patrick.net

I know about endthefed.us already, btw. Any other ideas?

Bumper sticker sounds good:

"BRING BACK THE 19TH CENTURY NOW"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_of_Gold_speech

There is absolutely nothing you can do to end the Fed. Silly conversation.

It's perfectly possible. We're dealing with radical conservatives here. Pretty much nutjobs, but if they get their people in power, they make the rules.

THE OREILLY FACTOR 1,202
PARKER SPITZER 254
COUNTDOWN W/ K. OLBERMANN 395
NANCY GRACE 223

HANNITY 1,065
LARRY KING LIVE 335
RACHEL MADDOW SHOW 404
JOY BEHAR 127

The Mouths of Sauron are loud. And winning.

Well, now that the brain-trust has graciously bestowed their opinion on this, I officially open the discussion to all the less lofty individuals.

Well the problem with ending the Fed is, there's bound to be a few people that want to abolish the FED that also want the right to Screw live stock and Shot Illegals on their property. So there for, all of the people that would want to end the fed would be two toothed Uncle Kooter. And there's plenty of random pic of trailer trash to prove their undisputed point, that Fed Abolishers, are inbred retards, floating around on the internet.

I vote to abolish indoor plumbing too

I hope we can go back to the goat barter standard.

Okay, so basically no one has any good ideas then? Good to know.

You know what the solution is to the problem of powerful strains of bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics ?

You guessed it. Ban germs. If that doesn't work, I guess we will have to ban antibiotics.

Tenouncetrout says

So there for, all of the people that would want to end the fed would be two toothed Uncle Kooter

It's not that so many of the people who blame the Fed are stoopid.

But it would be nice if more people had a better understanding of the Fed. Most of the anti Fed pieces I have read, and a couple of the Videos I have seen, are filled with outright untruths and many half truths.

By the way, if you missed this on 60 minutes, or when Patrick posted it, you have to see what David Stockman says.

It makes way too much sense (yes, same Stockman that worked for Reagan).

http://dailybail.com/home/60-minutes-fixing-the-deficit-by-taxing-the-rich-video.html?utm_source=patrick.net#siteTitleWrapper

Before we "end the Fed," how about the long awaited audit first? Ron Paul pledges it's coming:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6A35QB20101104

How about pre-privatizing one of the Big Four. Patrick has an interesting link that would make a case for BofA (plenty of Countrywide goodwill to go around). I bet that would make everyone happy... (except, of course, the shareholders). I bet the Feds, though, would be hard pressed to handle anything at that scale.

I don't see how the goal of "END the Fed" is plausible.

Let's put aside for a moment the economic CHAOS that would result both nationally and globally, and assume it wouldn't result in the reigns of "reserve currency" and benefits therein immediately passing to someone else.

In a purely practical sense, few of your fellow citizens care about this. And the people virulently opposed to it have most of the wealth. You'll be swimming uphill through a molasses flood.

Keep tilting Sancho.

marcus says

Let’s say that from 1970 to 1980 prices went up 70% but wages went up 55%. That represents a drop in everyones standard of living.

No it does not.

Anyone with large amounts of debt has their standard of living improve substantially.

I'd be way better off in such a situation, for instance. I laid some numbers out in another thread that assumed 100% / 80%, which is more or less the same that you laid out. (80 x .7 = .56). The end result was that I'd have a larger percentage of my income left over at the end of the month than I do now.

And I only have a modest debt level relative to the rest of the country, with a single mortgage and a single car payment. The rest of the country has a much larger mortgage (relative to income) than I do, bigger car payments, and credit card debt.

Kevin says

No it does not

Okay, it's more complicated than what I said. But what about people who rent ? More importantly, what about the long run ?

Even in the short run, say that after a serious wave of inflation, one is only just then ready to buy their first home. While you are enjoying your payments that are lower relative to your income than they used to be, this person or family is going to pay a record breaking amount of their income for housing.

(and a higher percentage of their income for many or most consumables)

After each wave of inflation, it will be a record breaking high percentage of income that will go toward housing (at least for renters and for new home buyers). I guess since it is sort of the American way though to be myopic and to only worry about how it effects me, you are right.

But I am also right. There is a longer term way of framing it, where you can see that our standard of living does in fact decrease when wages don't keep up with inflation. It did happen in the seventies, but at least then we were transitioning toward more frequently having two wage earner families.

Kevin says

The rest of the country has a much larger mortgage (relative to income) than I do, bigger car payments, and credit card debt.

What you are saying is really only going to hold for mortgage payments (and even there, property taxes can go up in many states - without a new transaction - they are often assessment based). Maybe car payments slightly, but that's just 4 or 5 years, so the inflation isn't going to make that big a difference, unless you are looking for some sort of instant devaluation.

As for credit card debt, virtually all people who hold much credit card debt are going to be paying interest rates higher than the inflation. Remember inflation happens over a period of time. Their credit card situation would not be getting better over that time. Maybe you could argue that the lower percentage of income going to mortgage will help them pay down credit card debt. But that's a stretch.

marcus says

Kevin says

No it does not

Okay, it’s more complicated than what I said. But what about people who rent ? More importantly, what about the long run ?
Even in the short run, say that after a serious wave of inflation, one is only just then ready to buy their first home. While you are enjoying your payments that are lower relative to your income than they used to be, this person or family is going to pay a record breaking amount of their income for housing.
(and a higher percentage of their income for many or most consumables)
After each wave of inflation, it will be a record breaking high percentage of income that will go toward housing (at least for renters and for new home buyers). I guess since it is sort of the American way though to be myopic and to only worry about how it effects me, you are right.
But I am also right. There is a longer term way of framing it, where you can see that our standard of living does in fact decrease when wages don’t keep up with inflation. It did happen in the seventies, but at least then we were transitioning toward more frequently having two wage earner families.

Yes, clearly if we had wage inflation that did not keep up with price inflation indefinitely things would get really bad for everyone.

But that's not really what we're talking about here.

And, yes, thinking about the short term is pretty important right now, because if we don't address our current problems then we won't be around to address the long term problems.

Yeah! Let's unilaterally default on our debt creating a world wide currency crisis that will spawn the worst world wide depression ever. That will fix everything for good.

Kevin says

yes, clearly if we had wage inflation that did not keep up with price inflation indefinitely things would get really bad for everyone.

But that’s not really what we’re talking about here.

It doesn't have to be indefinitely.

Just one round of bad inflation for several years, even if it ends, with wages not keeping up (how can they given the global market for labor), would make things permanently more expensive (as a percentage of average income) forever in to the future, with the exception being people who currently have debt that they get to pay back in dollars that worth less.

And then, considering that our economy is largely based on our own consumption, and given that most people would have less money to spend after paying their bills (at least later generations who don't have a mortgage yet), it would be just one more way that we are screwing over the future generations, and our entire future (domestic) economic prospects.

I'm not saying it won't happen or that defaulting would be better. I just think (long term) we are royally screwed as a country if we have another big round of inflation.

marcus says

Just one round of bad inflation for several years, even if it ends, with wages not keeping up (how can they given the global market for labor), would make things permanently more expensive (as a percentage of average income) forever in to the future

The key thing is analyzing what is going to inflate in this notional environment of sticky, at best, wages.

This is kinda my hobby horse so apologies if I'm beating it into the ground here.

Food prices are going to go up. That's a given. Gas too. Health care. Electricity. Everything that doesn't have substitute goods.

The producers of these goods will therefore have more money, subject to the fact that consumers will have to moderate their consumption, just like we've stopped driving as much:

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2010/09/dot-vehicle-miles-driven-increase.html

but I can't really understand the follow-on effects of certain sectors of the economy raising prices. It seems to me that the lower tiers of the economy -- the primary sector -- ag and mining will be inflation-protected, as will certain service sectors fields with pricing power like health care ("your money or your life!").

But the big variable in all these equations is home rents. If living costs go up, can't rents on existing stock go down?

The LLs will fight this of course, but theoretically I think there is immense adjustment from current rents possible.

But I could be wrong here. Perhaps discretionary income will just vanish as the LLs take what they will.