3 ms·

There hasn't been a single point in my shorter life so far where things have been this out of control. The fed is supposed to be as non-political as possible. I

There hasn't been a single point in my shorter life so far where things have been this out of control. The fed is supposed to be as non-political as possible. I know politics and the economy are intertwined, but tell me how this won't end up a disaster please. How do we get back to the USA we had even 10 years ago?

OutOfHere 9mo ago
[flagged]
- oenton 9mo ago
  This is the second or third comment I’ve seen online that says this. I’m curious how do you conclude the fed has “never been non-political?” Is this just a matter of using the right terminology? The term “non-political” (also “independent”) isn’t concerned with each board member’s individual party affiliation, or how they vote in elections. It just means that management of the fed and importantly its monetary policy I.e. the federal rate, be guided by data; not influenced by short term goals of politicians and especially not influenced by the President or his administration. (Edit) all that to say, maybe that’s what you meant by “never at an individual level”?
  - OutOfHere 9mo ago
    I have looked at individual votes for far too many years, and they often are politically aligned as per the respective state of the voter. This is not a coincidence, and it's not something to overlook. If the votes were guided by data alone, this pattern would not exist, but it does.
baby_souffle 9mo ago
> but tell me how this won't end up a disaster please. Unless you want to split hairs and argue that "disaster" is really only in the middle of the spectrum of plausible outcomes... then there is no outcome here that isn't a disaster. At *best* this only moderately raises inflation in the short-term and somehow the rest of the world isn't shaken too much and the USD somehow still remains a reserve currency. I'm in the "USD looses reserve currency status in 6-48 months" camp but there are some reasonable arguments against this.

OutOfHere 9mo ago

[flagged]

oenton 9mo ago
This is the second or third comment I’ve seen online that says this. I’m curious how do you conclude the fed has “never been non-political?” Is this just a matter of using the right terminology? The term “non-political” (also “independent”) isn’t concerned with each board member’s individual party affiliation, or how they vote in elections. It just means that management of the fed and importantly its monetary policy I.e. the federal rate, be guided by data; not influenced by short term goals of politicians and especially not influenced by the President or his administration. (Edit) all that to say, maybe that’s what you meant by “never at an individual level”?
- OutOfHere 9mo ago
  I have looked at individual votes for far too many years, and they often are politically aligned as per the respective state of the voter. This is not a coincidence, and it's not something to overlook. If the votes were guided by data alone, this pattern would not exist, but it does.

baby_souffle 9mo ago

> but tell me how this won't end up a disaster please. Unless you want to split hairs and argue that "disaster" is really only in the middle of the spectrum of plausible outcomes... then there is no outcome here that isn't a disaster. At *best* this only moderately raises inflation in the short-term and somehow the rest of the world isn't shaken too much and the USD somehow still remains a reserve currency. I'm in the "USD looses reserve currency status in 6-48 months" camp but there are some reasonable arguments against this.