Posted on 11/10/2010 4:22:49 PM PST by Starman417
Sarah Palin blasts Obama for defending the QE2 in her new post titled "Obama’s Clever Way to Punt the Tough Calls: Driving the Dollar Down":
In his press conference on Monday, President Obama responded to critics of the Federal Reserve’s decision to start a new round of quantitative easing – a fancy term for printing money out of thin air. He claimed this move would drive up U.S. growth rates. He also warned that “the worst thing that could happen to the world economy, not just ours but the entire world’s economy is if we end up being stuck with no growth or very limited growth.”The latter is certainly true. It would be a global disaster if the U.S. economy remained permanently stuck in the mud. But the same cannot be said of his claim that the Fed’s experiment in pump priming would automatically lead to increased economic growth. By the time this experiment is over, QE will make us queasy. Will driving the dollar down in this way do anything to boost U.S. exports? The short answer is not really. A weaker dollar will temporarily boost exports by making our goods cheaper to sell; but inevitably other countries will respond in kind, triggering the kind of currency wars economists are warning us about. It’s precisely to prevent this scenario that World Bank President Robert Zoellick recently came out in favor of some new type of gold standard or “international reference point.”
Will QE2 then at least boost domestic investment? No, again. As I explained in my speech in Phoenix, the reason banks aren’t lending and businesses aren’t investing isn’t because of insufficient access to credit. There’s plenty of money around, it’s just that no one’s willing to spend it. Big businesses especially have been hoarding cash. They’re not expanding or adding to their workforce because there’s just too much uncertainty created by a lot of big government experiments that aren’t working. It’s the President’s own policies that are creating this uncertainty.
And Peter Schiff noted that Palin is right in his video blog yesterday. Take note of the rising numbers for staples...as Glenn Beck-predicted:
[VIDEO AT SITE]
Partial transcript:
Oil this morning hit a two year high before closing negative on the day but some commodities managed to hold their gains, the CRB did hit a new high today, it is making, again, a string of successive new highs, new all time high for cotton, sugar hit a contract high, soy beans...soy beans were up over 50 cents a bushel closing at 13.29 a bushel. We actually have beans in the teens. I've never even seen this in my adult life, I think it was the rallying cry in the 1970's bull market. It's back and I think today was just a reversal Tuesday. Look at the bond market tho, look at the yield on the 30 year bond rising to 4.25 this is the highest yield on 30 year treasuries in six months. And as I mentioned before I think the bond market is slowly eroding, certainly at the longer end of the curve. The 10 year was weak today but I think all our longer term interest rates are moving up as Quantitative Easing is already backfiring on the federal reserve. It is producing higher, not lower, interest rates.~~~The world is throwing a lot of criticism on the fed now for QE2. I think the harshest criticism is coming from Germany. Germany, which understands inflation quite well, called Ben Bernanke clueless. I've used that word too so maybe the Germans are paying attention to some of my writings. The Russian central bank was critical.
Obama was in India, I think he's still there, and he made a speech in which he's trying to defend the fed. And this is really kinda funny because first of all he said that he doesn't want to comment on fed policy because he doesn't want to compromise the independence of the fed, well, there isn't any independence left to compromise. The irony of it is that normally when its the fed acting tough, you know removing the punch bowl, unpopular, raising interest rates, that's when you don't want to bash your central bank because you don't want to create the impression that the government is putting pressure on the central bank to be too easy. Or to be easier. To not be be tougher. But when you have people asking Obama to criticize the central bank for being to easy! I mean that's when he should be criticizing them because the federal reserve is acting really in concert with the government to facilitate government debt, to monetize government debt, that's exactly when it should be criticized. I mean the whole thing is ridiculous.
But also Obama basically said that the fed has a mandate to grow the economy.
Well...where do you figure that out? Where did you get that mandate?
(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net...
The fed should have only one mandate: provide a stable and reliable currency. Leave the economy to fiscal policy and the private sector.
This is the serious Sarah Palin. The 2010 campaigns are over. Pay attention to Sarah Palin. She's leading the way, (again).
If the President was serious about getting the economy moving again, he’d stop supporting the Fed’s dangerous experiments with our currency and focus instead on what actually works: reducing government spending and boosting business investment through good old fashioned supply side reforms (cutting taxes and reducing overly burdensome regulations). Simply running the printing presses in order to avoid paying off your debts is no way for a great nation to behave.
- Sarah Palin
.
“President Not Serious About Fixing Economy”
Yes he is. He’s “investing” in things like education, energy, and magic beans.
“The fed should have only one mandate: provide a stable and reliable currency.”
I can’t abide even that mandate. What business is it of the feds if there was a private currency and it were to inflate or deflate as a result of market forces? Absolutely none. Because there’s no natural danger to either inflation or deflation, so long as it happens naturally.
Government is, as always, the problem. Instability is a bugaboo. I mean, who really cares whether, say, the price of Nintendo Wiis is “stable”? Nobody. Neither should we care about the price of money, were it freely chosen.
Obama comes from the Frances Fox Piven school of constructing scarcity.
Spreading scarcity is their conscious goal—they just don’t have the onions to admit it because their ideology is caca.
Are we to believe that 0 has the intention to fix the US economy?
I think that the rats are trying to tank the economy on purpose as part of their effort to bring down the USA, even if just by a few pegs and it will get away from them. Devaluing our dollar is part of that attack and will anger our largest creditors causing more uncertainty to create a crisis.
“I can’t abide even that mandate. What business is it of the feds if there was a private currency and it were to inflate or deflate as a result of market forces? “
I have no problem with an alternative private currency as long as it is 100% gold backed. That way, if that company goes under, nobody would be screwed. State backed currencies have the advantage of not being able to go under so quickly.
Obama not serious about fixing the economy???
Not serious??????
BUahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Obama and his liberal fascists WANT to ruin the economy.YES!
That will bring about the ingredients for their Socialist Utopia, destroy wealth in America, and make the people dependent on Big Brother.
Its amazing that anyone would say Obama s just, “Not serious.” Even Sarah Palin.
This is willful destruction of the US economy and its free market capitalism.The new wealthy class will be government elitists who get monopolistic “breaks” given them by the government.Mandarin Czars. Thats the plan.
We await the futher awakening of America.
“State backed currencies have the advantage of not being able to go under so quickly.”
That’s not an advantag. As their ability to manipulate the market outstrips by lightyears any private organization’s, they are bound to do far more damage. And indeed, they have. “Wildcat” banking (though people tend to forget that they operated in a context including various government manipulations, even if there was no single federal bank at the time) never caused a Great Depression, and by any account the boom and bust cycle has gotten more frequent with a shorter wavelength.
“That way, if that company goes under, nobody would be screwed. State backed currencies have the advantage of not being able to go under so quickly.”
To put it shorter, the idea that the only way anybody gets screwed is for the currency to “go under” is irrational. There’s a whole lot of pain between, say, a currency screwing up time schedules and capital investment and thereby creating an artificial boom to be corrected by a bust (however small and limited the bust may be) and a total and utter collapse of the currency, through hyperinflation or whatever, which wipes out the savings of all who hold it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.