• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Dick Bove: Trump poised to take control of the Federal Reserve

kyredneck

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dick Bove: Trump poised to take control of the Federal Reserve
  • President Trump sharply criticized the Federal Reserve this week, saying interest rate increases are hurting the economy.
  • Trump will have the opportunity to fashion the central bank in the image he would like as he has four vacancies to fill on the board of governors.
  • The result could be a more politicized Fed.
"President Donald Trump has multiple reasons as to why he should take control of the Federal Reserve. He will do so both because he can and because his broader policies argue that he should do so. The president is anti-overregulating American industry. The Fed is a leader in pushing stringent regulation on the nation. By raising interest rates and stopping the growth in the money supply it stands in the way of further growth in the American economy.

First, He Can
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve is required to have seven members. It has three. Two of the current governors were put into their position by President Trump. Two more have been nominated by the president and are awaiting confirmation by the Senate. After these two are put on the Fed’s board, the president will then nominate two more to follow them. In essence, it is possible that six of the seven Board members will be put in place by Trump.

The Federal Open Market Committee has 12 members and sets the nation’s monetary policy. Seven of the 12 are the members of the Board of Governors. Five additional are Federal Reserve district bank presidents. Other than the head of the Fed bank in New York, who was nominated by the president, the other four can only take their positions as district bank presidents if the board in Washington agrees to their hiring. One of these, the Fed Bank president in Minneapolis, Neel Kashkari, is already arguing for no further rate increases.

Second, Regulation
Following the passage of the Dodd Frank Act in July 2010, the Fed was given enormous power to regulate the banking industry. It moved quickly to implement a number of new rules. The Fed set up a system that would penalize banks that failed to obey its new rules. These rules included setting limits as to how big an individual bank could be; how much money the banks had to invest in fed funds and Treasurys as a percent of their assets; which loans were desirable and which were not; where the banks had to obtain their funding and many, many, more up to and including how much a bank could pay its investors in dividends.

These rules have meaningfully slowed bank investments in the economy (the Volcker Rule) and they have had a crippling effect on bank lending in the housing markets (other agencies have had an impact here also).

Thus, of all of the government agencies the Fed has been possibly the most restrictive. The president has already moved to correct these excesses by putting in place a new Fed Governor (Randal Quarles) to regulate the banking industry.

Three, Killing Economic Growth
In the second quarter of 2018, the growth in non-seasonally adjusted money supply (M2) has been zero. That’s right, the money supply did not grow at all. This is because the Fed is shrinking its balance sheet ultimately by $50 billion per month. In addition, the Fed has raised interest rates seven times since Q4 2015. Supposedly there are five more rate increases coming.

This is the tightest monetary policy since Paul Volcker headed the institution in the mid-1980s. It will be recalled his policies led to back-to-back recessions. Current Fed monetary policy is directly in conflict with the president’s economic goals.

Moreover, the Treasury is estimating it will pay $415 billion in interest on the federal debt in this fiscal year. A better estimate might be $450 billion if rates keep going up. There are a lot of bridges and tunnels and jobs that could be created with this money.

Then there is inflation. It is likely to rise if the Fed eases its policies. If that happens paying down the federal debt becomes easier. On a less desirable note, higher interest rates lower real estate values. Lower rates that stimulate inflation increase real estate values.

Bottom Line
The president can and will take control of the Fed. It may be recalled when the law was written creating the Federal Reserve the secretary of the Treasury was designated as the head of the Federal Reserve. We are going to return to that era. Like it or not the Fed is about to be politicized."
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dick Bove: Trump poised to take control of the Federal Reserve

Three, Killing Economic Growth
In the second quarter of 2018, the growth in non-seasonally adjusted money supply (M2) has been zero. That’s right, the money supply did not grow at all. This is because the Fed is shrinking its balance sheet ultimately by $50 billion per month. In addition, the Fed has raised interest rates seven times since Q4 2015. Supposedly there are five more rate increases coming.

This is the tightest monetary policy since Paul Volcker headed the institution in the mid-1980s. It will be recalled his policies led to back-to-back recessions. Current Fed monetary policy is directly in conflict with the president’s economic goals.

This guy is kidding, right? Tightest monetary policy? The current Fed funds rate is 2.0% a year ago it was 1.75%. The prime rate is 5.0%; a year ago it was 4.25%. This is still cheap money.

Unemployment is at 40 year lows. Wages are starting to rise. Tax cuts are only 6 months old. The economy is going to heat up. If the Fed is to head off inflation, small, incremental interest rate rises is the way to do it.

Moreover, the Treasury is estimating it will pay $415 billion in interest on the federal debt in this fiscal year. A better estimate might be $450 billion if rates keep going up. There are a lot of bridges and tunnels and jobs that could be created with this money.

Author is saying, "Hey, we're $20 trillion in debt, but interest rates are going up .25%. Let's borrow MOAR MONEY!"

Then there is inflation. It is likely to rise if the Fed eases its policies. If that happens paying down the federal debt becomes easier.

Hilarious contradiction. The author wants to borrow more money for infrastructure projects because interest rates are going up, then claims to want to pay down the national debt by keeping interest rates down, letting inflation loose, because "it would be easier to pay down the debt." On what planet is adding $1 trillion to the debt by borrowing for infrastructure going to make it easier to pay down? Meanwhile everyone's purchasing power is eroding as prices go up due to inflation. Not to mention the prices going up because of Trump's trade wars.




Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
 

kyredneck

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
This guy is kidding, right?

I don't know. I didn't even know there were that many appointed governors on the Fed. I think his point is that Trump is going to politicize the Fed:

"Bottom Line
The president can and will take control of the Fed.
It may be recalled when the law was written creating the Federal Reserve the secretary of the Treasury was designated as the head of the Federal Reserve. We are going to return to that era. Like it or not the Fed is about to be politicized."

I wish Trump would audit the Fed like Ron Paul was foaming at the bit to do.

It's CNBC, if that tells you anything. Could be just the usual hysteria of Trump Derangement Syndrome.
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I don't know. I didn't even know there were that many appointed governors on the Fed. I think his point is that Trump is going to politicize the Fed:

"Bottom Line
The president can and will take control of the Fed.
It may be recalled when the law was written creating the Federal Reserve the secretary of the Treasury was designated as the head of the Federal Reserve. We are going to return to that era. Like it or not the Fed is about to be politicized."

I wish Trump would audit the Fed like Ron Paul was foaming at the bit to do.

It's CNBC, if that tells you anything. Could be just the usual hysteria of Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Fed appointments are subject to Senate approval. Trump saying things like "we can fight a trade war right now because we are playing with house money" is not going to endear him to many Senators. His nominees will be scrutinized.

CNBC, being the business news entity of NBC is not as far left as NBC or MSNBC, but still, I hear ya.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL
 

Wingman68

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I don't know. I didn't even know there were that many appointed governors on the Fed. I think his point is that Trump is going to politicize the Fed:

"Bottom Line
The president can and will take control of the Fed.
It may be recalled when the law was written creating the Federal Reserve the secretary of the Treasury was designated as the head of the Federal Reserve. We are going to return to that era. Like it or not the Fed is about to be politicized."

I wish Trump would audit the Fed like Ron Paul was foaming at the bit to do.

It's CNBC, if that tells you anything. Could be just the usual hysteria of Trump Derangement Syndrome.
I have read a lot about this lately, & for one thing, the fed is, & has been politicized. Is it a coincidence that the fed lowered rates to zero within the first year of o, & didn’t raise rates for seven years, during which time o still doubled the debt?! He couldn’t have done that under any normal circumstances. As soon as Trump comes in it’s raise, raise, raise. He will not be able to bring down the debt with rates going up because of the massive interest that we must service. The only thing left for him to do is cut entire segments of government, which would be great anyway, imo. The knashing & wailing would be priceless.
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
These ultra low interest rates for so many years have been horrible for those of us on a fixed income. We are having to put our money at way too much risk to try to get a decent return. Any increase in inflation would be a double whammy to those of us on a fixed income.
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I have read a lot about this lately, & for one thing, the fed is, & has been politicized. Is it a coincidence that the fed lowered rates to zero within the first year of o, & didn’t raise rates for seven years, during which time o still doubled the debt?! He couldn’t have done that under any normal circumstances. As soon as Trump comes in it’s raise, raise, raise. He will not be able to bring down the debt with rates going up because of the massive interest that we must service. The only thing left for him to do is cut entire segments of government, which would be great anyway, imo. The knashing & wailing would be priceless.

The failure to cut the government deeply suggests to me that Trump is not so conservative.
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I have read a lot about this lately, & for one thing, the fed is, & has been politicized. Is it a coincidence that the fed lowered rates to zero within the first year of o, & didn’t raise rates for seven years, during which time o still doubled the debt?!

The Great Recession caused the Fed to lower interest rates to near zero in an effort to stimulate the economy. Obama increased national debt mainly through his $780 billion stimulus plan.


He couldn’t have done that under any normal circumstances. As soon as Trump comes in it’s raise, raise, raise.

The Fed raised the rates twice during Obama's last two years in office and has raised it twice in Trump's first two years in office.

He will not be able to bring down the debt with rates going up because of the massive interest that we must service. The only thing left for him to do is cut entire segments of government, which would be great anyway, imo. The knashing & wailing would be priceless.

We ran budget surpluses the last three years of Clinton's administration and interest rates were 4 points higher then. It can be done in higher interest rate environments. We need economic growth, which we are getting. We don't need to borrow more money.


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL
 

Wingman68

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
‘Obama increased national debt mainly through his $780 billion stimulus plan.’

He added 10 trillion to the debt, 780 billion is a drop in that bucket.

The day o was inaugurated the fed dropped the rate by .75. The cuts continued every year until .25 point increase in Dec. of 2015. The second raise you speak of happened after Trump was elected in Dec of 16. There were 3 more raises in 2017. In 2018, 2 more raises, so that’s 5 raises not including the one just before Trump was inaugurated. This in 18 months. O in essence had 1 raise in 8 yrs, but got a lot of major drops.

You miss the point that when rates rise quickly, it will stifle growth. Folks will find out soon how bad of shape we are in with what it will take to service the debt at higher rates, but the morons will rush to blame Trump.

https://www.thebalance.com/fed-funds-rate-rate-history-highs-lows-3306135
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
‘Obama increased national debt mainly through his $780 billion stimulus plan.’

He added 10 trillion to the debt, 780 billion is a drop in that bucket.

The day o was inaugurated the fed dropped the rate by .75. The cuts continued every year until .25 point increase in Dec. of 2015. The second raise you speak of happened after Trump was elected in Dec of 16. There were 3 more raises in 2017. In 2018, 2 more raises, so that’s 5 raises not including the one just before Trump was inaugurated. This in 18 months. O in essence had 1 raise in 8 yrs, but got a lot of major drops.

You miss the point that when rates rise quickly, it will stifle growth. Folks will find out soon how bad of shape we are in with what it will take to service the debt at higher rates, but the morons will rush to blame Trump.

https://www.thebalance.com/fed-funds-rate-rate-history-highs-lows-3306135

You are correct about the number of raises since Trump became President. My memory is not what it used to be. Still, cuttimg interest rates in a recession and raising then in an expansion is an oft-used strategy and is not necessarily the politicalization the Fed.

Rising rates do not necessarily stifle growth, just look at the period from 1999-2000. Rates went from 5.0% to 6.5% in less than a year and that time was a boom time.

Every situation is different and the Fed walks a tightrope trying to figure out what to do with rates. I tend to agree that they are being a bit aggressive here, not sure we need that final rate increase this year.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
Republicans controlled the house for 75% of Obama’s presidency and the senate for 25% of Obama’s presidency.

The $1.3 trillion increase in the national debt in the first 18 months of Trump’s presidency has occurred with the GOP in control of both houses of Congress.
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Republicans controlled the house for 75% of Obama’s presidency and the senate for 25% of Obama’s presidency.

The $1.3 trillion increase in the national debt in the first 18 months of Trump’s presidency has occurred with the GOP in control of both houses of Congress.

That's the trouble with the GOP. They wouldn't let @bama veto anything. They were afraid of being called racists and they wanted cheap labor.
 
Top