Sen. Warren Opposes ‘Audit the Fed’ Bill

[Galileo]

Sen. Warren Opposes ‘Audit the Fed’ Bill

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.), a member of the Banking Committee and an outspoken critic of the Fed’s oversight of big banks, said she does not support Mr. Paul’s proposed legislation, which she said could have “dangerous” implications for monetary policy.

MORE GRUESOME DETAILS HERE:

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/02/10/sen-warren-opposes-audit-the-fed-bill/

This is pathetic, Warren is a fraud, she cow-tows to Wall street, not Main street.

:sucker

UPDATE:

Rand Paul Responds to Politico ‘Hit Piece’ Criticizing His Position on the Fed (AUDIO)


Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul (R) appeared on Glenn Beck’s radio program Thursday to respond to what Beck called a “hit piece” in Politico criticizing the senator’s push to audit the Federal Reserve.

“They bring up a lot of points that somebody like me looks at and says, ‘Well, gee, that kind of makes sense. What’s Rand talking about?’ So let’s go over these point by point,” Beck told the senator. “The article says the [Federal Reserve's] finances are already subject to an audit by the GAO, the Government Accountability Office, the Federal Inspector General and outside audit firms.”

Paul suggested Beck watch a “really great exchange” where a congressman asked the Federal Reserve auditor during a committee hearing what was purchased with around $2 trillion. The auditor said they were “not allowed” to audit Federal Reserve bank activities.

LISTEN TO AUDIO HERE:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/19/rand-paul-responds-to-politico-hit-piece-criticizing-his-position-on-the-fed/

[boutons_deux]

you're full of libertarian shit.

Liz explains explains clearly that is for Fed transparentcy, ad why she against your adored, silly Randian Paul's bill

[Galileo]

you're full of libertarian shit.

Liz explains explains clearly that is for Fed transparentcy, ad why she against your adored, silly Randian Paul's bill

You are full of Wall street shit.

[boutons_deux]

“I strongly support and continue to press for greater congressional oversight of the Fed’s regulatory and supervisory responsibilities, and I believe the Fed’s balance sheet should be regularly audited – which the law already requires,” Ms. Warren said in an emailed statement. “But I oppose the current version of this bill because it promotes congressional meddling in the Fed’s monetary policy decisions, which risks politicizing those decisions and may have dangerous implications for financial stability and the health of the global economy.”

[Galileo]

“I strongly support and continue to press for greater congressional oversight of the Fed’s regulatory and supervisory responsibilities, and I believe the Fed’s balance sheet should be regularly audited – which the law already requires,” Ms. Warren said in an emailed statement. “But I oppose the current version of this bill because it promotes congressional meddling in the Fed’s monetary policy decisions, which risks politicizing those decisions and may have dangerous implications for financial stability and the health of the global economy.”

bullshit. Bi-partisan reform is on the table. She is using the same talking points as the Fed opinion managers.

[Galileo]

The Fed has purchased $2 TRILLION in distressed assets, and none of this is audited. They are leveraged at 80 t0 1 (liabilities to equity ratio).

[boutons_deux]

bullshit. Bi-partisan reform is on the table

could be, what other "audit the Fed" bills are on the table?

Give the ignorance of Paul and the extremism of the Repugs, why would you want them inserting their politics into the Fed?

btw, you libertarians who want to go back to the gold standard demonstrate how fundamentally stupid you are about economics.

[Galileo]

could be, what other "audit the Fed" bills are on the table?

Give the ignorance of Paul and the extremism of the Repugs, why would you want them inserting their politics into the Fed?

btw, you libertarians who want to go back to the gold standard demonstrate how fundamentally stupid you are about economics.

This IS the audit the fed bill. It has a good chance to pass because it is bi-partisan and co-sponsored by the Senate Majority Leader and has 30 sponsors overall. Auditing the Fed is not rocket science.

PS - the Fed has fiat money, auditing the Fed has nothing to do with the gold standard.

[Th'Pusher]

More ony why Paul's legislation is bad. Pretty much in line with Warren's objections.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121007/rand-pauls-monetary-policy-views-make-him-very-dangerous-2016

[Galileo]

More ony why Paul's legislation is. Ad. Pretty much in line with Warren's objections?

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121007/rand-pauls-monetary-policy-views-make-him-very-dangerous-2016

They just audited the Fed 5 years ago and no *danger* ensued. Take that, smarty pants.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

They just audited the Fed 5 years ago and no *danger* ensued. Take that, smarty pants.

You didn't read the article. First part says that that fed is already audited by the IG and AOG; it considers your point and dismisses with cause.

Of course you are the king of confirmation bias so it doe snot surprise me.

[Galileo]

You didn't read the article. First part says that that fed is already audited by the IG and AOG; it considers your point and dismisses with cause.

Of course you are the king of confirmation bias so it doe snot surprise me.

If the Fed is already audited, then auditing the Fed would not be dangerous, now would it Einstein?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If the Fed is already audited, then auditing the Fed would not be dangerous, now would it Einstein?

Again, read the article and discuss what it says substantively or shut the fuck up.

It addresses specifically what you are talking about. If you cannot find the relevant portion of the article let me know and I'll hold your hand through it.

[Galileo]

Again, read the article and discuss what it says substantively or shut the fuck up.

It addresses specifically what you are talking about. If you cannot find the relevant portion of the article let me know and I'll hold your hand through it.

I read the article. It claims a bunch of shit will happen, but none of the shit happened when they audited the Fed 5 years ago. They forget to mention in the article the Fed was just audited 5 years ago.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I read the article. It claims a bunch of shit will happen, but none of the shit happened when they audited the Fed 5 years ago. They forget to mention in the article the Fed was just audited 5 years ago.

No, it points out that the audits that currently exist do not allow for recommendations while what Paul is doing does. It's one thing to audit and give factual reports of what they are doing. It's quite another to try to influence institutional execution.

This isn't an issue of transparency. Rand knows exactly what the fed is doing and who they are talking to etc. This is an issue of power and influence. You are trying to increase the power of the legislature. Between the partisan bullshit that he clearly panders to and the 50x(x) lobbying groups that they are beholden to, I think I prefer my monetary policy insulated.

If he doesn't like the job that Yellen is doing then he should work to depose her. If he wants institutional reform then they have the ability to legislate. What i don't want is more political theater from the legislature that literally 80% of the country disapproves of. You want to empower them to dally in day to day execution? Fuck that. Let Yellen do her job.

You have a poor concept of the role of the branches of government. You are a good minion though.

[Th'Pusher]

It's obvious Galileo is incapable of comprehending the stakes of the bill. He likes it because it was offered by Rand Paul.

[Galileo]

No, it points out that the audits that currently exist do not allow for recommendations while what Paul is doing does. It's one thing to audit and give factual reports of what they are doing. It's quite another to try to influence institutional execution.

This isn't an issue of transparency. Rand knows exactly what the fed is doing and who they are talking to etc. This is an issue of power and influence. You are trying to increase the power of the legislature. Between the partisan bullshit that he clearly panders to and the 50x(x) lobbying groups that they are beholden to, I think I prefer my monetary policy insulated.

If he doesn't like the job that Yellen is doing then he should work to depose her. If he wants institutional reform then they have the ability to legislate. What i don't want is more political theater from the legislature that literally 80% of the country disapproves of. You want to empower them to dally in day to day execution? Fuck that. Let Yellen do her job.

You have a poor concept of the role of the branches of government. You are a good minion though.

You missed my point. A real audit was done 5 years ago and none of the *danger* appeared.

[Galileo]

It's obvious Galileo is incapable of comprehending the stakes of the bill. He likes it because it was offered by Rand Paul.

Senator Bernie Sanders supports the audit. He was the driving force in the senate 5 years ago when the last audit was done.

[Blizzardwizard]

Senator Bernie Sanders supports the audit. He was the driving force in the senate 5 years ago when the last audit was done.

This is true tbh, and I support the audit like Sanders and Paul, but let's not forget Bernie Sanders' absolute ass-kicking of Rand Paul on healthcare a couple years back, before calling them friends.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You missed my point. A real audit was done 5 years ago and none of the *danger* appeared.

You don't know what you are talking about. There has been no audit with policy recommendations from the Senate done on the Fed. You just completely ignore the point of separation of powers and conflate audit with executive input.

In your own words tell me why this particular power should go to the legislative branch and not the executive.

[Galileo]

You don't know what you are talking about. There has been no audit with policy recommendations from the Senate done on the Fed. You just completely ignore the point of separation of powers and conflate audit with executive input.

In your own words tell me why this particular power should go to the legislative branch and not the executive.


Audit of the Federal Reserve Reveals $16 Trillion in Secret Bailouts

Sat, 01 Sep 2012 01:33 CEST


The first ever GAO (Government Accountability Office) audit of the Federal Reserve was carried out in the past few months due to the Ron Paul, Alan Grayson Amendment to the Dodd-Frank bill, which passed last year. Jim DeMint, a Republican Senator, and Bernie Sanders, an independent Senator, led the charge for a Federal Reserve audit in the Senate, but watered down the original language of the house bill(HR1207), so that a complete audit would not be carried out.

http://www.sott.net/article/250592-Audit-of-the-Federal-Reserve-Reveals-16-Trillion-in-Secret-Bailouts

You are a liar and Elizabeth Warren is full of shit.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Audit of the Federal Reserve Reveals $16 Trillion in Secret Bailouts

Sat, 01 Sep 2012 01:33 CEST



http://www.sott.net/article/250592-Audit-of-the-Federal-Reserve-Reveals-16-Trillion-in-Secret-Bailouts

You are a liar and Elizabeth Warren is full of shit.

Please underline the sentence that you think says that this former audit included policy directives. What do you think they 'watered down' before?

Either you do not understand my argument, you don't read very well, or both.

[Galileo]

Please underline the sentence that you think says that this former audit included policy directives. What do you think they 'watered down' before?

Either you do not understand my argument, you don't read very well, or both.

Auditing the Fed is NOT a policy directive. It is an audit of what the Fed did including how it spends its money. Not sure what you are talking about. You either are stupid or willfully ignorant.

[spurraider21]

boutons supporting BigBank :wow

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Auditing the Fed is NOT a policy directive. It is an audit of what the Fed did including how it spends its money. Not sure what you are talking about. You either are stupid or willfully ignorant.

Again, the language in the bill that Rand is proposing and Warren is opposing in the Senate right now includes policy directives.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

boutons supporting BigBank :wow

Actually creating an senatorial oversight board would ostensibly be a oversight board giving directives from big banks. The Senate Finance Committee is notoriously their proxy.

Your take is pretty ignorant of how the Senate functions and it's history over the last 25 years.

My question is why is Rand Paul the supposed libertarian proposing shit like this.

[spurraider21]

Actually creating an senatorial oversight board would ostensibly be a oversight board giving directives from big banks. The Senate Finance Committee is notoriously their proxy.

Your take is pretty ignorant of how the Senate functions and it's history over the last 25 years.

My question is why is Rand Paul the supposed libertarian proposing shit like this.
what exactly is my take?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

what exactly is my take?

That the two posts boutox has made in this thread are in support of the banking lobby. The dynamic of the banking lobby in the Senate and what the bill proposes is an important point of discussion in the evaluation.

Prima facia, the claim that Warren is pro banking interests is absurd. boutox was doing nothing more than backing and quoting her. You don't reconcile well.

[spurraider21]

That the two posts boutox has made in this thread are in support of the banking lobby. The dynamic of the banking lobby in the Senate and what the bill proposes is an important point of discussion in the evaluation.

Prima facia, the claim that Warren is pro banking interests is absurd. boutox was doing nothing more than backing and quoting her. You don't reconcile well.
you are just overthinking a comment that was purely humor

[FuzzyLumpkins]

you are just overthinking a comment that was purely humor

That it was flippant was obvious and your dissemble into nihilism routine.

[spurraider21]

That it was flippant was obvious and your dissemble into nihilism routine.
ok

[boutons_deux]

boutons supporting BigBank :wow

Spurraider with his head up his ass

[Galileo]

boutons supporting BigBank :wow

:lmao

[Galileo]

Again, the language in the bill that Rand is proposing and Warren is opposing in the Senate right now includes policy directives.

No, it doesn't. Tell us what the policy directives are in rand's bill.

[Th'Pusher]

No, it doesn't. Tell us what the policy directives are in rand's bill.
I thought you said you read the article?


However, the GAO and OIG audits exclude a few parts of the Fed’s policymaking, including transactions by the Federal Open Market Committee. Paul’s bill removes those exclusions and requires “recommendations for legislative or administrative action" from the Comptroller General. Sounds innocuous, right? It’s not. That would significantly damage the Fed’s independence, which exists so that politicians cannot influence the central bank for their own political purposes. In other words, “Audit the Fed” would lead legislators to interfere with monetary policy matters and put the entire economy at risk. For further explanations why the legislation is so dangerous, see the Roosevelt Institute’s Mike Konczal (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/11/16/heres-whats-wrong-with-rand-pauls-audit-the-fed-bill/) and the Washington Post’s (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/catherine-rampell-audit-the-fed-not-so-fast/2015/01/29/bbf06ae6-a7f6-11e4-a06b-9df2002b86a0_story.html)Catherine Rampell (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/catherine-rampell-audit-the-fed-not-so-fast/2015/01/29/bbf06ae6-a7f6-11e4-a06b-9df2002b86a0_story.html).

[Galileo]

I thought you said you read the article?

I read the article. The bill requires an audit one year later after the Fed has already done its policies. The article claims this is policy making. It isn't.

[Th'Pusher]

I read the article. The bill requires an audit one year later after the Fed has already done its policies. The article claims this is policy making. It isn't.

What do you think recommendations for legislative or administrative action means?

[Galileo]

What do you think recommendations for legislative or administrative action means?

It means the Fed will be audited one year after it does stuff. Like buying $2 trillion dollars worth of financial junk. Or lobbying against Rand Paul and planting news stories about him in the New Republic. The Fed makes their policies and then it will be audited.

[Th'Pusher]

It means the Fed will be audited one year after it does stuff. Like buying $2 trillion dollars worth of financial junk. Or lobbying against Rand Paul and planting news stories about him in the New Republic. The Fed makes their policies and then it will be audited.
Ok. You're a moron.

[Galileo]

Ok. You're a moron.

Sticks and stones will break my bones, but names will never hurt me.

:stfu

[Nbadan]

:lol

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It's obvious Galileo is incapable of comprehending the stakes of the bill. He likes it because it was offered by Rand Paul.

[ElNono]

It's unfortunate Rand is nothing like Ron...

[boutons_deux]

It's unfortunate Rand is nothing like Ron...

it's fortunate that neither has won, nor ever will win, national office. KY Senator is already way too high. Thanks, Kentucky! and double thanks for Bitch McConnell!

[boutons_deux]

Money Makes Crazy

Monetary policy probably won’t be a major issue in the 2016 campaign, but it should be. It is, after all, extremely important, and the Republican base and many leading politicians have strong views about the Federal Reserve and its conduct. And the eventual presidential nominee will surely have to endorse the party line.

So it matters that the emerging G.O.P. consensus on money is crazy — full-on conspiracy-theory crazy.

Right now, the most obvious manifestation of money madness is Senator Rand Paul’s “Audit the Fed” campaign.

Mr. Paul likes to warn (http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/02/10/unfriend-the-fed-rand-pauls-attack-re-examined/) that the Fed’s efforts to bolster the economy may lead to hyperinflation; he loves talking about the wheelbarrows of cash (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/rand-paul-economic-collapse-could-lead-to-a-hitler-coming-to-power) that people carted around in Weimar Germany.

But he’s been saying that since 2009, and it keeps not happening.

So now he has a new line: The Fed is an overleveraged bank, just as Lehman Brothers was, and could experience a disastrous collapse of confidence any day now.

This story is wrong on so many levels that reporters are having a hard time keeping up, but let’s simply note that the Fed’s “liabilities” consist of cash, and those who hold that cash have the option of converting it into, well, cash. No, the Fed can’t fall victim to a bank run. But is Mr. Paul being ostracized for his views? Not at all.

Moreover, while Mr. Paul may currently be the poster child for off-the-wall monetary views, he’s far from alone. A lot has been written about the 2010 open letter (http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/11/15/open-letter-to-ben-bernanke/) from leading Republicans to Ben Bernanke, then the Fed chairman, demanding that he cease efforts to support the economy, warning that such efforts would lead to inflation and “currency debasement.” Less has been written about the simultaneous turn of seemingly respectable figures to conspiracy theories.

There was, for example, the 2010 op-ed article (http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=216598&) by Representative Paul Ryan, who remains the G.O.P.’s de facto intellectual leader, and John Taylor, the party’s favorite monetary economist.

Fed policy, they declared, “looks an awful lot like an attempt to bail out fiscal policy, and such attempts call the Fed’s independence into question.” That statement looks an awful lot like a claim that Mr. Bernanke and colleagues were betraying their trust in order to help out the Obama administration — a claim for which there is no evidence whatsoever.

Oh, and suppose you believe that the Fed’s actions did help avert what would otherwise have been a fiscal crisis. This is supposed to be a bad thing?

You may think that at least some of the current presidential aspirants are staying well clear of the fever swamps, but don’t be so sure.

Jeb Bush appears to be getting his economic agenda (http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-02-04/jeb-bush-america-should-achieve-more-than-twice-the-gdp-growth-rate-it-had-under-george-w-bush), such as it is, from the George W. Bush Institute’s 4% Growth Project.

And the head of that project, Amity Shlaes (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/07/17/the-intellectual-cesspool-of-the-inflation-truthers/), is a prominent “inflation truther,” someone who claims that the government is greatly understating the true rate of inflation.

(http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/13/opinion/paul-krugman-money-makes-crazy.html#story-continues-4)So monetary crazy is pervasive in today’s G.O.P. But why? Class interests no doubt play a role — the wealthy tend to be lenders rather than borrowers, and they benefit at least in relative terms from deflationary policies.

But I also suspect that conservatives have a deep psychological problem with modern monetary systems.

You see, in the conservative worldview, markets aren’t just a useful way to organize the economy; they’re a moral structure: People get paid what they deserve, and what goods cost is what they are truly worth to society.

You could say that to the free-market true believer, to know the price of everything is also to know the value of everything.

Modern money — consisting of pieces of paper or their digital equivalent that are issued by the Fed, not created by the heroic efforts of entrepreneurs — is an affront to that worldview.

Mr. Ryan is on record declaring that his views on monetary policy come from a speech (http://capitalismmagazine.com/2002/08/franciscos-money-speech/) given by one of Ayn Rand’s fictional characters.

And what the speaker declares is that money is “the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. ... Paper is a check drawn by legal looters.”

Once you understand that this is how many conservatives really think, it all falls into place. Of course they predict disaster from monetary expansion, no matter the circumstances. Of course they are undaunted in their views no matter how wrong their predictions have been in the past. Of course they are quick to accuse the Fed of vile motives.

From their point of view, monetary policy isn’t really a technical issue, a question of what works; it’s a matter of theology: Printing money is evil.

So as I said, monetary policy should be an issue in 2016. Because there’s a pretty good chance that someone who either gets his monetary economics from Ayn Rand, or at any rate feels the need to defer to such views, will get to appoint the next head of the Federal Reserve.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/13/opinion/paul-krugman-money-makes-crazy.html

[Galileo]

LOL.

[angrydude]

Glad to know Warren isn't serious about reforming the banking system.

All words.

[boutons_deux]

Glad to know Warren isn't serious about reforming the banking system.

All words.

reforming the banking system is MUCH MORE, and MUCH different than just Randian Paul's silly "reform". Liz has got more balls and integrity than all your Repug politicians combined.

[Galileo]

reforming the banking system is MUCH MORE, and MUCH different than just Randian Paul's silly "reform". Liz has got more balls and integrity than all your Repug politicians combined.

Warren wants pure unfettered unregulated Fed banksterism that goes out of control and drives the debt to a gargantuan $18 trillion. Yikes!

:downspin:

[Nbadan]

Senator Elizabeth Warren Banking Committee Hearing: Financial Regulations & Community Banks


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLjIuwTbBXU

[boutons_deux]

Warren wants pure unfettered unregulated Fed banksterism that goes out of control and drives the debt to a gargantuan $18 trillion. Yikes!


You Lie, and that's ALL you right-wingbats have.

[Galileo]

You Lie, and that's ALL you right-wingbats have.


I thought Nbadan was a liberal anti-Bush man?

:nope

[Ignignokt]

It's unfortunate Rand is nothing like Ron...

What does that have to do with anything in this thread?

[Ignignokt]

boutons is not a principled progressive, he's just a party shill. It's funny how he takes the side of the elites over democratic action on this one.

[boutons_deux]

boutons is not a principled progressive, he's just a party shill. It's funny how he takes the side of the elites over democratic action on this one.

bullshit.

which party I'm a shilling for?

"takes the side of the elites"? :lol Because I'm against Ayn Rand Paul's political control of the Fed? :lol

[Ignignokt]

bullshit.

which party I'm a shilling for?

"takes the side of the elites"? :lol Because I'm against Ayn Rand Paul's political control of the Fed? :lol

that's some pretty deep rationalization of why you will suck elite cock.

[Galileo]

Comrade boutons is a communist shill.

:lmao

[Blizzardwizard]

I'm disappointed in Warren opposing the audit. Only Sanders on the far left has the balls to support it along with the two Pauls.

[boutons_deux]

More ony why Paul's legislation is bad. Pretty much in line with Warren's objections.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121007/rand-pauls-monetary-policy-views-make-him-very-dangerous-2016

from the article:

First, the Fed already is extensively audited (http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12784.htm) by the Government Accountability Office (http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/reform_audit_gao.htm) (GAO), the Office of the Inspector General (http://oig.federalreserve.gov/audit-highlights.htm) (OIG) and even private sector auditors like Deloitte (http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/BSTNewYorkfinstmt2013.pdf). Each week, the central bank also releases its balance sheet (http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_fedsbalancesheet.htm) and even has an interactive guide (http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/reservebalances_p.htm) of its balance sheet available for further explanation.

Paul’s bill removes those exclusions and requires “recommendations for legislative or administrative action" from the Comptroller General. Sounds innocuous, right? It’s not. That would significantly damage the Fed’s independence, which exists so that politicians cannot influence the central bank for their own political purposes. In other words, “Audit the Fed” would lead legislators to interfere with monetary policy matters and put the entire economy at risk. For further explanations why the legislation is so dangerous, see the Roosevelt Institute’s Mike Konczal (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/11/16/heres-whats-wrong-with-rand-pauls-audit-the-fed-bill/) and the Washington Post’s (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/catherine-rampell-audit-the-fed-not-so-fast/2015/01/29/bbf06ae6-a7f6-11e4-a06b-9df2002b86a0_story.html)Catherine Rampell (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/catherine-rampell-audit-the-fed-not-so-fast/2015/01/29/bbf06ae6-a7f6-11e4-a06b-9df2002b86a0_story.html).
=======

so you simplistic mofos support POLITICAL CONTROL of the Fed, and if you think that prioritizes the 99% and the Real Economy over the financial sector.... :lol

[Galileo]

I'm disappointed in Warren opposing the audit. Only Sanders on the far left has the balls to support it along with the two Pauls.

Alan Grayson gives a speech on Ron Paul's HR 1207 and the efforts to audit the FED. (VIDEO)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkQRhVh_0Tc

[Galileo]

"Which Foreigners Got the Fed's $500 Billion?" Alan Grayson on Federal Reserve Loans (2009) [video]


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjK8JAbtXEE

:bang

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I'm disappointed in Warren opposing the audit. Only Sanders on the far left has the balls to support it along with the two Pauls.

She doe snot oppose the audit language. As has been pointed out the opposition is to the administrative interference in the bill.

Are any of you Rand supporters going to acknowledge this point? Galileo is incapable of even restating the notion.

[ElNono]

What does that have to do with anything in this thread?

What Warren actually opposes is a Rand bill, which includes more than just auditing the Fed... I don't think Ron himself would've voted for some of the items on that bill...

[Galileo]

She doe snot oppose the audit language. As has been pointed out the opposition is to the administrative interference in the bill.

Are any of you Rand supporters going to acknowledge this point? Galileo is incapable of even restating the notion.

Warren has NEVER supported or voted for any Fed audit. She is in league with Goldman Sachs. She gets her money from the large banksters, unlike Bernie Sanders, Alan Grayson, or Rand Paul. This is a simple audit and Warren opposes it because here masters have told her to do so.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So despite her railing JP Morgan Goldman Sachs etc in committee for the past several years she is actually in league with them. Got it.

:lol wtf is wrong with you? I guess when you got nothing you just make some shit up. This is her:


“I strongly support and continue to press for greater congressional oversight of the Fed’s regulatory and supervisory responsibilities, and I believe the Fed’s balance sheet should be regularly audited – which the law already requires, But I oppose the current version of this bill because it promotes congressional meddling in the Fed’s monetary policy decisions, which risks politicizing those decisions and may have dangerous implications for financial stability and the health of the global economy.”

http://reason.com/blog/2015/02/11/elizabeth-warren-wont-back-rand-pauls-au

That is pretty scummy telling stories like that.

[Galileo]

So despite her railing JP Morgan Goldman Sachs etc in committee for the past several years she is actually in league with them. Got it.

:lol wtf is wrong with you? I guess when you got nothing you just make some shit up. This is her:



http://reason.com/blog/2015/02/11/elizabeth-warren-wont-back-rand-pauls-au

That is pretty scummy telling stories like that.

Look up Warren's fundraising. Same as Bush, Ghouliani, McCain, Romney, Clinton, Obama. The railing is all rhetoric. She opposes a simple audit of the Fed and supports bailouts.

[boutons_deux]

Look up Warren's fundraising. Same as Bush, Ghouliani, McCain, Romney, Clinton, Obama. The railing is all rhetoric. She opposes a simple audit of the Fed and supports bailouts.

you are so fucking confused, ignorant, iow, typical rightwingnut

Wall St HATES Warren, is why the Repugs blocked her from running CFPB, the agency she designed.

[Galileo]

you are so fucking confused, ignorant, iow, typical rightwingnut

Wall St HATES Warren, is why the Repugs blocked her from running CFPB, the agency she designed.

You've been duped by a mass manipulator.

[Galileo]

Elizabeth Warren - OpenSecrets.org
https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00033492&newmem=Y

[Th'Pusher]

Elizabeth Warren - OpenSecrets.org
https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00033492&newmem=Y
What specifically should concern me in this link?

[Th'Pusher]

The sector that donates the most $ to Rand Paul: Finance, insurance and real estate :cry

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Elizabeth Warren - OpenSecrets.org
https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00033492&newmem=Y

Finance is the top donor to Rand Paul. It's not even top 5 for Warren and an order less than the other tallies.

OTOH, Rand gets 1/4 of his PAC money from banking interests. You are doing a great job discrediting your candidate, Gal. That is what happens when you cannot read or articulate.

[Blizzardwizard]

Look up Warren's fundraising. Same as Bush, Ghouliani, McCain, Romney, Clinton, Obama. The railing is all rhetoric. She opposes a simple audit of the Fed and supports bailouts.

Unfortunately this is true. I want to like Warren, but opposing simple audits is why I think she's just like Hillary (conservative in democrat clothing).

[boutons_deux]

Rand Paul caught lying about his college record

Senator's office forced to admit that he never graduated from Baylor University

http://www.salon.com/2015/02/13/rand_paul_caught_lying_about_his_college_record/

Ayn Randian Paul is a self-certifying fraud and liar.

Libertarianism is fraudulent

:lol

[Galileo]

Elizabeth Warren Endorses ‘Free Money’ for Wall Street


Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.), fresh off a speech to tone-deaf (literally) left-wing activists at the Netroots Nation conference, endorsed the U.S. Export-Import Bank amid calls to wind the bank down, Bloomberg reported.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/elizabeth-warren-endorses-free-money-for-wall-street/

:lmao

[Galileo]

Rand Paul caught lying about his college record

Senator's office forced to admit that he never graduated from Baylor University

http://www.salon.com/2015/02/13/rand_paul_caught_lying_about_his_college_record/

Ayn Randian Paul is a self-certifying fraud and liar.

Libertarianism is fraudulent

:lol




This is probably one of the stupidest articles ever published. Bravo.

:married:

[Galileo]

More ony why Paul's legislation is bad. Pretty much in line with Warren's objections.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121007/rand-pauls-monetary-policy-views-make-him-very-dangerous-2016

Rand Paul Draws Liberal Fire As The Left Discovers Its Inner Love Of The Fed, Part One


The New Republic, in its February 8th issue, carries an article by Danny Vinik entitled Rand Paul Has the Most Dangerous Economic Views of Any 2016 Candidate. It appears that TNR’s fact checkers decamped along with its top journalists. Vinik:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphbenko/2015/02/16/rand-paul-draws-liberal-fire-as-the-left-discovers-its-inner-love-of-the-fed-part-one/

:vomit:

[ElNono]

But the Paul camp views the “audit the Fed” campaign as a low-stakes way to remind the voters who propelled his father’s previous presidential bids that the younger Paul is on their side, too.

And some Iowa political operatives say that while the push may raise concerns with the business community down the road, the issue is sufficiently obscure that Paul is not in serious danger of alienating anyone over it at this point.

“Audit the Fed is an issue that plays to our base voters,” said Steve Grubbs, a top Paul strategist in Iowa. “It’s an issue that’s been around for a number of years and it’s one that’s important libertarian Republicans know Sen. Paul is fully behind.”

He added that “the core of our base [voters] are liberty voters” and that “our first job is to earn as much of that base vote as we can.” Ron Paul won 21 percent of the vote in the 2012 Iowa caucuses.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/rand-paul-wall-street-2016-elections-115226.html

[Galileo]

But the Paul camp views the “audit the Fed” campaign as a low-stakes way to remind the voters who propelled his father’s previous presidential bids that the younger Paul is on their side, too.

And some Iowa political operatives say that while the push may raise concerns with the business community down the road, the issue is sufficiently obscure that Paul is not in serious danger of alienating anyone over it at this point.

“Audit the Fed is an issue that plays to our base voters,” said Steve Grubbs, a top Paul strategist in Iowa. “It’s an issue that’s been around for a number of years and it’s one that’s important libertarian Republicans know Sen. Paul is fully behind.”

He added that “the core of our base [voters] are liberty voters” and that “our first job is to earn as much of that base vote as we can.” Ron Paul won 21 percent of the vote in the 2012 Iowa caucuses.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/rand-paul-wall-street-2016-elections-115226.html

This article was written at the Fed by a ghostwriter on the taxpayer dime, and then handed over to Fed propaganda arm Politico.

:pimpslap

[ElNono]

This article was written at the Fed by a ghostwriter on the taxpayer dime, and then handed over to Fed propaganda arm Politico.

:pimpslap

2016 watch: Rand Paul's PAC hires Iowa's Steve Grubbs

In a statement today, Paul said: "If we're to be successful in putting together an effective organization to advance the cause of liberty and freedom, we need to have successful state operations. Steve's experience as state chair, serving in the Iowa Legislature and working for five previous presidential campaigns will help us build on what we already have in place. He will join A.J Spiker in Iowa, and Doug Stafford nationally, in leading the organization that I rely on to advance the cause of liberty in Iowa and nationwide."

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/elections/2014/06/30/steve-grubbs-rand-pac/11773459/

[Galileo]

2016 watch: Rand Paul's PAC hires Iowa's Steve Grubbs

In a statement today, Paul said: "If we're to be successful in putting together an effective organization to advance the cause of liberty and freedom, we need to have successful state operations. Steve's experience as state chair, serving in the Iowa Legislature and working for five previous presidential campaigns will help us build on what we already have in place. He will join A.J Spiker in Iowa, and Doug Stafford nationally, in leading the organization that I rely on to advance the cause of liberty in Iowa and nationwide."

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/elections/2014/06/30/steve-grubbs-rand-pac/11773459/


By Ben White and Katie Glueck

2/16/15 5:06 PM EST

Updated 2/16/15 10:43 PM EST

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/rand-paul-wall-street-2016-elections-115226.html#ixzz3RybYMhqo

[ElNono]

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/rand-paul-wall-street-2016-elections-115226.html#ixzz3RybYMhqo

“Audit the Fed is an issue that plays to our base voters,” said Steve Grubbs, a top Paul strategist in Iowa. “It’s an issue that’s been around for a number of years and it’s one that’s important libertarian Republicans know Sen. Paul is fully behind.”

He added that “the core of our base [voters] are liberty voters” and that “our first job is to earn as much of that base vote as we can.” Ron Paul won 21 percent of the vote in the 2012 Iowa caucuses.


This article was written at the Fed by a ghostwriter on the taxpayer dime, and then handed over to Fed propaganda arm Politico


2016 watch: Rand Paul's PAC hires Iowa's Steve Grubbs

In a statement today, Paul said: "If we're to be successful in putting together an effective organization to advance the cause of liberty and freedom, we need to have successful state operations. Steve's experience as state chair, serving in the Iowa Legislature and working for five previous presidential campaigns will help us build on what we already have in place. He will join A.J Spiker in Iowa, and Doug Stafford nationally, in leading the organization that I rely on to advance the cause of liberty in Iowa and nationwide."

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/elections/2014/06/30/steve-grubbs-rand-pac/11773459/

[ElNono]

IOW, Rand's campaign is pushing your buttons to get your vote...

Ron, even if wrong, had a moral compass, IMO...

[Galileo]

“Audit the Fed is an issue that plays to our base voters,” said Steve Grubbs, a top Paul strategist in Iowa. “It’s an issue that’s been around for a number of years and it’s one that’s important libertarian Republicans know Sen. Paul is fully behind.”

He added that “the core of our base [voters] are liberty voters” and that “our first job is to earn as much of that base vote as we can.” Ron Paul won 21 percent of the vote in the 2012 Iowa caucuses.

What is your point? Practically everyone wants to regulate the big banks.

[ElNono]

What is your point? Practically everyone wants to regulate the big banks.

My point is what I mentioned earlier: Rand is your typical mainstream politician, pushing the buttons he needs to push to get the monkeys dancing (ie: see this thread). Unlike his dad, his positions largely do not come from conviction.

In that sense he's a lot closer to Warren et all, than Ron Paul...

[ElNono]

On the other hand, that might open the door for him to actually win an election.

BTW, I know very little about Warren, I suspect she's another typical politico.

[Galileo]

My point is what I mentioned earlier: Rand is your typical mainstream politician, pushing the buttons he needs to push to get the monkeys dancing (ie: see this thread). Unlike his dad, his positions largely do not come from conviction.

In that sense he's a lot closer to Warren et all, than Ron Paul...

Politico pulled a quote from an interview and printed it with an unsaid implication to rile Paul supporters. I will not take the bait.

[Galileo]

On the other hand, that might open the door for him to actually win an election.

BTW, I know very little about Warren, I suspect she's another typical politico.

Now you are talking.

[ElNono]

Politico pulled a quote from an interview and printed it with an unsaid implication to rile Paul supporters. I will not take the bait.

I think the implication is pretty clear. Then again, that's what Paul pays the guy to do, so it isn't necessarily surprising or indicting.

I just think peeps looking at Rand to follow the legacy of Ron, are up for disappointment, that's all. I don't particularly dislike Rand, although I'm not a fan either.

[Galileo]

I think the implication is pretty clear. Then again, that's what Paul pays the guy to do, so it isn't necessarily surprising or indicting.

I just think peeps looking at Rand to follow the legacy of Ron, are up for disappointment, that's all. I don't particularly dislike Rand, although I'm not a fan either.

If you think that Rand wants to audit the Fed just to rally the masses. then you are dead wrong:

Rand Paul says audit bill is ‘first step’ toward more say on monetary policy
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/rand-paul-says-audit-bill-is-first-step-toward-more-say-on-monetary-policy-2015-02-12

[boutons_deux]

If you think that Rand wants to audit the Fed just to rally the masses. then you are dead wrong:

Rand Paul says audit bill is ‘first step’ toward more say on monetary policy
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/rand-paul-says-audit-bill-is-first-step-toward-more-say-on-monetary-policy-2015-02-12

That's just what America needs, Rand Paul, etc influencing, making monetary policy. Banks created and own the Fed. Nothing RP can do about that.

[Galileo]

That's just what America needs, Rand Paul, etc influencing, making monetary policy. Banks created and own the Fed. Nothing RP can do about that.

Stopping bailouts is what it means. It also means stop inflating the currency and enriching the super-wealthy (who finance elections). In 1913, you could buy a year's supply of food for $20. Today you get a couple meals at McDonalds.

[boutons_deux]

Stopping bailouts is what it means. It also means stop inflating the currency and enriching the super-wealthy (who finance elections). In 1913, you could buy a year's supply of food for $20. Today you get a couple meals at McDonalds.

your friendly libertarians and Repugs just voted to have taxpayers bailout the banks. The Fed wasn't involved. Banks will also be able to steal depositors funds to stay afloat. Fed wasn't involved. Fed's policies are much more benign than politicians' policies.

[ElNono]

If you think that Rand wants to audit the Fed just to rally the masses. then you are dead wrong:

Rand Paul says audit bill is ‘first step’ toward more say on monetary policy
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/rand-paul-says-audit-bill-is-first-step-toward-more-say-on-monetary-policy-2015-02-12

Well, that's the point... the Fed is actually audited pretty regularly. His endgame, spelled out clearly in his bill, is to insert political meddling in the Fed.

But that is why the bill is going nowhere.

[ElNono]

Stopping bailouts is what it means. It also means stop inflating the currency and enriching the super-wealthy (who finance elections). In 1913, you could buy a year's supply of food for $20. Today you get a couple meals at McDonalds.

How is that a bad thing? We're talking 100+ years of stable, minimal inflation. That example actually supports the case for an independent Fed.

[Galileo]

How is that a bad thing? We're talking 100+ years of stable, minimal inflation. That example actually supports the case for an independent Fed.

There was no net inflation from 1787 until 1913.

1787: US economy 0.5% of world

1913: US economy 42% of world (Fed created, net inflation begins)

2015: US economy 15% of world

[Galileo]

Well, that's the point... the Fed is actually audited pretty regularly. His endgame, spelled out clearly in his bill, is to insert political meddling in the Fed.

But that is why the bill is going nowhere.

If the Fed is audited, then the Fed should not opposes a simple audit of the Fed. Not rocket science.

[ElNono]

There was no net inflation from 1787 until 1913.

lol "net". There was deflation and inflation like any other time in history. ie:

$1 worth of 1814 dollars is now worth $13.51
$1 worth of 1845 dollars is now worth $31.25

Not to mention that at those times, and pegged to gold, we couldn't have the GDP size we have now. The panic of 1907 already shown that having an inelastic currency with very little liquidity did nothing to prevent bank runs, etc. That's why the Fed was created to begin with.

Compared to other currencies (the only barometer that matters), the US dollar has had tremendous stability.


If the Fed is audited, then the Fed should not opposes a simple audit of the Fed. Not rocket science.

The Fed has no vote to oppose anything. The general opposition is towards politicians trying to meddle with the Fed's political independence.

But Rand Paul knows he's just pushing buttons and his bill isn't going nowhere. As explained by one of his campaign managers.

[Galileo]

lol "net". There was deflation and inflation like any other time in history. ie:

$1 worth of 1814 dollars is now worth $13.51
$1 worth of 1845 dollars is now worth $31.25

Not to mention that at those times, and pegged to gold, we couldn't have the GDP size we have now. The panic of 1907 already shown that having an inelastic currency with very little liquidity did nothing to prevent bank runs, etc. That's why the Fed was created to begin with.

Compared to other currencies (the only barometer that matters), the US dollar has had tremendous stability.



The Fed has no vote to oppose anything. The general opposition is towards politicians trying to meddle with the Fed's political independence.

But Rand Paul knows he's just pushing buttons and his bill isn't going nowhere. As explained by one of his campaign managers.

Those stats are incorrect. The Fed does not include food or energy in inflation stats anymore. Just another reason to audit the Fed.

[ElNono]

Those stats are incorrect.

How so?


The Fed does not include food or energy in inflation stats anymore. Just another reason to audit the Fed.

The Fed doesn't calculate inflation, the Bureau of Labor Statistics does, whose Commissioner is confirmed by Congress.

You seem to be pretty ill informed about what the Fed is, and what it does.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I think a good compromise is to keep the language that removes the half dozen audit exemptions but remove the language about policy and administration.

Gal just wants a pulpit which his master can rail against Yellen and the fed. He just fails to understand that when Rand moves on the pulpit stays and we can guess who will step up. They are already all over the Dodd-Frank panel of that same legislature.

[ElNono]

I mean, everybody is entitled to their opinion, and the Fed is certainly not a perfect organization, but I've yet to hear a cogent argument for Fed reform that doesn't involve some sort of political takeover of the printing press...

If anything, there's very, very little questionable about the Fed history and track record so far. Right now reform looks like a solution looking for a problem.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I mean, everybody is entitled to their opinion, and the Fed is certainly not a perfect organization, but I've yet to hear a cogent argument for Fed reform that doesn't involve some sort of political takeover of the printing press...

If anything, there's very, very little questionable about the Fed history and track record so far. Right now reform looks like a solution looking for a problem.

There is a tradition in the American south to be anti-fed. It goes back to Hamilton and Jefferson. To many like Gal here it is ideological. He has no idea about the particulars nor does he really want to.

[Galileo]

Rand Paul Responds to Politico ‘Hit Piece’ Criticizing His Position on the Fed (AUDIO)


Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul (R) appeared on Glenn Beck’s radio program Thursday to respond to what Beck called a “hit piece” in Politico criticizing the senator’s push to audit the Federal Reserve.

“They bring up a lot of points that somebody like me looks at and says, ‘Well, gee, that kind of makes sense. What’s Rand talking about?’ So let’s go over these point by point,” Beck told the senator. “The article says the [Federal Reserve's] finances are already subject to an audit by the GAO, the Government Accountability Office, the Federal Inspector General and outside audit firms.”

Paul suggested Beck watch a “really great exchange” where a congressman asked the Federal Reserve auditor during a committee hearing what was purchased with around $2 trillion. The auditor said they were “not allowed” to audit Federal Reserve bank activities.

LISTEN TO AUDIO HERE:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/19/rand-paul-responds-to-politico-hit-piece-criticizing-his-position-on-the-fed/

[FuzzyLumpkins]

:lol Gal cannot even come up with his own refutations. BTW the article you have been railing against here is from the New Republic.

[Galileo]

:lol Gal cannot even come up with his own refutations. BTW the article you have been railing against here is from the New Republic.

The New Republic was bought out by a larger corporation several years ago.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMNry4PE93Y

You and turtle boy contributed equally to the subject.