| RotoGuru Politics Forum View the Forum Registry XML Get RSS Feed for this thread | Self-edit this thread |
|
| 0 |
Subject: Fed to be audited? Posted by: Perm Dude - [154552311] Fri, Nov 20, 2009, 21:54 Realizing I'm treading close to conspiracy stuff here, it is probably worth noting that the House has moved legislation along which would require audits of the Fed. I have a small quibble with the article talking about the Administration as being "losers" in this debate--it seems to be a relatively easy thing for the Administration to re-cast this as another move for government transparency. But in general this is a good move, I think. | |||||||
| 1 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Tue, Jan 12, 2010, 17:00 | Fed made a lot of money in 2009: $52 billion | ||||||
| 2 | walk ID: 44111268 Tue, Jan 12, 2010, 19:58 | Not for profit, too...all goes back to the treasury. | ||||||
| 3 | Boldwin ID: 4265071 Wed, Jul 07, 2010, 12:32 |
Fed guts audit at the last second. Bowing to pressure from the Obama administration, 120 Democrats who were actual co-sponsors of the 'audit the Fed' bill flip-flop on it and gut the actual audit from the bill. A figleaf of a tiny peak at the past is all we are going to get this time around. Doubtful that that will fool the awakened public into giving up on the effort in the future. | ||||||
| 4 | bibA ID: 48627713 Wed, Jul 07, 2010, 14:27 | Why bother with your interest? If the audit showed negative re spending policies, you would applaud it. If it showed nothing wrong, you would attribute undue or crooked influence by the administration. | ||||||
| 5 | Building 7 Leader ID: 171572711 Wed, Jul 07, 2010, 14:46 | How do 120 supposedly independent Democrats go from being a co-sponsor of the bill to being against it? How can that happen? They must be getting their orders from somewhere else. How is it possible that 120 different Democrats would change their core principals all at the same time? | ||||||
| 6 | Khahan ID: 373143013 Wed, Jul 07, 2010, 14:47 |
Building 7...you said 'democrat' and 'core principals' in the same sentence. Found it amusingly unbelievable. (ok, before everybody jumps down my back, its a joke). | ||||||
| 7 | Boldwin ID: 4265071 Wed, Jul 07, 2010, 15:16 |
 [www.bestcyrano.org] Because these three wanted it that way. | ||||||
| 8 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Wed, Jul 07, 2010, 15:22 | I'm guessing because in WNDLand what Sanders did is considered "bad." It lacks context, however. What Sanders did was rescue what was a dead bill and allow some movement on it in the Senate. Without Sanders' efforts, there would be no audit movement at all. | ||||||
| 9 | biliruben ID: 358252515 Wed, Jul 07, 2010, 15:46 |
It's called party discipline, and dems aren't nearly as good at it as republicans (see: every vote since obama was elected), but they aren't a bunch of raving anarchists either. | ||||||
| 10 | Boldwin ID: 4265071 Wed, Jul 07, 2010, 15:56 | A republican/liberatarian wetdream of a bill with 120 dem co-sponsors, was dead? | ||||||
| 11 | Tree ID: 248472317 Wed, Jul 07, 2010, 18:22 | post 4 is spot on. | ||||||
| 12 | Perm Dude ID: 3210201915 Fri, Mar 09, 2012, 11:50 |
GOP bill would remove full employment goal from Fed mandate Meanwhile, the bill appears to strengthen Fed ties to monetary policy even more. FOX Business article | ||||||
| 13 | boikin ID: 532592112 Fri, Mar 09, 2012, 12:59 |
Actually that is not quite correct the Fed's mandate was Maximum employment not full employment they are not te same one is meaningless and one is impossible so removing it as mandate is really kind of technicality and not part of its job. Secondly I think you missed the actual troublesome part of the law and that was the part that gives more power to banks to over see the fed. | ||||||
| 14 | Perm Dude ID: 3210201915 Fri, Mar 09, 2012, 13:16 |
That was my comment, boikin. Banks are already deeply enmeshed in the Fed--this bill allows Fed power to creep out even more. I'm not sure I think that is a bad thing--I'm not an "End the Fed" kind of guy. But I think it is interesting that the GOP would switch gears in this way, since I'm not sure that this move advances any of their policy goals about the Fed, or monetary policy in general. | ||||||
| 15 | Perm Dude ID: 3210201915 Mon, Apr 30, 2012, 14:56 | The Fed's 2% problem | ||||||
| If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect, you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com | ||||||||
| ||||||||
Post a reply to this message: Fed to be audited? | ||||||||