https://www.wsj.com/economy/central...2p&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Please take a few minutes to read this article and then share your thoughts. But please, don't just post Trump Good / Trump Bad. If you do not understand what you're reading, then take the time to educate yourself on the matter first, whether that entails 10 minutes or 10 hours.

I am hoping for educated, civil discourse on this matter... not the crap show my post from last night brought about.

I will share my thoughts on the issue tomorrow...

My thoughts are Trump good/a trump bad.....

And yes I believe that the subpoenas were purely to out Powell in his "place" and I think it was a bad decision to attempt to sway Powell and company to ease more.

I found out this morning this is not a valid answer, lol. He is one or the other, so I was told.

My thoughts are the fed has never been independent,,,boarder line evil imho

All central bankers for the matter,,,

Just look at how the bailouts worked during the GFC,,,,

Many say the federal reserve is unconstitutional,,,,certainly controversial,,,, I agree

And why do they need such a massive new/ over priced building,,,,, they don’t!

At this point,,,, as painful as it would be,,,, they should end the fed,,,,

Of course that will never happen


And what ever happened to the Fort Knox audit?

I've never had anything good to say about the Feds or the system, but in today's scenario even they are looking better, but that's kinda like saying a lazy deadbeat is ok just because he at least shows up for work.

Thought One: Thank God for the Courts.

Thought Two: We cannot have a Fed that is a puppet of the President--whoever that President is.

Thought Three: We cannot have a DOJ that is the enforcer of the whims and vendettas of the President--whoever that President is.

Well, the fed is an independent banking cartel, and probably misnamed…it’s privately owned and needs oversight.

Agree on all points

Its only 2.5 Billion dollars to shine up a couple buildings....probably only real conservatives would want to know why.


Representative Tom Massie has been vocal about his opposition to the Federal Reserve's spending on the renovation.
He argues that the high costs are unjustifiable, especially during a time when many Americans are facing economic challenges.
Massie has introduced legislation aimed at increasing transparency and accountability within the Federal Reserve, including proposals to audit or even abolish the institution.

We as a whole complain about govt being too big but recent history shows even so called conservative voters have pushed back and criticized recent attempts to stop blatant overspending and fraud.

elected officials should be the only ones running our government, not judges or bureaucrats

How long would it take a complete democracy to annihilate a Republic ?

How does a Republic correct an out of control bureaucracy or activist judges? Do the people get to decide?

1 Like he closed the border dislikeanother war for anothercountry. after saying no more and several broken campaign promises.

Agree with both comments.

But I also have two other thoughts.

1. Correct decision........but I would like to se the "facts" the government presented.

2. Wrong judge. It would have been better, IMO, if a different judge had made the ruling. Boasberg has a well-known reputation for opposing the administration. It would look better had someone less controversial made this same decision.


Observations:

The building is being renovated. It was originally built in 1935. It is hardly a "new'' building.

Massie needs to inform himself a bit better. The Fed is audited every year. Not only that but the Fed releases a list of all their financial dealings each week on Thursday afternoon, online.
What politicians really mean by "audit" is that they want to be able to control interest rates. The worst possible outcome IMO

In my opinion, the Federal Reserve is not a bank! It is a group of high flutin financial idiots with fancy degrees and not a clue how to balance a checkbook that meet once a month for a few days. Often late on decision making about how to grow the economy without pain and drama and having no accountability. Currently using tax payers' money to build itself a majestic temple, where a rented office would suffice, with significant time delays and cost overruns. But what can you expect from an economist with no accountability or checks and balances in place.

I tend to agree that Trump used the subpoenas in an attempt to pressure Powell to do the President's bidding on lowering interest rates; but I also don't like Powell having the power of a blank check with no accountability to the American tax payers that fund the operation.and have to live with the consequences of the Feds' rather dubious decisions and expenditures.

Yep

I'm pretty sure the voters have voted to be 30 trillion in debt, not the Federal reserve? The Federal Reserve just gets to clean up mess.

The FED has a law they have to follow called the dual mandate. Pressure is applied to violate the dual mandate.

Just to be accurate:

The tax payer is not funding the renovation of these buildings. The Fed itself is funding the project and it isn't just one building, it is three. They are not buildings owned by the government. They are owned by the Board of Governors of the Fed.

The tax payer does not fund the Federal Reserve. It is self-funded.

White can you explain how the fed funds itself

IMO, both sides try to influence the Fed when in power. Only one side makes the news when they do it.

The FED owns $ Trillions of Interest paying Treasuries and Mortgage Backed Securities

"Assets (over 98% are securities):
U.S. Treasury securities: ~$4.3 trillion
Mortgage-backed securities (MBS): ~$2.0 trillion
Other assets: Includes loans, reverse repos, and foreign currency holdings."

Where'd they get the money to start?

When the FED is making money they send billions per month to the U.S. Treasury. I'm not sure how this works when they are losing money?

Dirt has that correct




A couple places;

The regional Federal reserve banks are owned by the thousands of small banks in each region ( if those small banks choose to be part of the system)

The small banks buy into the Fed system and are part owners. The funds from those "buy-in" transactions provided some of the initial capital.

Also, after the creation of the Fed, (can't remember the exact year) the Fed system was required to surrender any gold held by the banks in the Fed system to the federal government. In exchange, the Fed system was issued gold certificates reflecting that surrender. So the system does have a form of collateral or 'money in the bank'.

I've done some reading since asking, at the very beginning it said the govt was required to foot 20%.

There were a bunch of govt "acts" that regulated them in the years since.



The U.S. government invested 20% of the capital stock in the First Bank of the United States, which was a precursor to the Federal Reserve. This structure of government involvement continued with the Federal Reserve, which was established in 1913

Of course the subpoenas were thrown out. You can't fight the Rothchilds; not even the President can.

The losing money part is kind of a misnomer (if that is the correct term). It isn't that they are actully losing money, they are just not making money at a rate that they have projected.

Right . That was in 1791. The current iteration of the central bank was not funded by the federal government. Congress does have oversight of some of the ways the Fed operates.

That 20% invested in the First US Bank was only 2 million dollars. The total capitalization was only 10 million.

Quite a difference from today

Wow guys I am impressed!! Great conversation! No fighting. Y'all making me proud lol.

I said I would post my thoughts today but I see that BC already did.



Not commenting on thought three as it is more political, but his first two thoughts sum up my feelings on the issue perfectly.

This ruling was a correct one, and we simply can NOT have a FED that sways to the whims of whoever happens to be in office.

There is fiscal policy, and there is monetary policy. When the government goes on spending sprees (I know, when do they ever NOT, right?) then the Fed needs to tighten monetary policy in order to prevent inflation from going through the roof. The current administration has been pressuring the Fed to loosen monetary policy, while simultaneously spending gads of money. If the Fed were to give in to that request... well, I hope you like $6/doz eggs and $10/lb hamburger again.

Also, remember, that while you may like who is in office now, are you sure you'll like who is next?

Oh boy.

Tax payer money? It's the feds money. They own it. They print it and lend it to you, to be payed back with interest. Read the top of any bill in your wallet. "Federal reserve note". It's a brilliant scheme.

While the Fed issues it, it is technically printed by the Treasury....

The Federal Reserve funds its own operations, including building renovations, using income from its assets and fees charged to banks rather than congressional appropriations. The renovation involves multiple buildings on the Federal Reserve Board campus in Washington, D.C. While the Board of Governors controls those buildings and funds the project itself, the Board is still a federal government entity created by Congress.

Since the Fed is owned by banks there’s a really good chance that if you do business with a bank you’re paying for the improvements, as far as the subpoenas I can see how they could be considered pressure, but in my opinion where it was to go to grand jury to see if there can be criminal charges filed, and if the Fed did nothing wrong why wouldn’t they want to prove this in court?

No one that I know isn't both.

So should we have a federal agency that is beyond investigation? Are their circumstances where the DoJ can, or should, investigate what the fed has done?

Marten I believe the Fed is not a federal agency, and this maybe some of the issue.

Can we get a reincarnated Volcker

The USA needs a independent Fed, not bullied, swayed or pressured by either party or any politics. We live in an economy where inflation is not controlled nearly as much by supply, demand, interest ratesor even the value of the dollar in some respects. We have inflation driven by the supply of money as we can and do print money at will we need an independent and a fed board that is knowledgeable about how the money supply impacts our inflation and economy, thus making the need to be independent. To me it is too bad we needed to have the judicial system even have to be involved in keeping the fed indpependent.

Bryce

X2. Very well said Bryce.

So who oversees and insures the ongoing integrity of the Fed seven or the other 5 members of the Federal Open Market Committee after they have been appointed and confirmed?

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

The President can remove board members "For Cause"

""For cause" is generally interpreted to mean serious misconduct, inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office, not mere policy disagreements. "

Volcker was my uncles golf partner. As much as I respected my uncle, I'm not so sure I'd agree with your sentiment.

Getting rammed thru, when everyone had left for Christmas break wasn’t by accident,,,

How long can the clowns keep juggling the plates in this circus? I keep hearing 25% of taxes collected today is used to pay interest on the debt. The debt keeps growing.

If the rates are cut we get more of our old friend inflation.

If not we get a drop in the stock market and a lower GDP. Unemployment goes up.

I am very open to any corrections. I am no financial expert. My opinion is in spite of the current view that the dollar is still on firm ground it is instead a bit wobbly.

"Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook’s job seemed safe from firing by President Donald Trump after Supreme Court justices skeptically questioned the Trump administration’s lawyers on Wednesday about the grounds for Cook’s would-be termination and its effect on the Fed’s historical independence.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh warned Solicitor General D. John Sauer about the effects of his argument that Trump could fire Cook or other Fed governors “for cause” — but without judicial review of whether that purported cause of alleged mortgage fraud was legitimate.

“Your position that there’s no judicial review, no process required, no remedy available, very low bar for cause — that the president alone determines — and that would weaken, if not shatter, the independence of the Federal Reserve,” said Kavanaugh, one of the court’s six conservatives."

Good!

You got the idea right.

But, are you seeing any signs of recession where you are? I'm sure not here....

Went to town the other day and everyone had out help wanted signs.

And it seems not much can keep this market down for long.

At the FOMC meeting this week, they will likely keep rates where they are........ as they should IMO.

But by the next meeting? If anything, they may need to RAISE rates, certainly not lower them.... despite what Trump wants........

The U.S. has full employment. Inflation is still above target. Should be raising rates. Dual mandate.

I wouldn't complain if they raised them this week but you know they won't........

Because pressure works

As recently as a couple weeks ago, Fed futures were pricing in up to three 25bp cuts by December of 2026.

As of two days ago Fed futures are not pricing a 100% chance of a 25 bp cut until June 2027.

Recall that immediately after the last 25bp cut......long term rates actually went up....not down. So the fed would be, IMO, pushing on a string at this point if they cut......which I can't see them doing.
It is also going to take a while for the increase in crude prices to filter through the economy even if the hostilities in the gulf stopped today.

Ang, things are good here. Lots of jobs. Fuel is going to hurt some this summer.

Put me in the camp that says the president has enough power. He doesn't need more. Regardless of who holds the office.

Not to nit pick most currency that is "printed" by the treasure is used to replace existing currency in circulation. Approximately 80 85 percent.

Most new money that is created is digital.

Doesn't matter who prints debt backed currency the fed owns it. The treasury owns coinage, technically the treasury could print trillion dollar coins and use it to pay debt and it wouldn't add to the money supply. Would be a very short sighted decision that has been flouted by short sighted politicians.

Fourth Quarter GDP was revised down to 0.7 percent. Crude is up 70% YTD. The Iran quick hit strategy appears to be in jeopardy so oil prices may stay high. Inflation will result if so. Job losses in February.

Somebody cue the stagflation watch.

Stagflation requires" high unemployment". Since we have a labor shortage, I believe this may not happen.

Getting to the base of the issue, justice is meant to be blind. The self acclaimed activist judge Boseard should be nowhere near this decision nor a court room period. There are many others wearing robes who shouldn’t as well.

Osky

PPL inflation .7 percent in Feb before oil price inflation. I wish pressure didn’t work.

I really don't think the FOMC is voting based on political pressure. Do I think rates should be raised? Yes. But I am sure the Fed is taking into account things such as the unexpected drop in payrolls in February as well. I don't see Powell giving any concern to what the POTUS wants... if anything he'd probably wanna stick it to him the way he's been bashing him all year, lol.

Powell's comments are what will be interesting today... especially after the PPI came in hot which doesn't even account for war inflation. Imagine it'll be a rocky afternoon in the market.

The new goal is 2 percent inflation over the long term. Mathematically you will have to bring inflation below 2 percent for 6 or 7 years just to average 2 percent over the long term thanks to the post Covid spike. If you grew up in the 70’s and 80’s you know what bad jobs market looks like. This ain’t one. IMO

Lower rates increase the economy. Trumps white house is printing money and pushing for lower rates. Inflation should increase if that happens. Peoples investments should keep booming. I'm guessing the new Fed chair in May has some plans.

Tangible > Numeral

everything require petrol to produce or move

inflation/prices will be going up....

I don't think we'll be seeing rate cuts anytime soon.....

Absolutely, we witnessed that jyst A few years ago.

To see how oil price and inflation go hand in hand, compare these two charts.

There are other factors, but these two run pretty close together..

https://www.chartoasis.com/crude-oil-per-barrel-commodity-chart-5-years-cop2/

https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/

My head hurts.

Rates held steady.... as expected.

The cost of living index went up .7% in February. The largest monthly increase in several months and that does not include any of the increases in March which will be substantial. We are seeing the real impacts of year old tariffs, now. So all of us that belive a 3-6 week pump in energy costs will disappear by the 4th of July do not understand how our economy works. Businesses are spending billions more for goods and services that will be in our economic future for many months. Long term things like fertilizer. Most fertilizer has been purchased for 2026, but the cost for 2027 has already gone way up It is not just the cost of the fertilizer used per acre it also shows up as less is used and that can trigger lower yields and thus shorter supplies. Corn has already gone up .25 cents since March 1st and we still have a 2 billion bushel carryover but users know and feel there could be some real supply concerns heading our way even without weather etc. Fertilizer issues impact all major crop countries, like Brazil, China, Ukraine, Argentina, India etc.

Bryce

I heard Kevin Warsh wants to reduce cash in circulation and destroy it, if someone has heard different please correct me.

It actually is nice to finally see some volatility come into the markets it creates some good buying and selling opportunity.

It actually is nice to finally see some volatility come into the markets it creates some good buying and selling opportunity.
Yes there are 3 March 2027 futures over $5.00 for corn. Been a while since those prices were around, but with fertilizer up about 30% right now and average costs would be say $100 per acre that is another $25-$30 or for good IA corn ground about 15 cents per bushel which means some additional income but that does not include the higher costs of other inputs such as fuel other fertilizers and chemicals which are largly petrolium based.
I can see some larger end users buying now even with 5 cents per bushel per month or 60 cents per year that means corn at $5.25 next year is break even for them and they have their supply. We have not dealt with a smaller crop for a while and it may get real interesting if we break away from typical acres planted and yield trends.

Bryce

Maybe it is me, but wouldn't you want to make a move to counter inflation to keep the money value stable or declining to your goal, not after the inflation happens away from your goal?

I'd be interested in knowing where you heard that.

Warsh has said he wants to reduce the Fed's balance sheet, which by itself makes sense to me. That should have the effect of reducing liquidity and raising rates slightly.

But at the same time I suspect he wants to cut actual short term rates to satisfy his boss. The two things MIGHT be possible but would likely take years to accomplish.

I can't imagine he supports eliminating cash entirely. I also think any move in any of those directions will create an outcry in both the credit and equity markets.

He can't do much of anything on his own.

"The Fed’s traditional playbook is that when there is tension within its dual mandate of stable prices and maximum sustainable employment, it leans toward containing inflation. Stable prices, after all, are a precondition of full employment."



"Fed officials “are aware they’ve missed their inflation target for five years, and they do not want to continue to miss it indefinitely,” said Nathan Sheets, chief economist at Citi and a former top economist at the Fed. Inflation, according to the Fed’s preferred measure, was 2.8% in January, up from 2.3% nearly a year ago. It’s also above the Fed’s target of 2%."

Love it or hate it, the Iran War--or whatever it is causing financial instability.
Oil Prices are up 73% YTD.
Love them or hate them, tariffs created significant issues.
Inflation is not under control.
Growth has slowed to almost nothing.

The S&P and Dow are down approximately 4-5% YTD.

From what I can see, average consumers are feeling it worse than is being reported.

2026 didn't have to be this hard.

I could be dead wrong but I don't think oil prices will remain elevated for an extended period. The world is awash in oil and the current price spike is logistics. The transporters will find a way to get the needed oil to market. Until the United States begins to decline from record production of the last few years, oil price increases will be short lived.

True if the Iran thing doesn't last to long, also the market will rebound huge once it's over.

I agree. Short interest in USO has jumped from 0.5% on 2/26 to nearly 20% today. So the larger players are also betting on a pull back or hedging other long positions

Yes oil prices may well decline in soon and maybe quickly, but from an economic aspect there will be much higher prices built into the goods and services that will be used in the short and medium term. High usage season is coming up very fast. On emonth of higher prices is 1/12th of the year and that adds cost to about 8% to the cost. So in a consumer economy as we are the real prices to be paid will be on the lower end of the income range where energy costs already make up a higher percentage of the expenses.

Bryce

"Is the US creeping towards a 3% inflation regime?"

Maybe

I’m sorry white I didn’t mean all cash but reduce the amount in circulation, it was a comment made on market to market and I found this article, I will change my other post to say reduce.

https://economic-research.bnpparibas.com/html/en-US/Kevin-Warsh-Lead-Policy-Implications-2/5/2026,53202

This guy is a fruit but I been listening to him b/c he seems to make a lot of sense. Interested in what you think.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDJ0Ebk0PA0

Oh that makes more sense.
Thanks Bob.

Reduce the amount of cash and circulation?

As in deflation?

No. He seems to be advocating continued QT. Reducing FED'S balance sheet.

He wanted to reduce the amount of physical cash in circulation, and the more I’ve read they won’t reissue bonds, while at the same time cut interest rates I would imagine that’s the way to keep inflation and not have deflation, I also saw were he thinks AI will play some role in inflation.

Good thing he's only 1 vote of 12....IF he gets confirmed.....

Reducing money in circulation... GOOD.

Cutting interest rates more.....HORRIBLE.

Not good for investors, borrowers or both?

How about the economy?

Assuming you were talking to me.....

For the country as a whole...

Frankly I don't care about investors (I am one) or borrowers (I am not).

I care about our country.

Hope you like $7/doz eggs and $25/lb beef....

I went yesterday and bought several hundred dollars of beef because I can see what is coming.

Hint: It's inflation..... again

But ya know what, hippie?? I don't care because I DO think we need to take Iran out....

I'll pay higher prices in the grocery store for that........

Yeah, that's right...... I APPROVE of what Trump is doing here just like I approve of 90% of the things he does........

For whatever reason, you just wanna focus on the one or 2 things I do not approve of.........

But if you think inflation is coming ( ignoring the fact inflation is currently above objective) would it not be the FED's job to combat it?

Of course. I'd not be surprised to see a hike at the next meeting.....