Jerome Powell Is Reportedly Considering Resigning As Fed Chair

“Appears”

Another know-nothing operating on feels disparaging the work of someone (including the entire FOMC) that dedicates their time to keeping our economy stable.

 

President Trump should have him arrested if he won’t go voluntarily.

 

Hmm, where did I say I want the Fed to ease. I said he’s too slow to react. Inflation is above target but there are also signs of slowdown. His past history indicates that he will wait too long to start to ease. Many may feel that time is now. I’m not quite convinced of that. Easing might sell a few more cars and homes, but I want inflation down to target first. If someone isn’t buying a car or home because the interest rate is 1/2 point too high, they probably shouldn’t be buying something that expensive

 

Auto loans and home mortgages are driven by the 10 year bond market. It’s why mortgage rates spiked this spring when Trump started his tariff insanity despite the Fed not changing rates.

 

The Fed would have already started lowering rates if not for the tariff game Trump is playing. Yet Trump wants to blame Powell for a situation he caused. Every Fed member thinks it’s prudent to wait and see how the economy reacts to his erratic tariff policy before adjusting rates accordingly.

 

Very clear now. He should have reacted by more quickly ...... not lowering rates.

 

A more appropriate analogy would be Arthur Burns decision to lower interest rates at the request of Richard Nixon in 1972. Nixon got the economy that he wanted in 1972 and was reelected in a landslide. The country ended up with almost a decade of a stagflation with double digit inflation in late 1973 and 1974 followed by the most severe recession in 1974-75 since the Great Depression.

 

The next Federal Reserve Chairman will be: KEVIN WARSH

 

And if you make the font size even larger it's guaranteed to happen!

 

I think I was pretty clear about what I meant Jo. Go start your bullshit somewhere else.

 

many conservative economists have argued for a rule based monetary policy rather than a discretion based MP.

The Fed's mandate is not complicated. Show us your rule, then you can take politics out of it. My favored rule sez the fed funds rate should be 5.35% which is higher than the current rate. BTW, I also argued against the cut in the Fall.

Show us your rule & then I'll share mine. Otherwise, you're just grinding your politically biased gums IMO & can continue to be a FED expert based entirely on your

 

It mighta been strong, but it was ill informed. Do you not know the FED's mandate? It's pretty simple.

The Fed and the Dual Mandate
Price Stability
One part of the Fed’s dual mandate is price stability. Price stability means that inflation remains low and stable over the longer run. When inflation is low and stable, people can hold money without having to worry that high inflation will erode its purchasing power.

For example, a 2 percent annual inflation rate means that—on average—a dollar buys 2 percent fewer goods and services than it did the year before. That seems manageable, but what if it was 10 percent? With stable prices, consumers and businesses don’t have to worry about rising or falling prices when making plans, or when borrowing or lending for long periods. In short, the economy can run efficiently when inflation is low and stable. But how low is low? The Fed seeks to achieve inflation that averages 2 percent over time.

Maximum Employment
The other part of the Fed’s dual mandate is maximum employment. The concept of maximum employment can be thought of as the highest level of employment that the economy can sustain over time. Of course, measuring this concept is hard because the level of maximum employment varies over time with business conditions, demographics, labor market regulations, and other factors. Rather, the Fed considers a wide range of employment indicators to estimate the shortfalls of employment from its maximum level. In short, the Fed does not have a numerical target for the level of employment; rather, the Fed analyzes economic conditions using a wide range of data to design policies that achieve maximum employment.

& no, maximum employment is not an UE rate = 0%. Full employment UE rate is typically estimated to be between 4-6%.

inf = 2.4%, UE = 4.1%. So, what is the (non feelings intensive) argument for lowering rates?

 

Have you never considered that Donald J Trump may be ordained by God?

 

he does seem to share Jesus' affinity for communism, but I don't believe in god, so no.

 

If evolution was that good, wouldn’t you think we’d have 0% unemployment?

 

I think your inability to think critically is more of an indictment of evolution. Or, perhaps you can explain why an atheist can’t believe in intelligent design.

 

I have always disliked the Maximum Employment aspect of the dual mandate given what I consider the natural mandate of price stability. I really don’t see how they can effectively do both at the same time consistently. Managing price stability effectively should keep rates somewhere close to what you mention as your preference.

Many on this board like to say; “Do stupid things, win stupid prizes”. Well, shutting the economy down was stupid. Subsequently pumping trillions of $ in spending and liquidity in 2021-present was even more stupid. We will be unwinding our stupidity for several more years.