Central Banks get their act together

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Lowering unemployment is a lot more important than lowering inflation.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Treasury Department sets dollar valuation policy, not the Federal Reserve.

If ignorance was bliss, you'd be having an orgasm by now.  The Federal Reserve reports to no one.  It isn't part of the government.  There's nothing federal about it and there are no reserves.

In case you haven't noticed, you are choosing to act like an ass, so please allow me to retort:

Your comments regarding whether or not the Federal Reserve should exist and whether it is actually "federal" were NOT the topic of this thread.  So, responding to me as if I were addressing those issues is ignorant.  At least introduce your tangential remarks as topics that should be discussed, instead of acting as if you’re giving an intelligent response.

Furthermore, it is an established fact that the Federal Reserve does indeed exist and that it derives its authority from the U.S. Congress, the legislative branch of the United States federal government, which just so happens to be the overseer of the Federal Reserve.

I, however, MADE it the discussion.

$10 in 1780: $10
$10 in 1916: $16
$10 in 2006: over $1,900

Your precious federal reserve steals more money from Americans than any other organization, even the government.

That shows that the Hungarian Pengo had more inflation in one week than the US dollar has had in 226 years.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Lowering unemployment is a lot more important than lowering inflation.

If you were aspiring to become Chairman of the Federal Reserve, you would have just killed your chances with that statement.

Well it's a pity that no one who has power over the process cares about the working poor, and the economic stimilous that high employment creates.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

HOLY CRUNCHIES!  jmfcst, I've never met someone so uneducated about economics.

The fed in conjunction with all banks create money out of nothing by making loans with money they don't have.

What?...wrong

---

If the banks get $1000 in deposits they can make about $10,000 in loans.

wrong

Banks can loan up to 90% of deposits sitting in transaction accounts, not 1000% of deposits as you claim.  In time deposit accounts (e.g. CDs), the bank can loan up to 100% of the deposits, but NOT over 100%.

Ever heard of fractional reserve banking?  Yes, the loan out 90%, but of that 90% another 90% can be loaned out, and of that another 90%.

$1,000 deposited by A
Bank loans $900 to B
$900 deposited by B
Bank loans $810 to C
etc.

In fact, with a 0.1 fractional reserve rate, $1 blow up to $1/0.1 = $10.  $9 created out of thin air, and banks charge interest on this.  How is it that you do not know this?  Did you get an American government education per chance?

But those are different banks, the point is only 90% of the money gets lent out. It's irrelevant whether some of that gets re-lent out.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Richard is being very unclear in his argument. A bank can't loan out more money than it has in deposits. The thing is that money loaned out can go through the economy multiple times. For example, spending on one California bus system that had its budget cut by Arnold helps the economy by $8 per $1 spent. This is really nothing new. Richard is extreme right-wing on economic issues, and opposes such increases in the economy.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

However, that extra $7,333.33 decreased the value of the rest of the money supply.  And each time the government increases the money supply artificially, your month becomes worth less.  As I said,

1776: $10
1916: $16
2006: $1,800+

Criminal.

Quick, someone tell Richard about the Hungarian Pengo so he'll quit obsessing about a factor of 180 inflation in 230 years.