Comments

1
Today, Mudede, being the learned fellow that he claims to be, will explain to each and everyone of us how it is that President Obama never once invoked the congressional procedure whereby it is only necessary to receive a majority vote (meaning one vote more, instead of the normal two-thirds majority vote required) for financial legislation, which would have passed most, if not all, of that financial legislation he supported which would have been positive for The People!

Something Bush before him did repeatedly.

2
Blaming quantitative easing instead of the fallout from China's markets (which we all knew was going to happen, their economic bubble is MASSIVE) is like blaming a loose screw in the couch when your roof caves in.

Go read about what is happening right now, and has been happening in China for the last decade, Mudede. It may shock you.
3
What I truly want is for the ONLY two candidates running for the presidency NOT in the pockets of the Koch brothers to make it to the election: Sen. Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump --- the two individuals, not bought and paid for by the Koch brothers - - - as for the rest of the swine: Cruz, Clinton, Rubio . . . .
4
@2 is quite correct --- when Mudede gets it wrong, he really blows it out his butt!
5
I say we just keep pumping money into the Banks, they are the professionals and know how to do this stuff properly, I sure don't !
7
3/5 posts by sgt_doom
abandon thread
8
But QE is a key part of neoliberalism, and Charles is on record as being a Marxist who prefers neoliberalism to democratic socialism. How can Charles be both for and against something at the same time?
9
I have a friend who is a VP at an investing firm. A few months ago told me to put it all in cash. Why? QE had been inflating stock prices that would come back down now that it was ending. I'd say he, and you, are spot on.
10
we had strong job growth long before we had low oil prices. you are missing the intellectual opening offered by the right-wing's sound-money lunacy. QE is the socialization of credit the money supply. Japan has 3% unemployment. Canada did so well in the Great Recession that the UK hired Canada's top guy, and now the UK has record hi employment, with massive net immigration. ever wonder why Australia, Canada and the UK never had the housing busts that we're supposed to feel so guilty about?

the end of QE and ZIRP brought China's dollar peg to a crisis point, as the yuan has become overvalued. their situation is a bit like France's, say, tho with more sovereign power to remedy via devaluation

Canada and Japan had looser monetary policy than we did, and milder recessions. young Europeans r voting with their feet for QE, packing into the UK

QE forced wealth into riskier assets. that made a lot of people wealthier on paper. a new, unprofitable car company was given enough capital to shoot an SUV from 0 mph to 60 with laptop batteries

QE is designed to reduce the value of savings and of wages, so that thrift becomes less attractive to investors, and a given nominal wage level becomes more affordable to employers. it's supposed to make credit cheaper. we've had years of net job growth

Europe has the same oil market dynamics that we have - really, low oil prices should b better for them because they don't produce as much as we do, and we're a larger savings destination for OPEC rents than they are. we had massive fiscal austerity (the sequester, plus huge local government cuts since the beginning of the crisis), just like they did. we did way, way better than them because the Fed was more socialist than the ECB, and because our labor markets r less socialist than those of Mediterranean Europe

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.