35 Burst results for "Fed"
FBI said to have pinpointed possible suspect in death of Capitol Police officer
"O ps 206. It appears the feds were getting closer this morning to find out who's responsible for killing the Capitol Police officer on the day of the capital riot, The New York Times reporting the FBI has pinpointed a possible suspect in the investigation into Brian Sick Nick's death. Times reports. Investigators have identified a single person seen on video using bear spray on officers, including sick, Nick that said authorities do not yet have this person's name and a statement. Capitol Police say they're awaiting toxicology
Strome, Kreider lead Rangers to 6-2 win over Bruins
"The Bruins have followed Thursday seven two loss to the islanders by getting blasted by the Rangers six to two Ryan Strome had a goal and two assists for the Blueshirts who had fans in the stands for the first time since last March having the home crowd behind us you know it's two thousand people who ever felt like a lot more and I think we definitely feed off their energy and you know hopefully get things wrong Chris Kreider added a goal and an assist as the Rangers won for the third time in four games Patrice Bergeron got the Bruins within two to one early in the second but the Rangers regained control when Colin Blackwell and Kreider scored twelve seconds apart late in the period the Bruins allowed just thirty six goals in their first sixteen games before surrendering thirteen on Long Island and Manhattan I'm Dave Ferrie
US Personal Income Increased 10% In January, Consumer Spending Up 2.4%
"The us household income grew ten percent in january alongside. This consumer spending rose two point four percent. This growth came primarily from the latest round of stimulus and was in fact the second largest monthly income growth on record after last april when the initial pandemic payments were sent out. This was also the first month since october. That consumer spending rose. Interestingly the thing to really pay attention to around this is in fact the bond markets. We're going to discuss them a little bit more in our main topic but effectively. What we're seeing right now is a situation where investors think that regardless of what jerome powell and the fed says an improving economy will force them to back off the aggressive monetary policy that has helped asset prices remained so high in response. They're backing off of high priced. Stocks and pushing treasury yields higher. Some are calling this the taper 'less tantrum and this refers to a twenty thirteen market episode. Where the fed tried to taper post. Gfc policies and markets absolutely freaked the. Hell out the fed. This time is saying that it's actually not going to do any such tapering. But the market is still freaking out believing they won't be to not hence the taper lewis tantrum anyway todd of stats around income and consumer spending are exactly the sort of evidence. Those tapes tantrum irs are pointing to
McElhinney leads Lightning to 3-1 win over Hurricanes
"Curtis Michael he stopped thirty one of thirty two shots and got an assist on the game winning goal to steal a win first Tampa Bay Lightning who beat the Carolina hurricanes three to one Thursday night I got a hand for guys I thought we hung in there and you know we got a great shot to get that second goal and and then we hung on for the for the most part but you know huge two points for everybody in that restaurant tonight the hurricane struck first with a pretty place started by Sebastian aho feeding a streaking Jesper fast who threaded a cross slot pass to Brett Pesci for an easy shot past mackel Haney but that would be their only goal of the game despite outplaying the lightning for much of it Tampa Bay managed to even the score in the second McHale circuit Jeff getting his first of the season and Yanni Gourde went top shelf to beat James Reimer for the game winner Barclay Goodrow added the empty netter late in the game Walter Marcia Cano Tampa
Security chief says Washington, DC ‘must reimagine safety and security'
"Capitol Hill, Auto Mitchell Mall shop Miller Fits wt. first Save Save LP LP LP Money Money Money Money knew knew knew knew on on on on New New New New well well well well Toyotas Toyotas Toyotas Toyotas in in in in the the the the face face face face Hyundai's Hyundai's Hyundai's Hyundai's of of of of the the the the Subaru's Subaru's Subaru's Subaru's evolving evolving evolving evolving threat threat threat threat isn't isn't isn't isn't of of of of fit fit fit fit dumbest dumbest dumbest dumbest small small small small dot dot dot dot domestic domestic domestic domestic com com com com Transparency Transparency Transparency Transparency terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, the the the the head head head head You You You You can can can can trust trust trust trust of of of of Homeland Homeland Homeland Homeland security security security security David David David David for for for for the the the the Alden. Alden. Alden. Alden. district district district district W W W W says. says. says. says. T T T T o o o o P P P P This This This This Traffic Traffic Traffic Traffic city Now your has latest forecast to re imagine with storm safety team for meteorologists, and security Chuck extremism Bell Sunshine is a growing and a step problem, north says to northwesterly Chris Rodriguez, breeze for the remainder director of DC's of your Thursday Homeland afternoon Security temperatures and emergency hovering in the Management low fifties agents for state much while of the day in the past and then cooling quickly they existed after on the the sun fringes goes down of society. clear skies They overnight are rapidly temperatures becoming will drop part below of our freezing cultural mainstream and most of the suburbs and to they around are fueled 32 and downtown. fed by And misinformation then your Friday and lies. turning very He cloudy told the council's highs committee around on the judiciary 50 degrees tomorrow. and public safety. Showers That intelligence of rain like gathering to arrive needs during to know the evening when hours. people Those are rain involved showers in could what be mixing looks with the wet like stuff like military very late Friday or night, law enforcement it'll go back to training all rain in by the community Saturday morning. to ensure Another that the rain specific chance on Sunday. skill sets I'm Storm Team four. Which are Meteorologist developed to defend Chuck Bell a nation, for w a state T or o a community P. Well, or
Anticipating 2021 boom, Q4 GDP revised up slightly to 4.1%
"The economy tanked in twenty twenty but wait until you hear what's about to happen last year the economy shrank more than in any year in the past seven decades three and a half percent bling the pandemic but as bad as twenty twenty was it set us up for what economists believe will be a very strong rebound one expert says the economy is beginning to fire on all cylinders song one soon as the finance and economics expert in Los Angeles he says you have massive government stimulus low interest rates from the fed and the covert nineteen vaccine supply is growing sales have been surging in the beaten down retail sector for all of twenty twenty one economists are forecasting the GDP could grow by six percent I'm Rita Foley
Halo TV show will air in 2022, alongside Star Trek
"So viacomcbs held its big investor presentation paramount plus which is rebranded and rebooted version of an existing service called. Cbs all access. What did we get yesterday yesterday. There was this three. Plus our event designed to unveil the scope of paramount plus says this revamped version of cbs. All access in a kind of inauspicious. Start this event that was supposed to talk about how the company is going to be really competitive and streaming ended up starting half an hour late because they were having problems streaming so that wasn't a great place to start but generally the main focus last night was squarely on programming all the titles that they're going to be creating the originals the exclusives movies and shows that they're going to be leading into sort of cbs's stable of networks and brands and intellectual property in order to hopefully they hope draw new subscribers to service that has been around almost since the very beginning of services like this. Yeah let's take into that. Because cbs all access has largely been known for shows like star trek discovery and well star trek card and star trek. Lower deck's star trek. What else are we gave from paramount. Plus it how does it differ from. Was he this. All access had been about the last two years. Generally i would say that. The basic proposition of paramount plus is pretty similar to cbs. All access some of the things that make. Cbs all access a little bit. Different from other streaming services is baked into ciba's access. You get a live feed of Your local cbs channel most streaming on demand streaming services. Don't have both. I kind of live and on demand element integrated within them. That doesn't really change paramount. Plus the things that are going to be changing. Like i said it's really about how they're trying to expand people's concept of what's this entire company a includes and so what that is that they're going to be making a lot more originals based on things from comedy central and tv from nickelodeon there's going to be a rugrats boot and an entire new studio dedicated to avatar the last air bender Universe shows in shorts and movies and they're going to be leading really hard into the paramount. Pictures movie studio that the company also owns. They're going to be reviving some franchises from that movie studios past and they're also going to be bringing a few of paramount pictures new theatrical movies to permit plus to stream earlier than would be normal. This is nothing like hbo. Max streaming every single warner brothers. New movie the same day as it hit theaters but subscribers to promote plus a will have the opportunity to stream movies like quietly to the new mission impossible mission impossible. I think at seven on the of subscribers will be able to stream that basically a month and a half after those movies hit theaters. So for example quiet place equal you'll be able to stream in november. That's not as aggressive as as some other services but it does change the proposition. Little bet from what people were used to. Cvs all access right and so. Let's get some details. How what is the service actually launched and home was the cost and did it does it differ from. What's he has. All access was charging. Yeah well this is something. I was kind of surprised that this is going to be such a confusing transition. What's happening is in one week on march fourth they will essentially replace. Cbs all accesses premium tier with paramount plus in a launch on the fourth in the us and across countries some countries in latin america as a ten dollar a month subscription. And that gives you everything on the service. Add freight then in june going to widen paramount plus to be sickly launched a cheaper ad-supported limited tier. That's five dollars month so that's comparable with similar tier that's already on. Cbs all access. So both of the services have these kind of like cheaper ad-supported tears and premium more expensive inclusive tears but ammo plus is going to be rolling them out in. This staggered way which is going to create some confusion for current subscribers and also perspective subscribers know. There's going to be period of a few months where there's going to be multiple apps that have the cbs name in them was have the paramount name in them. And it's going to be hard. It's not as simple proposition for consumers to figure out what they wanna get and where they can actually get it with all those moving parts happening at once so we saw out some difficulty with. Hbo max when hbo max launched last year when they had not only at hbo max as an app out in the market but hbo go and hbo now still existed as made that transition. That was a really bumpy road for them for a while. Because of consumer confusion now add in the element that there is not only just like. Hey there's one subscription it's one price none of that change now. Add in the fact that you've got to tears which launches at one time one of which doesn't launch until another time and those things have different. They unlock different. So it does seem like it's setting up a really a really bumpy transition for them to
If You Sell Your Bitcoin, Michael Saylor and Jack Dorsey WILL Buy It
"Before powell spoke investors had started to get nervous in the us around the potential for an early unwinding of the fed's extremely aggressive approach to keeping rates low and stimulus etc. Because of this the market was getting out of stocks and into treasuries driving the yield of treasuries down and by the way if that sounded like greek to you. We're actually going to do a macro one show. And a bond specific show as part of that new kiddo show set as well either way powell gave testimony to the us senate banking committee on tuesday and said that the economic recovery remains uneven and far from complete and the path ahead is highly uncertain the bloomberg headline this morning about it said powell reiterates view that labor market has a long way to go. Pow pointed out that there are ten million fewer people employed. And that's a long way to go to maximum employment and this is really important the mandate the fed is actually two parts market stability. But it's also full employment the tools however that they have to achieve that full employment are limited and what we've seen is that asset prices tend to benefit before full employment is reached over the course of this year. We're likely to shift from the market stability part of that equation to the full employment part of that equation but it still promises a pretty aggressive approach from the fed powell also mentioned digital currencies saying it's a priority and that they'll be reaching out to congress about it in twenty twenty one so we'll have to come back to that soon next up on the brief today trouble in arc land i have discussed kathy would and arc pretty frequently here most recently in the episode last week i find it interesting. How a lot of the macro dynamics that are potentially interacting with bitcoin might be interacting with arc funds as well arc has seen a stratospheric rise over the last year but has been hammered. The past few days in fact it started a couple weeks ago as people started to get nervous about how concentrated arcs of some of their companies were remember. Our funds have specific feces around innovation. So there are frankly. Only so many companies they can buy if their fund owns to high percentage of those companies. The fear goes it could create risk in both directions that an issue in one company could create broader risk for arc or vice versa that arc could create new exhaustiveness risk for the companies themselves over the past few days however the concern has been less about that and more about this rise in treasury yields the innovation. Etf which is their flagship. Fell three sessions in a row. It had its worst today. Drops in september and again basically these yields were reflective as we just discussed of investors thinking that there was going to be pressure for rates to rise and for fed support on wind earlier than expected because of that they were moving out of the pricier parts of the market. I e tak. Now for her part. Kathy would said she wasn't worried said that she welcomed the correction and to be fair. She's gone from three billion assets under management in january twenty twenty two more than thirty in january twenty twenty one to more than sixty billion last week still. I think this is worth watching as a reflection of the bleeding edge of the markets. I don't think. Bitcoin is so correllated that you can watch these things move in tandem. But i do believe that. There's some proxy for how traditional investors might think about bitcoin at any given time based on the macro context lasts up on the today. Let's talk about the latest out of india. India as we've discussed has been very aggressive. Vis-a-vis crypto currencies with that seeming to only heightening right now a couple updates from the last few days rakesh ginger who's likened to an indian warren buffett. The billionaire investor he told. Cnbc never buy bitcoin that. Regulators should step in and ban cryptos in india and called bitcoin speculation of the highest order. So pretty much that. Warren buffett description is accurate at least when it comes to opinions on bitcoin at the same time however he also stated that india should focus on the creation of an official digital rupee. This was echoed by comments of reserve bank of india governor who reiterated that. The rbi has major concerns around cryptos but that they are working aggressively on a digital rupee. I wanted to point this out. Because i think it shows just how much india is going to really draw. This contrast between killing cryptos private cryptos and network cryptos while simultaneously trying to harness that momentum for an official central bank digital currency is that paradigm. That one can't survive while the other one does or are there different ways to look at
Did Bill Gates Seriously Short TSLA Stock
"Robbed our here and today we're going to be talking about bill gates response to on musk's claims the oregon podcast a couple of weeks. Back that get heard. That bill gates had been shorting stock. We've also got some news on the broader electric vehicle automotive market an interesting response from yvonne on an article from the washington post. And of course. We've gotta talk about tesla stock. It's about wild couple of days. We had the interview yesterday with alex rotter so we didn't get a chance to talk about it. But of course yesterday. Tuesday february twenty. Third tesla dropped to a low of six hundred nineteen dollars per share. That was down more than thirteen percent from the prior. Close then of course. We saw us swift recovery in the market. And from tesla tesla finishing down just two percent yesterday on the biggest volume day that we've seen in over a month and a half with sixty six million shares trading hands yesterday. So i talked about on monday and we briefly talked about yesterday in the interview as well. A lot of this is tied to expectation on interest rates. So yesterday fed chairman. Jerome powell made comments to congress. Indicating the current monetary policy is expected to continue for some time as economic uncertainty remains so not to get too deep into that. We've talked about that. Of course in the past but as far as tussles yesterday certainly was not isolated to tesla. Those sort of concerns were broadly extended to high growth. Stocks tussle obviously falls in that category. And i think the volatility there serves as a nice quarterly reminder that you have to be very very careful with stop losses on a volatile stock like tussle as for today tesla continue to rebound finishing up six point two percent to seven hundred and forty dollars two cents. That compared to the nasdaq up one percent. All right so i up today. I want to continue a conversation that we began a couple of weeks back after yvonne. Musk went on joe. Rogan's podcast for the third time and said that he had heard from people he believes would know that bill gates had shorted tesla. Yvonne brought that up in response to a question from joe rogan on the tesla semi citing that bill gates in a blog. Post a few months back had said that eighteen wheel electric semi is probably would never work so allen's claim here understand. We drawing a lot of attention not the first time something like this has happened between musk and gates last year. He did by his first electric vehicle. The porsche ticon. Which at the time. Maybe it wasn't so clear why he didn't by ordering vehicle up until that point. Well now we might have a better answer for that. But he talked about the decision in an interview with marquez brownlee and it seemed to be a relatively tepid endorsement of electric vehicles gatesville right up ranging anxiety as a problem and elon. Musk responded to that interview. Not necessarily gives purchase of tycoon but those comments in general by saying that quote my conversations with gates have been underwhelming to be honest and so that catches us up to today and then we have launched claiming that he heard gates which tesla now in the last week. We've had both cnbc and bloomberg asked gates directly about that claim. I think gates tone is important these responses so i will play the actual clip. The i wanna hear from andrew. Ross sorkin cnbc asking gates so so you're not sure tesla's stock were clear. Yeah i'm not. I don't talk about my investment. But i think he should be very proud of what he's done. Okay so technically there. He did say yeah. I'm not but it sounded like he was more starting a sentence of saying yeah. I'm not going to talk about my investments not yet. I'm not sure tesla because he interrupts himself and says i don't want to talk about my investments so to me. That's a no comment. Rather than a denial. What's interesting here is his reason saying he doesn't wanna talk about his investments but in the exact same interview. He talks about his investments multiple times. He says quote when i invested in impossible foods or beyond me or quantum scape. I was doing that just to help their own climate. Now it looks like those three will be very successful companies. And so i'll have more money to put into the tough areas a climate like cement and steel and quote. Okay so he says he doesn't want to talk about his investments but then he in response to another question talks about his investments in impossible foods beyond me quantum scape and then how does investments are doing and that i'll have more money to then go on an invest in other stuff. I mean how much more could you talk about your investments. And he uses the first person tense. You're saying i invested. He's asked about bitcoin and he says quote. I don't own bitcoin. I'm not short bitcoin. So i've taken a neutral view and quote so for bitcoin. Perfectly fine to say i'm not short bitcoin. Same question for tesla. oh. I don't want to talk about my investments that we just spent a bunch of time talking about. If you're not going to answer the question at least come up with a better non answer. That doesn't immediately contradict yourself. He has to have known that he'll be asked about that and yet seems completely content guard answer so that was last week if there was any doubt left after that because he did start off. By saying yeah. I'm not before interrupting himself as we said. Here's gates on bloomberg yesterday so we had five days to think about this answering the same question from emily. Chang yuan has in the past claimed you shorted tesla and i wonder if there's any truth to that Well you know i think. Test us on amazed seen company I wish you know own. Been more on the long side. But i it's it's great And you know i have. Lots of relatives won't tassels Helped by for them. So you know nothing. But positive thoughts about tesla role. Okay so if the answer to the cnbc question was a bit of a flood. There was a clear opportunity to just say. Hey i'm not sure. Tesla was jor tesla and again gates passes and he sure doesn't look comfortable to me answering the question. Belief is that it looks pretty clear. That bill gates was short. Tesla who knows if he's still is it'd be surprised but come on. How are you going to be all about climate change and then short the one company that's doing more than any other company on earth to combat it. If you don't think it's a good investment you think it's overvalued you can just not invest in it. No one has any problem with that but too short it push the stock price down. Make it more difficult for tesla to raise capital. That's something else entirely.
Powell Pledges to Maintain Fed’s Easy-Money Policies Until Economy Recovers
"His second day of testimony before congress federal reserve chair. Jerome powell made more reassurances that the central bank will keep interest rates at ultra low levels as planned that eased fears on wall street and pushed stocks higher. The dow industrials closed at a record of thirty one thousand nine hundred sixty two up one point. Four percent the s. and p. Five hundred snapped a five session. Losing streak closing up one point one percent and the nasdaq also added one
The Fed's system that allows banks to send money back and forth went down for several hours
"The Federal Reserve is reporting an outage in its system for inter bank payments. That's the service that allows banks to send money back and forth. No immediate word on the
Federal Reserve Says Some Services Disrupted by 'Operational Error'
"We're getting the Federal Reserve system for inter bank payments somehow went down today, according to a website for payment services operated by the Fed. Federal Reserve operational error resulted in the destruction of service and several business lines, according to a spokesman for the Richmond Fed, which apparently handles those operations. The out is reported to be widespread across the payment systems. Maintained by the Fed, including the vital automated clearing house system, known as a CH and the Fed wire funds, Interbank Transfer service or if you're having some transfer issues involving cash today, this could be the reason the meantime, the stock market rally continues. Right now the Dow is up nearly
'Operational error' causes Fed payment system to crash
"Went down this afternoon, according to a website for payment services operated by the central bank. Spokesman says quote a Federal Reserve operational error resulted in disruption of service in several business lines, THEA outages widespread across the payment systems maintained by the central bank. Including the vital automated clearing house system, known as Fed a CH and the Fed wire funds. Interbank transfer service. Goldman Sachs shares up now by
Facebook pledges to invest $1 billion in news after Australia standoff ends
"Facebook is defending its stance in australia saying that it has invested six hundred million dollars just since two thousand eighteen to support the news industry globally and it plans to spend at least a billion dollars or more over the next three years going forward quoting facebook's nick clegg the assertions repeated widely in recent days that facebook steals or takes original journalism for its own benefit always were and remain false. We neither take nor ask for the content for which we were being asked to pay a potentially exorbitant price. In fact newslink's are a small part of the experience. Most users have on facebook fewer than one post in every twenty-five five in your news feed will contain a link to a new story and many user say they would like to see even less news and political content. As tim burners lee the inventor of the world wide web warned. The australian law could make the internet as we know it unworkable. Arguing that it quote risks breaching a fundamental principle of the web by requiring payment for linking between certain content online and quote. Facebook is more than willing to partner with news. Publishers absolutely recognized quality. Journalism is at the heart of how open societies function informing and empowering citizens and holding the powerful to account.
Why Beef Isn’t The Enemy
"I want to sort of elephant room. Which is the conversation about meat. Itself is a good for you. Is it bad for. You is bad for the planet is a good for the planet is bad for the animals. Is it okay to eat animals. Because the conversation it's really emerging in many many circles is that we should become vegan or to save our health and save the planet. And you put up a very different conversation about this How how do we become to understand. That beef is the enemy and and why why is why is it not absolutely i mean. There's a series of cultural conversations. That happened after the industrialization of beef production that shifted the arctic millennials reviewed beef. You know the narrative. Well i'll repeat it. The broad brushstrokes. That story after the second world war we had a major consolidation agriculture many of the ammunition factories converted to fertilizer factories. Which made we had basically a vast infrastructure loot fertilizer factories. That were ready to go. We started to make fertilizer much much cheaper. We had a bigger industrialisation of agriculture. At the same time we had a different approach towards food security is what we call them today but the government after the second world war and around that time was very concerned about america autonomy understandably and invested in systems that ensure that we had enough corn wheat rice soy those key crops and a few others cotton sorghum tobacco that we had those introduced in volume sufficient to feed the american public in the us. The conflans those two things is an overabundance of food crops starting in the fifties that we began to understandably redivert to be feed developed. The world service's in too much food so we feed. It does something else right and the thing is to mark. It's a bunch of rational things that we did right. We are like okay. I don't wanna have another. You know victory gardens and terrifying end of the world scenario. Understand right we have all these huge factories that we need to do something else with understand. These are all rational economic. It was good. It was good intentions with bad consequences and longer term consequences. You know these are sort of short term pivots responses. I think sometimes. And i do agree with some of the broader kind of conspiracies time around big ag but the way that it's been built up i think was a normal reaction to a bunch of social and economic forces and so we ended up with though is by the fifties we were realizing we could get fatter. Beef faster feeding it. Human food right and then about ten years later diet for small planet planet was one of the first book said that hit around those but then by ten years later people started to say but wait a second. This is devastating for the environment. Right because we're basically producing resource intensive crops that are maladaptive for beef diet right And are also bad for the planet being produced at the scale for this usage and effectively we created a very unsustainable beef supply system so the way that it happened is that we pivoted how we produce beef from a natural regenerate traditional system to the modern industrial farm. Yeah and then we started to understand. I'd say they the the response to that was for many people will. We're going to be vegan now the response but just like oh my god. Look what's happening. These factory farms and then of course literature came out. That meat is bad for you as got saturated fat. We shouldn't be eating. It causes heart disease right. Yes yes. And i think a lot of they you know they the conversation around beef and how bad it is a lot of it. I agree with directionally in that confinement. Beef is really bad.
Attacks briefly knock some podcast hosts offline
"Browns bean spreaker and captivate all subjects to eight to nile attack. The same attackers appear to have been involved. We were wondering why they targeted podcast hosts so we talked to them. You'll find that full report in our show notes and our newsletter today. A company called. Happy scribe is publishing automated transcripts of podcasters without the parent's consent of many of the publishers. We learned today. Cumulus media owner of westwood. One has its achieved more than one billion downloads. In two thousand twenty podcasting revenue grew forty percent last year to they say. They've made their bet on partnership arrangements with talent as opposed to going out and spending a lot of money on it or infrastructure the company uses spotify owned megaphone backtracks has launched a tool that monitors your head gesture movements. The tool requires the listener to be using airpods pro headphones investor. Andrew wilkinson says in a tweet. He's removing podcasts. From his phone because podcastone mostly people repeating ideas. You already agree with or talking about things that trigger anxiety. He's co founder of tiny capital which invests in ios podcast app castro podcast membership platform super fast and podcast producer. Righto media try and digital has released the latest podcast ranker's for the us and latin. America they're incomplete ranker's containing participating publishers only notably the ranker's don't include. I heart radio podcasts. Triton digital is being bought by the company echoing the open independent nature of podcasting and writing in the financial times fulmer spotify chief economist will page notes that major labels released one point two million songs in two thousand and twenty but diy artists released nine point five million songs the music industry. He says he's making more money but has more mouths to feed. Iv is a new podcast app. That offers a way to follow. Topics tags hosts or podcasts. Catholic part is also a new podcast for android with a great name. Mavi star homa smart speaker in spain from canada now incorporates. I've is podcast catalog. And i will be speaking at the rain. Podcast business summit with npr's. Brian moffatt tickets are free and available now from link in our show notes and our newsletter. Today and in paul cost us the journal has an interview with dominion voting systems. Ceo john pelos today. His company has filed three defamation lawsuits against tv networks. Saying his excellently. One hundred percent accurate and very handsome. Voting machines are perfect. Which of course they absolutely are and nassar's curious universe is the first podcast recorded on another planet if features raw recorded sounds from the mars perseverance rover
Fixing The Problem Of Regulating Algorithms
"So nathan. tell me what's an algorithm algorithms can be thought of as a recipe. A series of steps often programmed into a computer that determine how machine behaves but the challenge as any cook often fines. Is that when you put them out into the world especially something of sufficient complexity. They often behave in ways. That are different from what we expect. Can you just take a minute to explain how that's problematic. And why why should we care. That algorithms are deciding which piece of content you see on facebook or which which video you're being recommended on. Youtube algorithms happen at all levels from exactly how the electrons go from one point to another on the internet to the much more high level things that we think about in our direct experience for example an algorithm determines what your email inbox decides is spam an on twitter decides which faces to show when it's displaying a photo and algorithms also and critically make decisions about what information to prioritize when showing us feeds on facebook on twitter when determining which adds we see which adds we don't and those are often some of the uses of algorithms that people worry about in society and policy circles. Youtube makes a recommendation system to help us find the videos. We like and suddenly were worrying about recommendations of extremism. Microsoft makes fun chattan that will have interesting conversations with you and now we're worrying about it learning racism and hatred so we find that although we have these simple building blocks of an algorithm that an engineer can imagine they often grow to be something larger than we might admit initially imagine i've written and others have written about the problem of algorithms on facebook favorite is ing or preferring content and posts that are emotional that are negatives that are divisive. There's been an argument. That that's one of the reasons why we have so much division and polarization in our societies that we are being fed more and or excitable an angry content because the algorithm tests and guesses that. That's what we're gonna wanna see or anyway. That's what's going to keep us online or keep us using facebook. Is it accurate. Is that how they work. We do live in a world where many of the systems that determined what we see. And to give our attention to our learning from our behavior our preferences and from the collective behavior of many others some of who are paying some of them have motivated coordinated campaigns to influence those our them's and they're adapting in real time and so because we've never really faced a situation like this at such scale. People have a lot of concerns about how those algorithms are behaving and what they're doing to society one of the fundamental challenges. I think scientists are still wrestling with. Is this challenge of influence. Typically if a car crashes because there's say a faulty drivetrain we can point to the engineering and say there's a problem with this system. With these adaptive systems they're reacting and learning and responding to human society and human behavior and we're still developing the scientific tools to understand what it means to have those feedback loops and in the meantime we have to live in a world where these things very real power
[TEST] Charles Blow on His Black Manifesto of Great Migration Back to the South
"Tuned into black on the air with lou. Thanks for tuning in you. Guys are really appreciated Wanna thank everybody For listening have a really Interesting show today charles. Blow the new york times. Columnists book called the devil. You know black. Power manifesto where he Proposes something very interesting in it Based on the great migration conforto conversation with charles sees. He's a very interesting guy. Had him on the nightly show years ago and He's very has some very interesting ideas. So we're gonna get into that a lot about black culture in that sort of thing. What's happening right now. So i won't talk about that in my Into now because we're going to cover a lot of that. But i do want to talk about some of those issues coming up. Not just for stream on you know. This is back in the air. But there's a lot of issues out there. And i believe there's a lot of i'll call it. This isn't a good phrase. But i'll call it mission confusion and the reason why i'm saying that i think there's a lot of A lot of things the black community. And i know i'm over generalizing here so i apologize for that that i think i need in order to accomplish a lot of different goals in there. They're not necessarily connected and one of the things. I'll be covering a coming up in the future not today but i want to put this on your mind. So you know i'm going to be talking about this is i. I think there are two things going on out there that are sometimes in conflict with each other. When it comes to the back community. And i will call them racial justice of versus racial grievance. Okay so i want to put that out there to you. And i'm not gonna. I know i'm teasing right now. Not gonna go into detail right now. 'cause actually have a good top charles bo coming up in and we'll talk about some of that but i want to put that out there. These are two kind of separate issues you know. One just is kind of based on laws and transforming the way that institutions are structured in and grievance which is for me kinda base more in opinions in people's feelings and up things like that. But i'm i'll go into more detail about that later. Little bit different But both very interesting both very wrote both very important. You know they're just. They're not always in cooperation with each other is one of the issues. And i think there's not always clarity around that so because i don't have a lot of time today I wanted to just say give a shoutout to The people who are on the ground helping everybody in texas right now that is gone through took time with the weather. not helped anybody did crews going to cancun which is kind of a funny story this week. But what's not funny is what's happening so many people are you know just without food and you know they're in situations they'd have faced before you know. A lot of the countries used to this type of weather but there are places that aren't used to. I'm one of those kind of places if we had that type of thing here in southern california. It'd be a mess as well but there are a lot of organizations out there that are doing some really good work. Give a shout out to my niece. Vanessa vanessa wilmore. Who is doing some of that. Work yourself with the feed. The people dallas which is a great organization and they give food directly to people They they i know they collect money but more than money. They collect resources that they can give directly to people that needed. 'cause sometimes money is great. You know you need money for things but sometimes people just need water. You know like right now you know or you know food to feed the kids right now you know and so Those grassroots organizations like that that are ended on the ground and there's a lot of them. I just mentioned hers. Because she's my niece and she's doing. I'm really proud of her. She's doing good job down there but there there are other organizations like that. I encourage you to look line if you can help. That's great you know All the support is really welcome. And finally you know i. I sent him keeping unsure because they don't have the time to. I do want to thank everybody. That was so kind. Oh let them. Before i get into that. let me just mention. I have a series on netflix. Right now command. And i didn't get a chance to talk about last week because A segment something else but Amend is the story of the fourteenth amendment and it's a documentary six part docu series that i did with will smith and the documentary group in man. It took it took a while to put this thing together and it wasn't easy but we're really proud of it now. Hope you guys get to see its educational inspirational. It's informative eye opening. it was eye opening for me. It was real really good experience to learn some of the nuances of one of our most important constitutional amendments with just the fourteenth amendment. Lot of good stuff in there. I encourage you guys. Please watch him in You can watch with your family. You know it's not one division but since detaining one division that is taken up by kids level division. I think he's gonna go to but
"fed" Discussed on Marketplace Morning Report with David Brancaccio
"We'll tell you what you need to know and why it matters just ask your smart speaker to play the marketplace minute or find it wherever you get your podcasts. We were on the call yesterday when the Federal Reserve Chair said, there's only so much. He can do to get the economy out of this mess. I'm David Brancaccio America's central banker in chief offered a choose your word doer dreary forbidding assessment of the economy after his policy making teams last interest rate meeting before the election the outlook is quote. Uncertain given the pandemic Jay Powell left the world with a strong impression that interest rates will stay near zero until college freshman now becomes a college senior year twenty, twenty three, but Powell also made it clear. There are things the Fed cannot do marketplace's Nancy Marshall Genzer was on that video briefing and joins us now live what can't the Fed do We'll pell made it clear. The Fed only has the power to lend money can't make grants. That's Congress's job. These are lending powers not spending powers. The Fed cannot grant money to particular beneficiaries. We can only create programs or facilities with broad-based eligibility to make loans to solvent entities with the expectation that the loans will be repaid. And David Pell said, another relief package from Congress will likely be needed. He pointed out that roughly eleven million people are still out of work due to the pandemic. And this is the first fed meeting since Powell unveiled a new policy on letting inflation run hotter before intervening. It is at the new policy is the Fed will aim for inflation to come in at an average of two percent letting it go a bit higher if it's been below that for a while, even if unemployment is low the Fed to raise rates to head off inflation right away when the jobless rate fell, the thinking was workers could demand higher salaries pushing up prices but now the Fed will sit tight because it takes longer for the black and Hispanic jobless rates to come down. The idea is give everybody a chance to find a job without worrying so much about the economy heating up. But. We cover the wealth gap here would say about income. Inequality. He was asked about that a couple of times I asked him about it. He said economic inequality holds back the Economy Pal said people are stuck at the lower end of the income spectrum they have limited mobility they can't move for jobs but PAL said there's only so much the Fed can do about these problems. The thing is we don't really have the tools to address those we we have interest rates and bank supervision and financial stability policy and things like that but we can't. We can't get at those things through our tools. Pal said these issues elected representatives to Congress marketplace's Nancy Marshall Genzer thank you on Fed duty there this morning London's one hundred share index is down ten percent here, SMP and Nasdaq futures reach down about one percent. Today. We'll get the latest count of people who signed up for unemployment benefits in the last week, forecasters expect the number to hold steady at about eight hundred, seventy, thousand after layoffs a week ago more than thirteen million people were on unemployment that would be a historic high.
"fed" Discussed on Stansberry Investor Hour
"If you have a good plan in place, and you can afford to be patient with it, then a lot of these short-term generations don't matter if you're if you're someone who's been sitting in cash for. For Ten years in your. You've been waiting for the big hyper inflation or something like that and you don't know what to do. You know you still you need to be patient I think putting that money to work because it's going to be really tricky over the next six to twelve months implementing a lump sum allocation like that, just because I think there's going to be so many ups and downs in uncertain periods, regarding how this whole virus thing plays out. All right patients is the ultimate diverse. Never heard anyone say that. Thank you for that. That's a great nugget. So that's it I mean we're we're out of time, but you know as always a highly stimulating conversation that I thank you for. We'll talk to you again soon. Bye Bye for now. Our identity. Yeah, as catching up, be safe, everyone. Okay. That was a lot of fun. It's always fun to talk to call in I. Think is a great educator, and and he's somebody who has some different ideas outside a lot of the you know, buy gold. Be Afraid of the Fed type of universe that I. Think a lot of US get stuck in. So with that, let's go and see what's in the mailbox. Being left behind.
"fed" Discussed on Stansberry Investor Hour
"Three four percent type of inflation Kinda wrote returned to like the the early two thousands, or even the the nineties type of inflation that has the Fed on their heels in backtracking on of things that they've been doing in the last few years. Okay, so we're. We've actually been talking to while here so second last question then. Are there any you know asset allocation ideas that you have for us or even a stock picker, a bond, or or anything at all? You can be as specific as general as you like. What do you do right now? You know I Gosh I feel like I was bearish. Last time we talked in September and I. I hate to to tell you that I'm probably more bearish right now than I had a really odd conversation with somebody the day somebody came to me. Ultra high net worth person, they said Look I. I have a withdrawal rate in my IRA about three and a half to four percent I'd like to hit that return in a very safeway, and I'd never said this to a potential client, and I looked it all the numbers, and I tried to come up with something, and I said I honestly, I do not sink, I can provide that target return for you with without buying something that is going to implement or introduced a lot of risk into your portfolio stocks bonds the long-term bonds. preferred. Stocks something that's going to introduce a lot of principle volatility. I've never had that conversation with somebody. I think that the the stock and bond markets right now. They look about as bleak as I can. Ever remember in aggregate I mean there's obviously been times where the stock market I think going forward had far worse future prospects, but the the totality of a stock bond portfolio right now is about as bleak looking as I've ever been able to remember it in I think. Part of that is just the huge boom we've had in the last few months I actually wrote in in late. March that the the long term investor should be licking their lips it at the prospects of future stock returns, but that's it's completely flip flopped now, and the stock market looks like it's GonNa be a at best a low return generating type of asset going forward and the bond market. Be Shocked if the bond market can even beat the rate of inflation going forward, so you know I think right now that if you're putting asset, asked asset allocations together. I think it's probably never been more important to be really diversified, probably diversified outside of financial assets. You probably need some inflation hedging risk component in there, so things like real resources. Your House might be your best performing acid in the.
"fed" Discussed on Stansberry Investor Hour
"Okay, so what that means is that the banks can't lend their reserves out to non-banks. Can only lend them to other banks, and so it's a banking system specifically for the banks, but the problem is is because it's a closed system. In the banks they're required by regulations to hold these reserves, but the reserves are these are assets that don't earn any income for them, so they try to lend them out to other banks when they have too many of them, and what this does, because they can't lend them out in the aggregate, it drives the oldest short-term overnight rate to zero percent, and this is one of the big things that I think. Some of the the Fed critics misunderstand is that the actual match rate of the reserves in the Interbank System in the FEDS system is zero percent so the Fed can't manipulate rates lower. The rate that they control is naturally zero percent because that's where the banks wanted to always be basically because that's where they drive it, they have to because they can't lend them out in the ivory, so they're always putting downward pressure on interest rates in the Fed. Since the very beginning of its existence, the Fed has been basically manipulating that rate higher, so the Fed always has to manipulate the short-term interest rate from zero percent up to. Whatever the today it's! We call it. The interest on excess reserve rate is as a defacto fed funds rate, but they're always driving rates higher than they otherwise would be so, but that misses the point because the the rate at which is land in the interbank market is not the primary rate that impacts the rest of us. The the rates that impact the rest of us are really mean primarily their credit card interest rates, and they're basically mortgage rates, mostly fifteen thirty year, mortgage rates and those rates. There's somewhat tied to the overnight rate, but those other rates really they float more so in a in what is much more like a free market in that the. Your credit card rate for instance it could be fifteen twenty twenty-five percent I mean it. It has almost I mean not no correlation to the overnight rate, but it is phenomenally higher on average than what the overnight rate will be that set mostly based on what basically what your personal credit is. The mortgage rates are very similar in that the banks are are setting those interest rates based on mostly. What what is the homeowner's credit and? What is the? There's usually a bit of a a credit hedging. They're based on the homeowners credit. And then there's a usually like an inflation hedge for the the bank. That's the. Usually wear the correlation to the overnight rate comes from some degree, so if you overlaid thirty year mortgage rate with the overnight rate, you'd see some correlation, but the Fed isn't controlling the thirty year mortgage rate the the thirty year. Mortgage rate is mostly. Really the rate of inflation. That's the kicker. Is that the the Fed can't exactly control the rate of inflation and what they're trying to do with? The overnight rate is influence inflation, so they're? They're almost like.
"fed" Discussed on Part of the Problem
"What's the benefit of the system if this is all the cost while the benefit of the system is that they can enrich themselves at your expense so when you create new money as you pointed out before you're not gonNA see a rise in prices immediately because like people don't even know the money's been created the store owner doesn't even know that it's not like the Federal Reserve prints money in the store. Owner is watching the Fed balance sheet and then goes okay better raise prices. It takes a period of time before the money gets into the economy and start circulating around and then the it's realized the money is less valuable and prices go up but whoever gets the money I gets to buy at the current prices and then they get the value of it going up and who gets the money I in the system. Wouldn't you believe it's the big banks. The same ones who wrote the legislation of the Federal Reserve Act the same ones who financed the worst president of the twentieth century. Woodrow Wilson and got him in office. So He'd sign the Federal Reserve. Act those same mother. Fuckers are the ones who get the money I so they get money for free that they can then loan out for interest they get it before the inflation's hit and they're ripping you off. This is now just already in this Kobe. Shit the Federal Reserve has extended trillions and trillions of dollars. Okay it's hard for human beings to wrap their heads around how much money that really is. But it's more you think of the biggest business you've ever thought of. It's way more than that way more. And they're taking it from you. It's the money isn't magical printing. More money doesn't add any more wealth into people's lives it just devalue the currency. That's out there. It's the same thing in effect as stealing your money. It just makes your money less valuable. If your money loses half its value or half your money as stolen the same fucking fit and this is how they get away with that and so when you look around and you see how the ruling class of this country just gets richer and richer and richer and believe me. They've gotten richer through this whole crisis. This is at the heart of it. It's the fucking Federal Reserve. So this is something that needs to be inserted back into the conversation in these crazy times that we live in. This is what's going on when America was at. Its IT'S A in its darkest hour the Federal Reserve came in and stole trillions of dollars of your wealth. That's the reality of the situation. This is a criminal organization. It's there's no constitutional authority for it. It's on it's the greatest scheme in the history of world of the world. It destroys the economy. It's taken away. We should be At at such a higher standard of living than we are if we didn't have this monstrosity of running the department of money and it should be ended or at the very least is Ron. Paul was pushing for. It should be audited. There should be a new movement coming out to audit the Federal Reserve to find out. What the fuck. They're really doing because guess what none of us know. None of us even have a right to see their balance sheet at least and other government departments. You can have these you know freedom of Information Act Request. Sir You can get some of these things released like we just had the Justice Department released. These like you know Transcripts in the testimony about Michael Flynn and the FBI. Notes was last time you ever saw any of that. Should come out of the Federal Reserve. Never okay so that's where there should be a big push to audit the Fed and the Fed and let the free market take over money the same way. The people look back on the the development of the separation of church and state. And how like how wonderful that was for humanity because it cut down on religious wars and all of this type of blake unnecessary bloodshed. A we need a separation of banking and the state and we might need more than we needed the separation of church and state but once and for all a separation of banking and the state let let the free market do its job and until then we really don't have a free market if the government's controlling fifty percent of every transaction that's that's a lot closer to communism than it is to capitalism. If you ask me all right at something yeah let me get a plug in here if you guys are interested in the stuff thirty minutes and on my last run your mouth. I talk about how they're using special purpose vehicles which is illegal to give all this money over to black rock and basically bail out the junk bonds stuff. You're curious no they've taken the scheme one step even further than their charter and go check. Run your math that start that that piece is like a half hour all right absolutely and just in general go check out. Run your mouth hilarious. Villian FORMATIVE PODCAST and go support. Rob The fire he needs. He needs more firewood for that. Beautiful fire a behind him. All right. So that's our back to basics episode on the Federal Reserve. Hope you guys enjoyed it. And I'll see you soon on the next episode piece..
"fed" Discussed on Part of the Problem
"All right let's get back into the show. One of the Federal Reserve's mandates is to control inflation. Now what the way they measure inflation might be different from the way an Austrian economists measures inflation. And I think that's a very key distinction. So the the the modern economists. Ms Measures inflation by the CPR. That's known as the Consumer Price Index. And they'll say well it's only three percent so that's reasonable which okay gotta you gotTa say that. Here's the big reason why that's a broken tool is because most of our goods are coming from China now and the CPI doesn't reflect quality low. That's a good point. That's a very good point. You buy refrigerator now and on paper it might not the price the refrigerator and it might not have gone up over last seven years but the thing firstly. It's partially because technology's really good Amazon. These things a lot cheaper. And it's also because you're refrigerators. Probably GonNa last half as long as it did when people bought them in the seventies and that's true for a lot of good things that would have lost. You lasted fifteen twenty years the last two years in none of that's rum. None of that's reflected in the CPI. They did they take things off the CPI like ear. Yeah yes they've they removed. Well okay so there's a lot of poems let me let me start with the more broader philosophical problem and then we can mention like the the actual ads. No it's it's fine because this is all important stuff but I would just say that the Austrian economists the way they look at it is if you create new money that is inflation. That's the inflation. The creation of new money if you put new money credit into the system that is inflation. That's a very different way from than looking at the prices going up as inflation so and the reason why the Austrian economists are right about this is that measuring prices is is a flawed. Just to begin with even exactly. So let's say hypothetically right that prices and if you just understand very basic right but just if you inject more money into the system the money gets less valuable right like just basically understand that like just very basic destroyed island economics if you Have an economy that has like you know. Whatever it's it's you know it's made up of like someone built a horse and buggy and pick some fruit and gathered some firewood or whatever like very basic level economy. And you have X. amount of money in the economy right that you're just using to trade back and forth everyone agrees we'll trade for money and this is your little economy and then you double the money supply. Well there's no more wealth there's no more production. Nobody's any richer noth- nothing more has been produced. You still have the exact same amount of goods with more money chasing the goods. It just makes the money less valuable right because there's more of it but nobody actually got wealthier from it's just piece of paper so no one's gotten wealthier from that so it's just if you just add more money into economy in makes the existing money less valuables Amir. Four things cost more money so costs go up. All right was just another way of saying the value of the dollar or the money goes down so if you were in a situation where. Let's say you were adapt to have massive deflation? Just let's say prices were about to on average be cut in half because there was huge deflation for whatever reason there's huge deflation coming and then you double the money supply for example and so prices state. Exactly still now. The Austrian economists would say you just had tremendous inflation right because prices were gonNA come fifty percent down but instead they stayed level. That's the prices. Were inflated back up and that's pretty important to stand in that moment whereas someone just looking at the prices would say zero inflation because prices didn't change it all. This is the problem when you're judging symptom rather than the costs so this is something that the Australian economists. Just one more thing. They're absolutely correct now the other problems with the CPI as you're just getting into is that they will manipulate the CPI to show less inflation so when housing prices started going through the roof they took housing out of the basket of goods. They took a different foods out of the basket of. They took energy out of the basket. The basket of goods so they now to the average person getting housing and energy is still pretty important but that's not reflected in the CPI anymore. It's also I guess it's inevitable if you increase the money supply and inflation. So the K. The Austrians basically okay so we know printing money means money's less valuable INFLA- action. They go. Well no it's not inflation until he can it the issue that is like let's say let's just theoretically money supply it's exactly one trillion dollars and then you're going to increase it to two trillion dollars or so. I'm not an economist. But I'M GONNA assume it's probably GONNA take three months maybe two months. There's some amount of time that there's GonNa lag between when he give the money in between when you monitor the inflation. But here's the issue. If you're just going off the monitoring you oh well we were able to print a trillion dollars and look. We're not monitoring inflation so I guess we can print another one because at dozen caused inflation and at some point. Here's here's where it goes. Boom and bust is that these things happen wants all of a sudden people realize oh prices are going up and then chases his own tail because everyone makes the adjustment really quickly and that's when all of a sudden fucking boom installed the you know the Austrians alike. Let's understand it's inevitable so it was opposed to waiting till we can Monitor it. Let's say it's happening once we do it. And so let's make all of our decisions and pricing and all these arrangements around that Which to me. That's the biggest flaw in government system is at its reactionary. It goes we'll doesn't exist until we can monitoring it it's inevitable it's like you're you're pretending like it's some sort of a or or it's like what you're saying we're technologies getting so good were you otherwise would have had deflation and then all tied it. You're not you're not accounting for almost advances in human ingenuity some we we have benefited much less than we. Otherwise would have for all of the advances we should have. We should live in a world of deflation because production gets better and better as technology gets better and better so things should be cheaper. 'cause that's an unnatural trend of just and an warmer thing on deflation so the biggest fear of government is that if there's deflation people are GonNa save people are going to realize I hold onto. My money might get me more tomorrow than well today now you have to realize that the foundation of good society is savers. It's people realizing hey it's building capital so you can make good investments for one or two. It's the spiritual side of not going. Hey I need a media. Consumption now. Others VALUE IN DELAYING RATIFICATION. And someone government comes in and says we are the enemy of saving the enemy of deflation. We don't want to ever have that. We WanNa make sure that there's constant inflation we're GONNA pretend like we do it as a steady rate and we want to force people to always spend take on debt to ensure that you create a system that really values the most foundational principle of what would be immoral society. Which is delaying gratification. Yes otherwise known as time preference and this is why the Federal Reserve is the great destroyer of time preference. So in you know the the idea of time preference is just that Obviously everybody you know you'd prefer To to consume in the present. But you're willing to delay that to put that off for greater consumption in the future Also known as as you said delaying gratification. So everything you know just going to work is an example of this right like you're going to work now so that you can get a paycheck at the end of the week or the month or whatever right. So you're you'RE GONNA put you're GONNA put in some work now for something you may. You don't really WANNA do. But because later it will be better now with people save money what they're essentially doing is delaying their their current consumption for the ability to consume in the future right so if people are saving money this is how a market economy what operates right if people are saving money that means in the future. They're going to have money to consume right so as they're saving money the interest rates. Come down and your this is a signal now. Remember prices carrying information for businesses. That it's a more friendly environment to to to expand to borrow money because there's going to be consumers in the future because people are saving right so this is this is the beautiful harmony of the marketplace. Is that in the same way that you buying a cup of coffee from somebody. Is this beautiful harmony. Well this is what I'm willing to pay for a coffee okay. This is about what I can pay for office and it all comes together so the signal. When people are saving from the prices would be okay. There's going to be consumption in the future. So you're probably GonNa want to open your business now. And if people aren't saving their spending well this isn't a great time to expand the business because people are doing all of their consumption right now at the expense of future consumption. Okay so an just ex the inflation point just zoom out a little bit if you really if if the Federal Reserve by their own admission their role or at least half of their role is to control inflation. We'll just look at the job. They've done Federal Reserve was created in nineteen thirteen to you. Feel like things are a lot cheaper now or maybe a little bit more expensive. Just just look since the early seventies when when we went off the gold standard and they really were unleashed to print as much money as they wanted to. What would you rather pay? You know I'm going to sell you a house. Would you rather pay nineteen seventy-five prices for it or two thousand twenty prices for it? What do you think a better deal here? The the fact that they can sit there and say oh we've controlled inflation and look at the. Cpi It's not that bad look at the price of everything. Look at the price of a car of a House of Health Insurance of College of food of everything that people meet and they've all gone up and up and up and up and you explain to me the reason for that other than monetary policy. We are more efficient. We have more technology when it comes to building houses cars. We have way better medical technology. We have way more people going to college. Which should bring down the costs. Okay so the only explanation for all of this is the Federal Reserve now. I want to transition toward the end of this because this is just kind of been again. Just basic primer and also understand. We're not economists with this is just at the whole premise of this show has always been that. This is not shed that should be reserved for brainiacs and academics. This is basic common person. Shit that we should all understand. It's really not that complicated. They dress it up and try to make it sound super complicated to intimidate you out of thinking that you can think for yourself but believe me you can't okay and this is so there's a million economic problems with with the Federal Reserve but the real heart of the matter here is what we started off at the beginning with they are ripping you off. That's why they like the system. They don't have this system because of all the wonderful economic inefficiencies and all of the problems with it they have it because like.
"fed" Discussed on Part of the Problem
"Everyone's gotTa get insurance and all of a sudden healthcare costs through the roof so the the other government government creates not I it. I creates bubbles. You end up with credit acid but it also is a system that works in favor for the banks because it saddled with day at it makes everything more expensive and allows them to create like if if there are the business of creating interest like basically just creating interest payments the more money than they can saddle on everybody the more interest payments they get in so when you go and purchase a house they would rather have the house that you purchase cost you a million dollars two thousand dollars because they're gonNA catch more interest payments and so that's part of the system where government comes in and it destroyed the entire market because it pretends. Hey were doing favourite. Because we're making all this capital available. It's not doing anybody a favor. It just means prices because then demand for all the products everyone wants goes up all of a sudden. The price for all of that shit goes out. It's just more money in the bank through interest payments. Exactly exactly all right. Let's take a quick second. I WanNa thank our sponsor for today's show which is your crato up. They've been sponsoring a bunch of shows on the network. They're also the marquis sponsor for skiing fest. The owners of Ukraine are great guys. They're fans of our network and we really appreciate them supporting us. This is our people listening. Who are over twenty one who are already into crate on if you like cranium gaudio creative dot com. It's an easier way to get it. It's cheaper than the sixty dollar kilo the like. I said they're great guys. Despite Corona by resin the world coming to a halt they're still sponsoring shows. They're still delivering. Crayton's people this way it comes right to your door..
"fed" Discussed on Part of the Problem
"And why is that it will because at the apple store they have to compete for your for your patronage. They have to compete to make sure I mean they're literally will be there in around the corner there's like a Hewlett Packard store. And so if if they're just shitty to you and they're like now get that line you have the wrong horn. Go back in that line. Go back in that line. Then that line you'd be like fuck this. I don't really need an apple. That and so they in order to get that money from you they need to win over your competition but the DMV doesn't they have a monopoly. You WanNa drive with you gotta get your license from us. And so I don't know what to tell you. Get these six lines blah blah blah. Now the other thing that that is really worth mentioning and this is one. This is me probably. The central economic problem with the Federal Reserve is that it is by its very nature price-fixing and this almost any economist. Any economist worth their fucking. You know. Ver- degree worth their weight in whatever worth their salt. What's the I'm not good with expressions but almost any communists will tell you very easily the problem with price-fixing like why is it that we can't just decide that the price of you know like let's say we just want everybody to have a computer will? Why can't we just write a law and say the price of computers is five bucks now? Everybody can afford a computer. I mean everybody should be able to think this through the basics of this. Why why we can't do forget like why it's evil and why you know. Forget the moral libertarian case. Which is very important. I am not like saying forget that permanently just for the moment. Forget the fact that you're now saying the government is going to like arrest somebody for the crime of selling a computer for more than five dollars in that. It's a voluntary transaction. Any of this just in terms of the economics of it. Why would it not work to happen? I'm GONNA lay on the floor. I is within a week. You won't have any computers left. And that's what they call it rationing or suddenly have computers that are essentially calculators. And you'll be like oh if I do five five three seven eight. Oh eight if I want to see a boobs on this thing. Well right well. What's what's going to happen here right. Is that right away? You have you have these stores with a bunch of computers in them and you just legislated that they have to sell them for five dollars so they don't WanNa go to jail you know now. Some of them of course will immediately go into the black market right but so they're going to sell a few computers for five dollars. People are going to rush in Walmart. Stampedes spblackfriday style to get is five dollar computers The people who sell are gonNA sell them at a tremendous loss losing a bunch of money right because costs a lot more than five bucks to make. A computer is whether you like that or not. It's nobody's GonNa fucking build computers and get all the parts and manufacture them for that little money so they're just not gonNA build them. You hope you get a lot of sodas and fries. While they're picking up their computers. He can make up the margins right. So now there's going to be a huge shortage in computers because no one's going to produce them anymore because they've all been bought up the ones that were out there and there's no money to be made in this anymore so nobody is going to go into producing them anymore. Now likewise if you were to say we don't want people to have computers as much. So let's legislate that. Computers cost twenty thousand dollars a computer well. Far Less people are going to buy computers because they're unaffordable right. So prices are not some arbitrary random number prices carry with them a tremendous amount of information and just for like another quick example right. If there was something that you could make out of steel and aluminum or aluminum right like you could use either like it could be any two medals or whatever just a random example and come up with some technology where it's very very easy for us to produce steel. But it's very very hard for us to produce. Aluminum will what will happen. Is the price of steel will go down because it's so easy to produce. The price of aluminum will go up. Because it's so difficult to produce so if you have a choice between those two people will start using steel because that's cost effective right prices aren't just. There is some random number. They're they're the they carry information with them about. What is the best most efficient way to produce and the way this happens if you think about it right like just on a very basic level through the way markets work right with if you go and this is just how voluntary interactions work? Which is just another word for markets. That's what markets are essentially just voluntary transactions If you if you go to buy a coffee at the store you would. What would you like to pay for that coffee? But you'd probably like to pay nothing right. You probably like to get it for free and not have to pay for it at all. Then what would the guy selling you? The coffee like to pay for it like you to pay for it. Probably a whole lot right bike. He'd be happy if you'd pay him a million dollars for that coughing but however we settled unlike two bucks or whatever. It is that we come. Well it's this constant negotiation it. It's all about how much cost him. How much labor was necessary. How much he you know? He had to transport it all of these things. What it calls him where he can still make a profit right. 'cause there's a he wants to exist for reason to. He's not trying to work for charity. He's got bills to pay. So it's how much he can charge. Where you're still gonNA come in by that coffee from him and if he tried to charge eight bucks a cup of coffee. Most likely most of us aren't going to go to that place and get coffee anymore and then someone else would come along and undercut them and so they everybody's constantly competing to find the right price that will that will work to maximize profits and to still be able to you know have customers so this goes on all over the place. Prices communicate a lot of information and almost every economist would agree with everything that was just said like this. None of this is controversial at all. This is like basic economics. Yeah these other problems. With price controls you have shortages or you have rationing or any of these things and the fact that prices communicate information at. This is standard stuff. This isn't like some Nutty Austrian. Economists theory this is standard basic Modern economics except when it comes to the price of money when it comes to the price of money price controls are just accept it. Now this goes back to the whole thing of wire. Economy is constantly in this house of cards state because the price of money is fixed by the Federal Reserve and in response to this Cova crazes. They just decided that the price of money is zero. Now imagine any other price. Just the government has decided zero. Just think through what effects on the economy. That's going to have but that's what we accept from the Federal Reserve always just price fixing and price fixing for arguably the most important price. Because I said before money is half of every single transaction so if there was anything you know like I don't think we should have price controls on milk but I think that would be a lot of you know less would be much less of a negative repercussions from having a price controls on milk then on money. 'cause that's basically price controls on everything because money is fifty percent of every transaction just about. I mean there's some bartering out there in the economy still but just about fifty percent of every transaction so you have a system now way. Our interest rates are controlled by the government. Essentially the government's department of money known as the Federal Reserve. Now what what is the significance of the price of money or it's pretty important if you are of a business and you're thinking of expanding but say whatever you gotTa restaurant it's doing pretty good and you're you know you're like wow. We're really doing business. I think we should open to more restaurants. 'cause this business model works and there's two more you know. This is assuming a time when restaurants are allowed to exist But this you know. There's there's two more good locations we got here now. We're going to have to spend five hundred thousand dollars but we can. We can set up to more profitable restaurants now if the interest rate if you could get a loan and the interest rate was five percent or the interest rate was fifteen percent. Do you think that has an effect on whether or not you're gonNA open is next businesses? Do you think there's any businesses out there who would make sense to borrow money at five percent but it wouldn't make sense to borrow at fifteen percent of course right of course there's gotta be some ventures that you would undertake in normal times but you wouldn't undertake in more expensive times right like this has to be the case just logically. So what interest rates would be in a in a free market right without the government department of money what interest rates would be would. Just be dictated the way. Normal prices are through supply and demand and many factors that go into that so if you wanted to borrow money from a bank and they had a whole lot of money sitting in reserves money would probably be relatively cheap to borrow right just like basic supply and demand just like the same rules that that mainstream economists use about everything else. Just apply it to money if if you got a whole bunch of money by you're just sitting on a pile of ten million dollars and someone wants to borrow a couple hundred dollars no you got plenty of it. You can lend out to them at reasonably low interest rate but if you only got like five hundred dollars and someone wants to borrow the whole five hundred dollars you might have to charge a higher interest rate so interest rates would also just like all other prices communicate information and the information would be about how much money is saved so if you had a society added layer to this also if you took all the government money out of the system What you'd end up having a lot of prices coming down like even look at commercial real estate. If there wasn't funds available initiated from the government to be lent to companies in order to buy the commercial real estate you'd end up with commercial real estate prices. Were just less. So the institution of government money coming into the system also works to saddle everybody with debt. Which is essentially in favour to the banks because they cap straw that interest rate look at the housing market if you never had Fannie Mae Freddie like those institutions is a really less people who are able to afford houses or just most houses at purchased at a much significantly lesser like people one of like there's a market for selling people's houses they might not be mansions but there's going to be people that want to sell you land and put you in a house that doesn't go away it. Just their profit margins are less because there's less money that they can capture. If all of a sudden it's happened with college prices. The government made money available to colleges college price places. Inflation same thing happens with insurance. You create a financial incentive for insurance..
"fed" Discussed on Part of the Problem
"Never go to the post office again. All right let's go back to the show. This was one of my first big things. When I found a Ron Paul and Liberty Movement in two thousand seven two thousand eight. I was really anti war. And that's kind of they pulled me it. And then they kept talking about this thing called the Federal Reserve. I was like what is this. And Away Ron go ahead just just a you know. Firstly it's interesting because it's the greatest con story ever if you've ever watched Like this puts. What was that the any casino heist movie you've ever seen? The Federal Reserve is more interesting because they convinced us all of the greatest game ever concerned about war ties into it. Because we wouldn't be able to go to these wars because you'd have to actually tax people you have to raise the money and people would be like. I don't really care about going to war with Iraq enough and so the Federal Reserve ties into the war issue. Because if you took it away you wouldn't be able to have these unfounded worse absolutely and that goes not just for wars but for every big government program you can think of. This is this is it is the great facilitator of big government. And as you said it's the greatest of robbery it's the greatest heist in human history. There's never been anything. Even close to the level at Bernie. Madoff is like stealing your change jar compared to what the Federal Reserve has robbed from the American people. I remember when I first heard Ron Paul talking about the Federal Reserve and I didn't know what it was. I heard the term a few times before I couldn't have even begun to explain to you. What a Federal Reserve was and he would describe it and I remember thinking to myself. This can't be right can't be right. I would have heard of this. Someone would have taught me about this. What's one of my teachers would have mentioned it? One of these fine people on the news would have brought this up at some point. It can't possibly be that. There is a a secret organization that's privately owned. That just can make as much money as they want and they can profit off of it and they work in partnership with all the big banks this this can't be real and there's no way it was created went by bankers writing legislation in secret and then bankrolling presidential candidates and congressman to get past. This can't be real but you know what do what I did. Go do all your own research. Go go fine ally in all of what was just said and you won't find one because that is the system. Here's the thing David Smith. You have to understand money's very complicated and we need bank elasticity and what we need to make. Sure that if there's ever a run on the banks there's some sort of a lender of last resort that people feel comfortable keeping their money in banks. We also need a working system. Where if the government's GONNA run a deficit and suddenly really really need money? There's some that we can lend it from and I believe that the origins it's because the bank actually had that money but then that's somehow translated to. Oh we'll just allow these people to just printed and handed it to us so at least it's not the government just printing money and having a deficit we borrowed it from other. People Chase Bank and we're GONNA from they just printed it. Because they're allowed to do that. They get the magical special power that will no one else can just print money invented and say hey here it now exists. They can do it and guess what they can also bail themselves out. That's right that's right. And why is it exactly that we need this elasticity? Why is it that the other system or like a commodity backed money system or something like that would be too rigid? Well there's basically A couple reasons that are given now one is to smooth out the business cycle. Okay because they say basically capitalism just has this natural tendency to have these ups and downs ups and downs. So we need a smooth that out we need to have a dual mandate where we're concerned about both employment and inflation okay. So these are their arguments. These are the official arguments for why we need a central bank. We need Fiat currency. And we'll examine all of those in in just a minute but I just want for its. Let's just say they're somebody starting off from zero not understanding it. This is how I would describe the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is essentially the government department of money. Now they don't call themselves that they don't even call themselves government organization. But that's what it is. It is a government department. It's a it's a very special government department that's allowed to consider itself private and because it considers itself private it's never been audited. It operates in as much secrecy as it wants to put right. There's no there's no vote there is no right. There's nothing like that there's no even There's no pretense of transparency but You know that's But but it's not a private organization. They just use this now. They they'll give out some information sometimes but it's only what they want to so they'll give you know they just like. I think it was a in the last ten years. They just stopped giving out the m three monetary numbers. They're just like we're not gonNA do that anymore. You know feel like who profits off the Federal Reserve who owns the Federal Reserve. They don't need to tell you. What transactions have they made like? I said they've never been out of it. But they are essentially a government Department net they were created in nineteen thirteen by an active congress. That was signed into law. By Woodrow Wilson. The Fed chairman is appointed by the President. So to use an analogy. That I believe a bomb. Bob Murphy Used you know it's as if you said let's just say that Walmart or some company like that was created by an act of Congress. They weren't just a company that got together. You know is like Congress created in the Walmart. Act We built these stores Walmart and then the president appointed the CEO every few years. Would you consider that a private company? Probably not it's really more of a government Agency than anything else and what? They are is a Central Bank. So they print money and they can they can create as much or as little as they want to especially now that work since the nineteen seventy-one. We're off the gold standard or seventy three. We're off the gold standard so they can complete Fiat money. They don't even print it a anymore that much they really just create on computers and then they can lend it out and they basically can set a short term interest rates so they can lend money out to banks to the big banks for for basically nothing at this point. I mean the Fed funds rate is down to zero so lend money out to banks for free they. They can pay the money back if they want to. With no interest on it and then those banks lend the money out to suckers like us at interest so the banks make huge money just from taking money from the Federal Reserve and lending it into the economy that the the the money that we all use to trade and exchange goods and services It BY GOVERNMENT DECREE. We have to use it right there. Are these legal tender laws. You have to accept this money if you're a business anywhere and you have to pay your taxes in this money so the money has this value that is legislated by the government baked into the cake and they get the print as much of it as they want and handed out to their buddies who can then lend it out is that sometimes they don't even lend it out if you look back to what happened in the last financial crisis. They gave over all this money to the banks to lend down. They never liked it out now. Here's where I'm talking on my ass but I believe this to be accurate. They're not allowed to take the money from the Fed and then go put it into risky assets. They're not allowed to do that. Would they can take all the money that they have and spend it on risky assets and then take the Fed money and keep it in the reserves. Said they're shoring up their balance sheets and making more of those other funds available so I think probably part of why is I? They just keep the like didn't lend it out. That's what happened the last time around so I think part of it is because it allows them to get away with their more speculative bats and at the moment they might even be right. That's too speculative I don't want to say but were saying earlier about smoothing out the business cycle so there's two parts of that about that. That are truly insane. Firstly the idea is supposed to be to save when things are going. Well that's part of what the game is and they never do that. Government has never won saved. When there's a surplus events smooth out the business cycle and invest in a downturn. The other thing and I've never heard anyone say this. But if you look like a financial trendline and you know stock goes up and down. But it's up on a trajectory words knowing that works out well for everybody but part of what's going on at a boom and bust cycle. Is that your speculators. Getting WIPED OUT PEOPLE MADE BAD INVESTMENTS. People had the wrong signals and all of a sudden the crash. And we've got a purge the bad actors now of all those bad actors are being propped up by government or they're making male investments because they have bad pricing models. So then you're boom and bust cycle is going to be significantly worse than your natural cycle. And that's being is so in other words you have two problems with the government kind of interjecting itself. The economy is one is. I think he actually a road. What would otherwise be an upward trajectory in your trading bigger boom and bust because firstly your propping up the male investors and. You're giving people bad price signals. Yes that's that's absolutely right. And the idea that is is really just accept in the mainstream is that it's the nature of capitalism that leads to these boom bust cycles. But there's really no good working theory to explain why that would be. I mean if you think about right like economy as advanced as any modern economy as today there you could understand the reason why there would be ups and downs in certain sectors right like I don't know there's something happens I you know whatever. Like maybe there's like a bad harvest season or something and so farming takes a big head or maybe there's something like you know whatever you can think of in any particular industry that might lead to that industry having a boom and then a bust. You know just for example. Maybe we come out with some really cool cars and so everybody goes out more people go out and buy cars so the number of people who buy cars goes way up but these cars last a really long time like you don't need to buy new cars so then in the future since. Everybody already bought him now. You have a big write that you can think of in a particular industry whether it be a boom then a bust but why would it be the case that across the board we just have a good economy and then a bad economy and then a good economy and then a bad economy? And if you're at least thirty years old you've already lived through this to everybody has and if you're sixty years old you've lived through it several times where all the sudden that. The whole economy is humming along. Everything's doing great and boom. There's a big tank in the entire economy now. What would really account for that? We'll think about it this way right. If you are trading Every economic transaction is fifty percent money or just about everyone about like if I go to get a coffee at the store. We trade coffee for money. If I go to buy a car we try a car for money. A Computer for money. Whatever YOU WANT TO INSERT. This is what this is the central issue. So when there's someone's fucking with the money this affects the entire economy and this is why you see the boom and the bust and what happens is the you know it just like this why. I started by saying the Federal Reserve. Is the government department of money? Because I think most people certainly most free-market leaning people will understand that if a government department has a complete control on something it's it's GonNa suck and there's GonNa be all types of problems associated that with that just like every other government department. It's an and there's several reasons but the main reason is the problem of monopoly. Which is that. There's no competition. There's no real market and so things don't get figured out and you can just ask yourself why when you go to the say the DMV..
"fed" Discussed on Part of the Problem
"How are you? How's everything going by rub any more? Whatever I'm just I know I gotta figure out a new life plan myself. My my apartment's opened July. I gotta figure out what else. Yeah for quite a while. Yes three years. But whatever man if he can't do standup there's no reason to be in the city and I I knew a whole new plan here but you know I'm a mother. Plans in life gone amazing. Some really good at the plant is there's a lot of a lot of comedians are in a similar situation And we we talked about this on skanks like a few a few weeks ago episode and Bobby Kelly was on. We are saying it's like there's kind of this thing. Where for Comedians? Like who get a little bit older and have a family and stuff like that that that makes it a real big difference but there is this thing in general where you're Kinda like okay. There's all all the comedy clubs are in New York. And so you gotta be New York to be where the action is you know and after a while when you're in the situation I'm in this situation your in as well when you've kind of done a lot of podcasting and you've built up a fan base and really now you can kind of go on the road and fans will come out and see you already. It's less importance to be connected to the clubs. You know it's like it's less important to go run a ten minute set at the clubs when you're going out and doing a half hour or an hour in front of your fans and now where there's this situation where I mean a lot of a comedy clubs in New York City. Were barely getting by I. I don't know how many of them are going to reopen at all on top of that when his New York City going to be fully opened. A Comedy Club is an environment where you're really right on top of each other. I. I don't know that anytime soon. They're going to be allowing on hundred percent capacity in there and then once you take that element out of it. You're like oh so unjust staying here to be in a tiny apartment instead of having a big Nice space and then you know you can find them like an hour outside of the city or something like that where what like what. I did where you can get in really easily. So it's just I think a lot of people are kind of requesting what the plan is. I think you're not alone there. Yeah Me Knicker GonNa have to figure something out like partner Nick of three years there. You go okay so four. Today's episode I wanted to do something a little bit different. And it's something I was thinking about doing During the course of this wonderful lockdowns or thought we might start like a serious That I was GONNA call back to basics and go over some libertarian basics that I think are important because you know as as I've said before don't mean repeat myself too much but we're clearly moving into a different era a different time now In terms of you know everything but really particularly in terms of the size and scope of Government Liberty Verse State Ism which has always been the most important dynamic but now it's really even even more so than before it might have turned up their timetable of people willing to accept universal basic and electronic more. Like location monitoring by about a decade projecting. When you thought those things might come do I wanna say maybe like a decade? But now they're here. Yes that's right and On on every level in terms of I mean civil liberties the idea of civil civil liberties are basically suspended right now. The idea of even a pretense of caring about deficits and the size of government is completely gone. I mean you know. Every president so far has Railed against the spending of the previous administration like trump railed against Obama driving up the debt and Obama railed against George W Bush driving up the debt. Right and what we've seen in the last. Three months is is more deficit spending. Ben I mean probably ever in a couple years so there you know that. That's another as a awesome honest having such a fun Field Day. It like okay. If you take the worst case scenario that this thing's one hundred percent true then you have okay. So the worst economic disaster of all American history happened. There's a freak episode of some unknown novel. Virus never existed in the economy needs to be shut down. Because there's nothing that we could possibly do about if you take the liberal agenda of what Kogo Nineteen is. An OBAMA GETS OUT THERE. And does this whole thing is trump's fault and it's because of his lack of preparation. It's such a fun game that these guys get to play that if you know if you can spend the debt and enjoy the money while they're in office you look great and if the House of cards Krummel's while you're in there because it's your fault but look no matter what. The situation is whether the whether every claim every every one of the worst claims about cove nineteen is true and this was the best thing to do. And maybe we didn't even do enough or if it's bullshit You know what I mean. Or if it's a very what I kind of thing which is a very real nasty virus but these actions were not the appropriate way to deal with them and and caused much more long lasting devastation than the virus Was going to if that's the case or any of those things with the case. The reality is that we are quickly approaching. Forty million people just a filing for unemployment benefits for which a road towards jobs cases. Most people don't even want to go back to work. They're cleaning up on employed. Yeah that's that's a fair point to which actually kind of pulls in the other direction that the numbers in that sense might be a little bit inflated that they've pulled a lot of people into Wyoming to be laid off and a lot of people have been requesting from their employers that they may be laid off in younger stand. What I mean. Sure it's who would want to work for money when you can make just as much or more money in some cases from not working particularly if there's a virus out there that you're afraid of I'd rather stay home and collect the money and spend time with family by the way that's such the dummies game. Because now you're really putting your You're really putting your cards into the hands of the government that they're going to continue to give you a paycheck totally walking away from personal respond like for you. I'm not talking about like you might get some money now. You're better off doing your dumb factory job unless you're GonNa stay home and study something. Yeah no that's that's the case and I'm sure that the sitting home in studying something is not the case for the vast majority of people and no. You're absolutely right but it does seem to be an again. A lot of different things can be true at once but it does seem like the a lot of the politicians are quite happy to put. Just put everybody on Welfare essentially and it's a it's a scary. Thanks but one way or the other. The government kicked tens of millions of people out of their jobs. That's a reality of what's happening whether you think it was the right thing to do or not. That is happening right now. But the thing the topic I wanted to and for these back to basic episodes. Maybe I'll talk guys gas digital. Maybe we'll just leave these up and not put them behind the pay welcomes people. Ask me a lot of times for things to like. Oh you have a great like intro to libertarianism tight. You know episode where we can share around people who aren't Libertarians and convert them and a lot of times. I'm kind of in this situation. Where you kind of when you do a show like this. You have a lot of people who have been listening for almost decade. Then you have other people have been listening for a few years then you have someone else. Who's checking out for the first time ever so. I CAN'T EVERY EPISODE. Be throwing you into this shit because then it's like the people who have been here all along or they're already on level twenty. They're not trying to go back to Level One But for this time period right our premise as basically a been that we really need and have the potential for a new liberty moments. And it's never been more important and I think that a lot of times over the The last few years the the a lot of the talk of of the the Ron Paul days the liberty movement days hasn't been quite as sexy as some other topics if you're watching like a brawl between Antifa and alt-right or something like that you know it's like that's just all these cultural issues that are people are going to war over and a lot of them really important. I've spent a lot of time with west years talking about them. I I'm not trying to downplay the significance but they really sucked all the air out of the room for the issues that us in the Liberty Movement really wanted to put forward. Like if you're talking about I don't know like white privilege and transgender bathrooms and whatever ethnos states any of this. Other kind of just distractions silly issues. It gets a lot more clicks in a lot more attention than someone talking about central banking or the deficit. That stuff comes off as almost a little bit boring in comparison and I understand I understand what but now things are getting serious and is a whole lot of the ship that the people in the Liberty Movement have been talking about for years. This is all about government overreach and and you know so I just think this stuff is is important now and so. It's not a bad idea for us to kind of go over some things that we think need to be inserted back into the conversation and even for people who are on level twenty. Who have been here with US forever. It's not worst thing in the world to get a little refresher and to kind of all. Go over this shit together so thing. I want to talk about on this. Episode is the Federal Reserve. This is GONNA be Like a basic a back to basics why we oppose the Federal Reserve and want to see it abolished And and how much damage it's caused and the Fed I think is of all of the the the big issues from the Liberty Movement and this is this is what Ron Paul gets. All the credit in the world. Scratcher chain right Baron Paul. You've earned that there you go. He was the only guy who really like defied the odds to insert the Federal Reserve into the popular conversation. At least to some degree. I mean he had he was drawn. Tens of thousands of of people whose rallies and they were screaming and the Fed with passion and enthusiasm. That is pretty crazy that he was able to accomplish that. I I know people. I think it was both Bob Murphy and Tom Woods When Ron Paul was running were advising that he not talk about the Fed is Ron Paul. Wouldn't shut up about the Fed and they were just kind of like look. I'm with you completely but no one's GonNa care about this like you know you're not gonNA reach young people talking about the Federal Reserve talking about the war on drugs talk about Blah Blah Blah the war in Iraq all this other stuff s few care about and they were both like. Wow we were so wrong. And they were delighted to be wrong or they were like he actually got people really excited about this shit all right. Let's take a quick second. I WanNa thank our sponsor for today's show which is.
"fed" Discussed on Part of the Problem
"Everybody. Welcome to a brand new episode of part of the problem. I am the most consistent motherfucker you know. He is the king of the Cox. And if you'll take a look over his left shoulder you'll notice. He's also the fire. Rodney the Fire Bernstein. What is up my brother are you? Is this the first episode from the New Home I did? I did the other day from here but this is the first part of the problem from my new house which people were immediately able to benefit from a family being evicted. So I hit there. Yeah you know they know I'm not a victim of Robbie because of actions are illegal right now. There's nothing you can affect people. Even if you want to which is not necessarily did the Buddhist head come at the house or is that Your your piece of furniture. This is something that somehow my wife brought over here. That will not be there for very long. Those people who don't know I just got a House. I moved out of my apartments and I'm live in the burbs life. Now which is Let let me say first of all I apologize. If there's there's like a little bit of an echo or a tinny sound I'm a I'm still I'm going to set up a full studio down here but I got a fucking lay some carpets in some thick drapes and absorbed some of the sound. So bear with me through this episode. It'll be it should be much better by a couple more. Dna Do you need. You got the Great Ron Paul Decoration. You should make paper. I got that out of out of a box. I was like all right. I'll stick this year on the edge. Oh Yeah baby at Home David Smith. That's right real fireside chats right. We were both in the fire. I mean you have like the legit. This is a a gas fireplace. You have like a legit. You now chop down. I can see chopped down several pieces of wood. Really got that thing going. I think you'd probably rub two sticks together to start that fire just seems like a real authentic outdoorsy type fire anyway. It's it's it's a weird thing like I just literally just moved in boxes everywhere and I'm I've never lived in the burbs before And it's I you're you're basically from the burbs right rob and serves guy. It's it really is a much different life and I'm kind of looking forward to digging dipping my toe into it. I'll tell you I got a fucking.
"fed" Discussed on P&L With Pimm Fox and Lisa Abramowicz
"As well as at Bloomberg Dot com time for Bloomberg opinion right now we turn to Bloomberg Opinion Columnist Narayana Coach Lakota former Minneapolis Fed president also professor of economics at the University of Rochester Nariaki. Thanks so much for joining us here. Boys we think about the response to the pandemic. The Federal Reserve Bank I think is generally getting very good marks from the marketplace in terms of acting early acting acting decisively. But you make the argument. That defense should really consider going negative in terms of interest rates. Get your thoughts there. Yeah thanks a lot for having me on You know I think. The chairman laid out the case pretty well in his press conference. He certainly didn't go make the next step of actually going negative with rates. Which is he said. The Fed has to be prepared to use all its tools to support the the economy and the recovery that We hope we'll be coming soon. And that that That means include to me means including going negative with rates Pushing rates down further would stimulate spending And stimulate on the part of household stimulate investment on the part of businesses as it always does and that would be helpful for the economy. What is your view? I mean I guess you know. People look at say Japan. Germany developed countries with negative rates. Just doesn't seem right. It doesn't seem like the right strategy the policy. How do you view this negative and insurance in general I you know I think what's what's happened? Is that Economies turned to them as would be true in the. Us case when the situation is bad. So you can't just look at raw correlation between WHO's using negative rates in their what their situations like and say gee it looks like all the the countries that have negative rates have poor are are not doing that well because they view them as emergency tool they only turn to when when the situation is going badly The other problem is there. There's a limit to how negative to being able to go are willing to go. And in some instances and a quarter percentage point fifty basis point cut in interest rates. It's helpful it's supportive but it's absolutely not a panacea for all possible. Economic ills ever done training appreciable amount of time as a policy matter before You know now you're taking a little bit out of my knowledge base but my understanding is rate did go negative for some time in the during the Great Depression but But other than that. No right it's not something typically in the toolbox for Fed so one of the things when we think about the actions by the Fed. Is that the concern or the the expectation the assumption is that this pandemic has relatively short life measured in quarters. How about if you know if it's just one in a series of waves of this virus and actually goes much longer? What does the Fed do then? I think that's a great question. I think the Fed and Congress You know I think it's an and treasury I think there's there's basically been been all these entities and the government have been working together. I the the perspective is by the time we get into this to the certainly begin to the fourth quarter of the year The economy is going to be in a very robust recovery path and The the the they won't need the further for the backstopping from from the Fed at that point and I think that's led to the Fed and other entities to say boy. The main job here is to keep businesses alive. Try to freeze the economy where it was in February of twenty twenty. Well that might be acceptable if you're talking about a three or four months intervention but if you're talking to three ten years I mean ten is obviously quite extreme but two three years. Even you're really getting in the way of the dynamic flow and processes it really drive the US economy where we want copies? Go Out of business. Because they're not as being as effective at fulfilling what consumers want and we won't workers to be able to move from job to job Because they're not there'd be more productive that new job than they were at the old one so I worry that These these interventions are really designed to be temporary as a shock. That comes more persistent. They're gonNA introduce more more distortions in the economy leading to to towards more outcomes so just real quick twenty twenty seconds. What do you think about the Fed's decision to kind of go into the corporate bond market? Yeah I think it's I I think that the so it's a questionable one because I think the fact that basically I think companies should be facing a lot of risk right. Now it's appropriate for them to be borrowing at high interest rates because it's a very risky world. I think the Fed's intervention is getting in the way of that signal. The market interesting enough to see how that plays out in the coming weeks and months and Arianna coach Lakota former minneapolis fed president and Bloomberg Opinion Columnists also professor of economics at the University of Rochester. We appreciate you coming on. You can read all of Narayan. His work at Bloomberg Dot com slash opinion. And OPIE. I N go. That's where you can find all of the Bloomberg opinion work which is so good and we love having the folks on here talking about what is going on in the markets in a broader implications.
"fed" Discussed on FT News
"Percent. They say it's symmetric metric. Which means that over time they should be sometimes above sometimes below? What that's worked out to be in practice? Is that the Fed like every other central bank in the developed world has had trouble even meeting its target and so there's a separate movement going on within the Fed as part of this policy review. It does look like they're gonNA come out of it with a shift towards what they call. Average inflation flation targeting which means that if they miss their inflation target for two years. They're going to promise to actually exceed their inflation target for the next two years so that over time it averages out to two percent because they've recognized that if you can't generate enough inflation as a central bank then you're missing out on economic growth that you could have had the problem with that is the Federal Reserve has what they call a credibility problem. which is that is not completely certain that they can generate even two percent inflation so already long-term in terms? The Fed is worried about meeting the price. Stability Part of its mandate. That's the bad news for the Fed. The good news is they're not worried about high inflation and the luxury of being a Federal Reserve. Not Worried about high inflation is being a Federal Reserve. They can accomplish things that people politicians like like not raising rates and sort of trying to see how far you can get the unemployment rate down and we've really seen a shift over the last year so within the Fed at the beginning of the year. Sure there was noise that they were worried about the trade war now. The rhetoric has shifted and they're basically saying look. We don't see any inflation. Let's see how low we can drive the unemployment rate. Let's come back to to these regional consultations Brennan because as you suggested that the gap between certainly where the Fed started off in their thinking and views expressed on the ground about monetary policy. Have those views panned out in terms of difference between the visa expressed in the consultations and those are the Fed chief Jay Powell and his team so so one of the things that you've heard in his rhetoric that the feds got this highly ritualized language that it uses to talk to markets and so people who watched the Fed for signals watched the shift in that language for clues on what's coming up and so he has actually started to take the events and referred to them as part of his ritualized language. You know he'll say people in communities that we talked to tell us that they're coming back into the workforce at right they haven't seen before again. I'm paraphrasing using. But it's something along those lines and it's align he repeats again and again and again in public speeches that means that even if they haven't finished their year and a half Long Strategy Review about how the Carry Carrie about monetary policy he's already telling markets. Look I'm going out to underserved areas. I'm going out to poorer areas. I'm hearing something different from them. And this is informing my monetary policy Halsey choices. I think the Fed has a big challenge. which is that? Historically Americans have been hostile to the idea of a central bank because of this hostility the Federal Reserve reserve sort of doesn't even further to itself as the Central Bank though it obviously is and it was constructed along regional lines and so the original construction of it was that they took these twelve cities and built the entire fed system around the existence of these twelve regional banks so now where a lot of the power particularly since the thirties is vested in the board of Governors in Washington. DC The challenges. What's the role of these regional banks? One way in which the regional banks of solve this is is that they're really focused on regional development. What these fed banks are doing? They're using what they call the convening power of the Fed which they've got great researchers and they have in some sort of moral authority people tend to trust the Federal Reserve as an independent arbiter and they bring together state and local governments and community representatives and local banks and they say look here the problems problems that we think we can solve. Here's our research says this is what would solve the problem now. Who's got some money to do this again? The Fed is a weird position because they have all these regional research authorities parties. That have recognized that you can solve unemployment problems in a very local way without national policy. They don't have any authority to change that. And so the very limited way in which the Fed can help is trying to keep the overall unemployment level as low as possible for as long as possible so marginally the Fed can make a difference there. But what's changed. Is the conversations that were happening at the regional fed banks at Boston Philadelphia. San Francisco are now happening with the chair of the vice chair. That's brand new. It doesn't seem that novel but for the Fed it is so it seems like these consultations have exposed a preoccupation with the cost of living and a fear of incurring debt at RAV and perhaps on raising money to expand. Businesses as policymakers might have hoped. Does that mean that. The Fed's traditional focus on cutting interest rates in order to stimulate lending in the economy needs to change. I think that there's A. There's a sort of parallel problem going on. which is that? The Fed is realizing that it's running running out of tools to sort of effect monetary policy. So you know with its policy rate already now in expansion at one and a half two one three quarters percent that's already perilously close to zero. They don't have a lot of room to cut so they've looked at other tools. The Fed for a bunch of reasons not WANNA go below zero. It does not want to repeat the experiment the ECB CB ran. It thinks it might be willing to do a quantitative easing buying up lots of assets and expanded its balance sheet in the next recession so it seems fairly fairly comfortable with that. It seems comfortable with for guidance. Telling people not only that it's lowering rates now but it's GONNA lead them lower for longer in the background and that's something that the Fed will never say but it's something that formal fed reserve shares have actually come together to say is that there's a concern that even those tools might not be enough the next recession and so to get back back to your question. The Fed does not seem to be openly willing to contemplate anything radical like by municipal debt right actually targeting. The kinds of assets at buys is it still is hoping that state local governments and national governments will step in and do this kind of spending one. The time comes. I am skeptical. That that spending bending will come but you know do I think the Fed should change its mission. That's a pretty big. Ask what I'd really love to happen for fiscal authority in the United States to understand that community based policies sort of fixing local transportation education issues is massively important for economic growth. And it's going to require some spending but I'm not gonNA hold my breath on that recognition. Will thanks Brendan and thanks to you for listening. Don't forget if you missed. Our recent episodes finance and climate change Putin's Russian reforms assumes all the multilateral leanings of German Chancellor Angela Merkel you can subscribe and listen on all of the usual pa-past platforms.
"fed" Discussed on FT News
"I'm Patrick Jenkins deputy editor and this is news in focus where we offer our insights into the stories that matter the the US Federal Reserve has begun to consult the public particularly in poorer parts of the country apartment or trade policy as a result policy. Wonks at the Central Bank of begun to reconsider the impact of their decisions on communities far from the centers of power. It with me to discuss. This is our us. Economics editor Brendan Greeley. But first let's listen to an exchange from one of the recent public meetings organized between local community representatives and fed governors even places to lower than rates are going to be even in lower and we're going to have less power over a business cycle even less ability to support maximum stable prices nonetheless. It starts with the thought that we have to get inflation back up to two percent we wanted to be medically around two percent. Do you think we'll have a hard time explaining that to the general public ideas. He is ahead to do that. I think you're going to need another three hours. said in the long term it will have an impact higher inflation. I think we agree but for many of our communities distance to the long term. We don't we just don't survive that. That's that's part of the problem. The business close is is people. Don't get to make the choice safer higher education Families just can't find the milk today. I think that's the challenge so Brendan we just heard an exchange there between Denise Scott who runs one of the nonprofits involved in the consultation process and Jay Powell is typical of the kind of views. Put the Fed chair during his consultations. It is that conversation really stood out to me. I was in the room when it happened. And it got a big laugh and basically what's going on is that the Federal Reserve has a problem. which is that? It's running out of tools to actually accomplish monetary policy generally. There's what's called the natural rate of interest. It's impossible to measure. We have to sort of estimate what it is. But it's this idea of what interest rates would be without any intervention from the central bank so the Fed and other central banks are watching this very carefully because their whole existence. All of their tools rely on the ability to undercut this rate to drag it down if that rate and inflation are very close to zero. They don't have any tools so they're really worried about the possibility of low inflation. That's something that central bankers talk about all all the time. That's what they're worried about now. Normal people who live and work out in the real economy. Don't think this way at all and so. The Fed is starting to realize in particular through having these public consultations that the thing that it is obsessed with which is a lack of inflation is something that is completely legally alien to every normal person and what people actually out in the real economy are looking at and thinking about and worrying about is the fact that at least in the US the cost of rent. The cost of healthcare. The cost of education are skyrocketing. That's the inflation they think about but the idea that the Federal Reserve would want to create inflation and doesn't make any sense to them at all. So there's this massive disconnected. The Fed has in the thing is trying to communicate. Doesn't make any sense to any normal person but clearly makes sense that they've come to this realization that they need to conduct this outreach effort but what particularly prompted it and I was organized. Well it's almost a bit of an accident accident. That turned out really well. which is that the Fed about a year and a half ago decided that it was going to really look into its tools and and those tools are both how it conducts monetary policy? And then how it communicates. How talks about monetary policy to markets and the public to make sure the monetary policy works and so Jay Powell is an an interesting chair? He's a different kind of communicator. And his press conferences and he's gotten heat from this from people who were involved in financial markets. His press conferences are much more. Colloquial than press conferences references have been in the past from Fed chairs the challenging part of that is if you are colloquial and plainspoken in monetary policy. You leave open the possibility of misinterpretation and by markets. The good part of that is if you are colloquial in effect presser. Normal people might actually be able to understand you a little better so he's already a different kind of fed chair as part of this review. He decided that he wanted to conduct. What the Fed has called Fed listens events where he's going to go out into the community Mary and talk to real people in real places about monetary policy you know? Journalists were all inherently cynical about everything and I was cynical about this when they announced it seems like a one time. Pr Effort. But when I went to these events and sort of watched him and watch the other governors in particular. Jay Powell seemed to be really interested. He was writing notes and paying attention and actively engaging with people and talking to them he actually seemed like he was enjoying it. And that's what caught. My attention to things have happened. One is they've now had wanted wanted. Every of the twelve federal reserve banks around the country is the cities. All over. You know Saint Louis Chicago San Francisco and internally what we can tell from the Fed minutes and had also some hints externally. It seems like they're going to continue to do this. So this thing. That could have been a one time. Feel good public affairs. Event has turned into away. The Fed actually conducts research. And it's changing the way the macro-economists inside the Fed actually conduct their research. What would you say the main lessons that Mr Powell has learned from this excise of listening to local officials listening to local communities especially in poor areas so one thing that he has said that several of the Fed presidents have said that researchers at the Fed have said is that they learned from these conversations that there's more slack in the economy than they had thought and what that means means is as the economy expands it pushes the unemployment rate farther down slack? Is the remaining number of people who could get a job what they've discovered is they thought that the long-term natural rate of unemployment was five percent four percent that's been dropping when they go to these communities one thing that came out of the event they had in Chicago. Somebody said look in our communities were always in recession. There's never economic growth and so they realized that there a lot of workers on the sidelines. Who you aren't employed? Who could be employed? There's a lot more slack in the labor market than they had thought. These are things that aren't captured in aggregate statistics of overall employment in the country. That are caught when you talk anecdotally to people in certain communities I think that's the number one takeaway and the other one is that people don't care about inflation or rather rather people don't care about low inflation low inflation is a good thing and I think that's a real disconnect and I think the Fed still wrestling with that their response thus far has been. Well how do we teach them that. Low inflation is a bad thing and I think there's another step coming. which is that? Maybe the Fed still needs to learn that it may have to live with low inflation because what people are really worried about is the cost of medical care the cost of housing in the cost of education. Let's take a step back here. You're talking about how the Fed is changing but what is essentially the main task of the federal. What has it been up to now? And how is that different from other central banks around the world. Well what's interesting about. The Fed is that they have a dual mandate most central banks in the developed world their mandate is price stability. They just have to make. I'm sure that inflation is contained right. They've generally adopted a target of two percent inflation. The Fed has an interesting mandate it also has a slightly different history than other central banks it also has the mandate of full employment and so the Fed has defined its inflation target as maintaining two percent. It hasn't really defined what full employment is so it actually has this obligation under the law that charters it from Congress to pursue price stability and maximum employment. So it's starting to figure route that maybe it needs to focus just as much maximum employment as it has in the past on price stability. Tell us about that gradual shift in how these jewel goals have been sued in recent years. Well there's a separate thing going on at the Fed which is that. They're realizing that they have been unable to meet two percent inflation. Their target is two.
"fed" Discussed on Marketplace with Kai Ryssdal
"In Los Angeles. I'm Kai Ryssdal. It is Monday today. The sixth of January. Good as always to have you along everybody. There are military and national security challenges aplenty in the current state of affairs between the United States and Iran all or most of which are are being covered elsewhere there is though a historical and economic context. That's important here a context that may well shape. How at least some of what's happening turns out sanctions of course and the threat of more of them? Hussein scarring is an emeritus professor of business and International Studies at George Washington University. Welcome to the program. Thank you you for having me By Way of background into Fr- refresh right he's probably worth pointing out here That sanctions have been imposed on Iran by virtually every president since Jimmy Carter right that is correct. Okay now do they work. Have we gotten what we want out of those sanctions. Well there were times that Sir we kind of got what we wanted but really sanctions. Do not work immediately. They take time because you're trying to cause enough pain on the the country to change his policies and we kind of got there in two thousand and fifteen. We signed an agreement with them. But but that's about got it right. That is the nuclear deal. Of course the president trump has pulled us out of. Let me ask you then the pain that's being inflicted. What does that look like in the Iranian economy today? Well the things that you notice is that Iran of course there's been very little external or foreign investment in Iran economic growth has been quite bad in Iran largely because the sanctions but also because of terrible economic policies but also because of the Iran Iraq war which devastated the country in between one thousand nine hundred and nine thousand nine hundred eighty eight so you have had slow economic growth the price of imports of Ghana and they have not been able to get get the things that they want and the quality of life has really gone down you are. You're born there right yes. I was born in Iran. I left when I was nine years old. I I imagine though you still have friends friends possibly family when you talk to them What's it like well? They are of experiencing hardship. I I mean I remember vividly in the case of a person who was willing to go to jail. He in fact went on a robbed a grocery store a bottle of milk and went to jail because he needed milk for his children Henrik and so things are bad and I think that the they used to blame a lot of this on the regime but I think that in in the last few weeks especially over the last weekend a lot of the blade is being put on the United States. It's worth mention here just On the way out that it's not just. The united estates has sanctions on Iran. Right now there are European Union sanctions also United Nations sanctions. Yes but I think the kinds of sanctions that the United States has which basically financial sanctions and what they do is the following. They tell every country if you're institutions your banks have business dealings with Iran Ron then you will not have access to the US market and so the companies are afraid that if they do anything with Iran then the United States will sanction there. Talk to me for a second about oil would you. Because that of course is their primary source of foreign reserves and they're exporting almost nothing now right that is exactly correct. Iran basically it's exports exports. I would say by far the most important oil. Then there's natural gas and petrochemicals and basically all of your exports have gone down to almost zero and the only export outlets for Iran's export is basically to Iraq and to Syria. Okay so crystal ball this for me and this really will be the last question. A If somehow there is a climbdown from the current tensions and some mutual agreements are reached about the future course of events. How how long does it take the Iranian economy to to get back to something near normal? Well I think it all depends what you mean by near normal I think near normal normal for me. It's a country that is run. Well that the decent policies a lot of interaction with the rest of the world. I think that will probably take take two three years. But Iran Yin's to feel the beneficial effects. I would say within six months interesting. How cintos Cari is the emeritus Iran professor of business and International Studies at the George Washington University In Washington DC professor. Thanks for your time Sir. I appreciate it. Thank you for having Me Wall Street Street on this Monday traders choosing to see the calm and not the storm the major indices up oil down gold. The historically safest of havens was up just is to bid. We'll have the details when we do the numbers it's entirely possible. You missed it over the weekend given all the other stuff but Ben Banenky. He ran the Federal Reserve Coupla a couple of years ago he had some interesting things to say at the annual meeting of the American Economic Association in a speech entitled The new tools of Monetary Policy Burki said and this is a quote. The Fed should also consider maintaining constructive ambiguity about the future use of negative short term rates now first of all constructive ambiguity. How much do you love that? Very Greenspan Ian if you ask me but also negative interest rates. That's a big deal coming from a very important Horton to communist the whole idea of negative rates. Were depositors have to pay the bank to store their money. Forum is to make saving so financially unattractive that it's better to spend spend the money invested in other words it's unorthodox though yes happening elsewhere in the global economy but as marketplace's got song reports from Washington the Fed might well l. need get creative the next time the economy goes south the fence main way to juice a slowing economy is to cut interest rates so banks lend more and businesses and people borrow more but a decade ago in the great recession interest rates. Were near zero. So the Fed got creative and bought bonds to lower long-term rates still dartmouth economist Andrew. Eleven with working for Fed Chair Bernike at the time says that wasn't creative enough. The toolbox really wasn't adequate in two thousand ten and two thousand twelve. We just didn't know that at the time. But in in retrospect I think it's pretty clear now banenky wants to add a controversial new tool to the box negative interest rates for banks that would discourage them from stashing shing their cash in the Central Bank and nudge them to lend even though the economy is still growing Levin says it's good to have more options for when things stall again the level of interest rates. It's around one and a half percent which means there's really not much room to cut much less room than there was ten or fifteen years ago to offset Saturday recession or some other kind of sock. The Fed Chair Jerome Powell has not endorsed pushing the so called the Federal Funds Rate Below Zero but Burnett. He's trying to change his mind. As is Princeton's Alan blinder. A former fed vice chair. The Fed has ruled out several times. And pretty emphatically going negative live on the Federal Funds Rate Bernanke. Who was advocating? And I certainly agree that. They shouldn't rule out for Nike. Encouraged the Fed to employ quote constructive ambiguity. That is to be unpredictable as to whether and when to make interest rates negative in Washington. I'm Scott Tong for marketplace. The corporate news of this Monday of the Bovine Variety borden dairy the Elsie. The Cow Company is filing for chapter eleven bankruptcy protection. The one hundred sixty three year old firms had its current debt was unsustainable back in November. You might remember Bordon's bigger competitor. Dean foods filed as well and is said to be looking to sell itself to to a dairy co op market place's Kimberly. Adams looks at what's going on or maybe what's going wrong in milk. The milk industry is doing. Okay just not the stuff we drink. According to Peter Vitaliano an economist with the National Milk Producers Federation total use of milk what we call commercial use of milk produced in the United States actually been growing pretty consistently for years. Now it's the fluid part that's declining. People are eating plenty of cheese and yogurt and other milk products but vitaliano says we only drink about twenty percent of the milk produced plus the growth of plant based drinks. You're soy milk. OAT Milk even banana milks are eating away at the market. Share for cow's milk so the consumer changes the demand patterns have changed and Dean Foods and borden are just I in the wrong sector. Merrin Bozic teaches about the economics of the industry at the University of Minnesota. Another problem for milk processors. Is that big chain grocery tree. Stores don't really need them anymore. If for example Walmart who has been buying milk from Dean foods and others up until recently now they make their Camila dental implants all. These problems left an opening for private equity firms to swoop in Borden CEO. Tony Sarsam says some of the strings. Attached to investments didn't really set the company up for success. We found ourselves in a situation where the debt was outside for the size of the business and for the basic needs of the business to actually actually grow and prosper size says with the chapter eleven restructuring board and can work with debtholders to sort out a more fluid arrangement in Washington. I'm Kimberly Kimberly Adams for marketplace..
"fed" Discussed on Freakonomics
"Hey let me ask you this. Who in your view is the most successful fed chair in recent history and why Oh my gosh. I can't even pick a favorite movie. I really struggled to pick favorites. It doesn't have to be a favourite. Maybe just describe some either actions or temperament or handling of term of Fed chair in you know medium recent history less four five six decades. Whatever you just particularly admire but tell told me why okay okay let me talk about Janet Yellen because I worked so closely with her so we're Janice President of San Francisco Fed before she becomes vice chair and we're in the financial crisis and she's got all these economists over the system working on these issues studying things calibrating brady models and we're giving her all the research and we feel like we've done our jobs impart because we've given all all the research and at one point and I won't use the the phrasing she us but at one point she adjust frankly had enough and she puts both hands down on the table like and she says there are people there was a word in between these are people's lives and it was this emphatic call to we are not making widgets here like what if this is your mom and dad out of work would if you lost your home. What is your not studying people losing homes. What is your losing homes and it was that level of vulnerability and humanness that I I said okay that's a leader that I get and so then she goes on to be the vice chair and I saw her do this. In her vice-chair work and she was the chair. I saw her navigate a very rough waters on. Should we raise earlier than we did. As an institution would just full employment really look like and I again saw her. Stay steadfast and essentially say you know on my watch. I'M GONNA balance both sides of the the dual mandate and think about financial stability all at the same time so you asked earlier is due condoms really believe that economics is about people and we'll Janet Janet Yellen does so current. Fed Chairman Jay Powell has had an interesting tenure to say the least given the I guess iconoclastic nature of the trump trump administration. There's never been a president as far as I know in recent history. At least who's been so outspoken about the Fed and its moves Here's a couple recent tweets. The president tweeted. We have the greatest companies in the world. There's nobody even close but unfortunately the same cannot be said about our Federal Reserve. They have called it wrong. At every step of the way another tweet the Fed has got to do something. The Fed is the Central Bank of the United States not the Central Bank of the world. So can you describe five what it's like to be a central banker in a time when the president is willing to publicly rebuke the central banks work. Well let me see. I say that we all live in a much more open world than we used to that. We've always had disharmony. There have been times when people think the Fed's Ed's not doing something right or this group isn't doing something right. Another government institution isn't doing something right the thing that's different now and I would say it's globally different is that that things are just more accessible. Twitter has made all the debates that used to be behind closed doors and we'd learn about them long. After people had departed their positions have been to live live but there's always been that unspoken rule that the Fed because of its political independence. The president was not supposed to be in conversation with the Fed certainly in a public arena so that's changed. I don't need I'm not a historian but I am a casual student of history and when I go back and read periods of history things look as contentious and debatable. It's just very public now and what I want to say about the chair is that I admire the fact that the chair and the Federal Reserve has not gotten caught up in conversations about are we worried about our independence and instead is restated the principles that made us independent in nineteen thirteen and has continued to do the best work so let's talk about the economy generally. It seems to me like it's in a really interesting sort of strange place. Unemployment employment is very low. Wage growth is small but it is positive stock. Markets are at all time highs. You recently told The Wall Street Journal. We have good solid college. Domestic momentum consumer confidence is high consumer. Spending is solid. We see a strong labor market so the fundamentals that keep the economy going are present and yet. There's a great repeal of anxiety over the economy. Some of it may be cyclical. It's been a long time since the recession but what do you think of the sources of that anxiety over the economy and you think they are legitimate. We'll I think there is something to the idea that people get nervous. When expansions lasts a long time we have this whole group of literature that says expansions don't don't die of old age and yet everybody thinks they do so. I think there's just general nervousness. When you hit your ten year mark the longest expansion in history the natural human tendency is to think it can't last forever then you look at it in the data and there's been a lot of uncertainty. There's trade uncertainty. There is brexit uncertainty. There's geopolitical uncertainty. There's just the general financial volatility that comes from just markets trying to figure things out that creates uncertainty so this just creates creates a level of angst that makes people even more cautious than they would be if they were simply just thinking the expansion would run out of gas because it's old so all those factors actors are ones that create mood issues and you know the big question that I've been wrestling with the last nine months is what's going to win the data or the mood. If you look at the data the data are good apart from business investment. There really isn't any week indicator in the US economy in the business. Investment is unpredictable because of the uncertainty largely around trade. Would you argue the no. I don't think it's just that I think that's a part of it for sure but one of my ways I spend a lot of my time is to go out and talk to business leaders and community leaders when I talked to business leaders and this has been going on since November October of twenty eighteen so I start talking to them about this uncertainty piece back when uncertainty starts to spike and they weren't talking about trade. They thought that would be resolved. They were talking about the expansions getting along in age and so we might just simply are footing so then that uncertainty got replaced by Brexit then it became trade that it was the debt ceiling now. It's trade again so I think for businesses they've been on the cautious fording for a long time but most of the people I talk to are still executing on what they call their plan as which means I'm investing enough to continue growing but I'm not going to invest in these marginal projects that are really going to take me to the next level until I see how the lead land shapes up you know oh it's easy to focus on the problems or the faultlines or whatnot but let me ask you something about the strength of the US economy so if we were talking at the the peak of the great recession and you said that you know the US economy which was the primary driver of the great recession and was hit particularly hard that the US economy on me would be one of the world's strongest and steadiest economies ten years later. Would you have believed it. I mean I wouldn't have so I guess what I'm really asking is what does that indicate does it indicate some intrinsic strengths of the US economy that are typically overlooked in the daily commentary well. I guess I disagree we on that I mean I thought we were well positioned to get ourselves into a better positioning in and out of the situation we had but it's a good question about. Why did I have any of that optimism. We were really hit hard early on so we were in the emergency room and when you're in the emergency room you bring an all hands on deck approach. You know it's easier to throw everything you have at something when you know it's a really bad problem we were among the most severely affected early on but that meant we put everything we had to it and we worked hard to to stimulate the economy. We had fiscal packages. We had monetary policy packages. Did you know variety of moves outside of even the the interest rate to try to stimulate the economy so that was where we were we recognized at the time that this was a long hard slog. It wasn't lowered the interest rate and then as soon as you saw any green shoot you go back to normal it. was you gotta be lower for longer on interest rates. You've got to be stimulative on the fiscal side. You've got to be helpful on the relocation retraining side. You basically had a once in a lifetime. You hope shock and you have a lot of work to do to get you out of it there. There is this sort of rising sentiment among some economists rows chetty comes to mind and also among the occasional presidential candidate. Andrew Yang comes to mind the idea they're expressing is automation and AI and other technologies advance the very nature of work will continue to change as well the relationship between humans and working that we aren't really well equipped to handle these changes structurally and we're not that nimble so what's your end the feds position -sition on that complicated problem so here's the deal of course. We need to think about structural change. The economy is changing at a rate of speed that looks like like something that I'm sure people who didn't have electrification and they got electricity and then we had assembly lines felt but it's happening in so we need to think about what is our future. Look like there should be a high bar for change because change is difficult and we don't want to tear down things just to say. We did it but there should be this considerable I thought given to how do we not solve the problems of fifty years ago but how we solve the problems of twenty years from now well. Can you give me some specifics. What what kind of structural changes specifically would you advocate for them. The question I have is we haven't revised our social safety net in forty fifty years ears. Should we take another look and see if that's the right thing to have at this point in time in the modern workforce are the systems of retraining unemployment insurance divisions between welfare programs versus entitlement programs insurance programs versus entitlement programs. Are those the right definitions missions. Is that really helping family when they have an economic shock find their footing again. I love to hear your thoughts on a universal basic income mm-hmm you this was something the Nixon administration tried to get through and we ended up with supplemental security income instead and the reasons that they couldn't get Republicans and Democrats to agree and they couldn't get lots of people to agree because the concerns about universal basic income where that would be a work disincentive so I liked the principle of let's think about what the social safety net should look like in the future and let's make sure that we're taking care of people who really have fallen on hard our times and can't take care of themselves. I think we oversimplify the problems to make them easy to understand but the actually then end up not being very effective in maybe it's this time in our future complicated world just recognize policies or complicated seek about trade. The idea that trade is good for everyone is still true but it's only true that it makes everyone better off in real time if we redistribute the proceeds from the trade more evenly against the people who got displaced by it so that's an obvious obvious thing we could tackle. That's part of the social safety net that we've only waved at honestly what you just described. That disequilibrium is kind of consequence. It's a quince of the globalization and shifting workforce at a lot of economists twenty thirty years ago told us was going to work out better Larry Cats. It's you know one of the most well regarded Labor economists in the world has admitted recently that you know we didn't get very right. We Mis underestimated the costs for people people who would be misplaced so to people who have lived back. What do you say to them when you as a Labor economist working at the Fed now now says hey this time we get it this time we understand this time. We're going to make a better plan so thirty years ago. Economists honest writing about various problems were using what we now call partial equilibrium models. We're looking at the narrow slice and some some of the assumptions embedded in trade dislocations were that people would retrain they'd get some subsidy from the government for retraining and then they would easily reenter the workforce in a different skill so there would be a painful transition costs but there wouldn't be this very large friction that prevented them from ever reentering or displaced him forever ever so we completely underestimated the costs because we were looking in this very partial equilibrium world so the answer to people isn't trust us. This time will be different. We got it right. The cancer is the public should be asking these questions. Okay I get it. Trade is good. If you redistribute the proceeds powers that redistribution going to happen and how am I going to get retrained not economist simply got it wrong and we shouldn't trust them again. I think it's revisiting of the social contract. What do do we mean. When we have a program that has winners and losers. Do we simply accept that cost or do. We say you know what as policymakers we have to find a way to mitigate that difference and my work is a public policy. Person Or public servant is always been. It's our job to serve the whole public so we help mitigate that different. You can't always do it but certainly one generation from the time it happens. We should be able to do it. That should be our goal Tell me something that you believed for a long time to be true until you found out that you had been wrong or if wrong is not a word that resonates nicely. Tell me something substantial that you changed your mind about how and why the the data tell us the whole story. I was a true group believer in the profession of my training that I could look at the data if I studied it and I did natural experiments and used aggregate data and I read everything I could possibly read. I have a real good line of sight into what the reality of a situation was and I was totally wrong and I had had this hit me right in.
"fed" Discussed on Freakonomics
"Fed after starting out as a high school dropout so even in that bad fortune you had the good fortune of having a a kind of safety net arise around you that you wouldn't have anticipated. Your couldn't have foreseen but you know I'm I'm sure that for many people when they have such misfortune that safety net doesn't rise up some curious how that specific period of your life informs the way. You've approached your economic research. It made me realize that we're leaving so much talent on the table think think about full employment if we have so many people sidelined and we don't take advantage of them there were restricting them for sure but we're also restricting our economy so it becomes a key theme in in everything I do and it it goes all the way back to the the time I fell through if not by good luck and good fortune I would have been one of those people and I never would have been married daily early on freakonomics. What did your siblings ended up doing. My sister is a medical receptionist and both my brothers have had episodic employment in construction or other things and you know just living on the boom and bust of whatever the economic cycle brings them and you know they're not in line to be the first people employed because they all dropped out of high school. We all dropped out of high school in the end and while we all were able to go back and get a ged eventually eventually. It isn't something that's easy. If you don't go beyond and GATT additional education I know there's a lot of research showing that shocks to the system mm-hmm as a child and it sounds like your family had a lot of different shocks to the system are really influential downstream and employment education outcomes and so on it sounds as though your family is I guess a median example of that and a lot of ways yeah shocks you experience when you're young wrong they affect your parents and they affect you and the ultimately affect your children and in my case they have affected my nieces and nephews who are raised by my siblings and so so shelly and I my partner have been trying to interject but these are strong inertial pains essentially and it takes escape velocity at every generation even my nieces and nephews to lift them out and so you'll see more people in my extended family continue not to go to college then who go to college all right so let's drill down a little bit on education as a driver of economic success. Obviously the federal government is not in charge of education although it does have a hand on it in a number of channels so let's just take a couple examples that are problematic one. Is You know. US Educational Standards Compared to other rich countries. It's relatively quite quite poor and then you know higher. Education College is is problematic from a financial perspective from no others. We've seen massive massive college tuition debt skyrocketing so if you're pointing to education the the big driver of success it's very easy to point to those touch points as not failures outright but real problem points it would seem as though things are not moving in the right direction so make your best case that you and your colleagues at the. Fed Reserve have some sense of what to do because otherwise it feels like you know you're saying nice words and thinking nice thoughts but the evidence for successful outcomes isn't there we'll. I'm undaunted by unsuccessful pasts. I just meant to be harder for the future so so it's more than nice words though now the jury's out about whether we move the needle but we would quickly put the ones we've tried and didn't move the needle aside and start on something new you my go-to low income communities and not a single person in those communities says that a college degree isn't worth it so then you ask low income communities. What do we need to help your students get college ready. They can teach them the reading and writing and the arithmetic part of it what they need is the social fabric that supports those kids and allows them to see themselves in the future and so here in San Francisco we have variety of educational programs but one that we're really excited about right now is the first gen program and we're building virtual bridge for people between High School and college and in that were very influenced by the research of course she wouldn't be surprised that the most likely reason kids drop out in the first semester isn't the funding it's fitting in is not feeling like they belong and so we have over a hundred and fifty first gen employees and we're building this basically virtual posse coming up after the break we ask Mary Daly to name her favorite fed share of recent history and we find out why why it's so hard to read even the near future of the US economy. The big question I've been wrestling with is what's going to win the data or the mood. It's coming up up right after this freakonomics radio is sponsored by state farm state farm believes in strengthening communities where the challenge all state farm employees and agents to give back.