Democrat Boycotts? A New Way Of Doing Business In D.C.?

[WhiskeyGirl]

Democrats Boycott House Hearing Critical of Fed Policy   

The House Domestic  Monetary Policy and Technology Subcommittee concluded in hearings March 17 — apparently boycotted by committee Democrats —  that the Federal Reserve Bank's inflationary policies were hurting retirees at the expense of the economy's financial sector. The House Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology Subcommittee is chaired by Representative Ron Paul (R-Texas), a longtime critic of the Federal Reserve's inflationary policies.

The hearing on the Federal Reserve comes as the Fed reported this week that its balance sheet increased to a record $2.587 trillion in "assets," mostly U.S. Treasury debt purchased on the open market. The Federal Reserve purchase of government debt with money it prints out of thin air increases the supply of money — the traditional definition of inflation — and eventually leads to price inflation (the modern definition of inflation used by Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke).

"I really believe this is a critical hearing," House Financial Services Committee Chairman Walter Jones told subcommittee members attending. Jones went on to read to members of the Monetary Policy Subcommittee (which his committee oversees) a letter from a constituent in his district about the impact of inflation on retirees: "I have been retired from Ma Bell for 22 years and my pension has only increased once.... For people like us, in this situation, we are getting drained. The way things are going my wife and I will have to hope to die ... We cannot afford to live."

Meanwhile, illegal aliens and cheaters file for massive tax refunds using bogus Social Security numbers or TINs issued to them.

Dr. Salerno informed subcommittee members that monetary inflation does not conform to American ideas of fairness. "The key point is that prices and wages do not all increase at the same time during inflation. When the Fed initially expands the money supply, not everyone receives a share of the new money immediately. There is no Friedman-Bernanke helicopter that spreads the money evenly throughout the country." The "Friedman-Bernanke helicopter" remark refers to speeches by economist Milton Friedman and Bernanke where both speculate that a threat of deflation could be defeated by printing money and throwing it from helicopters. But Salerno noted that much of American history — from 1792 through the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 — saw mild deflation in consumer prices as well as strong industrial growth. People on a fixed income experienced a slight increase in their standard of living during those times. On the other hand, the Federal Reserve's deliberate policy of decreasing the value of the dollar hurts retirees and those on a fixed income. Salerno noted that these people do not receive the benefits of currency inflation: "Of course, those living on fixed incomes such as pensions and life insurance annuities suffer a cruel and relentless decline of their living standards that is never reversed."

read more here - http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/economy/markets-mainmenu-45/6745-scholars-document-fed-financial-attacks-on-retirees-as-democrats-boycott-hearing

It's almost like the Fed and DC politicians want to destroy every dollar earned by generations of Americans - except those that take the money and invest big elsewhere...

[WhiskeyGirl]

In Thursday's hearing, Institute founder and chairman Lewis E. Lehrman stated: “Since the expansive Federal Reserve program of Quantitative Easing began in late 2008, oil prices have almost tripled, gasoline prices have almost doubled. Basic world food prices, such as sugar, corn, soybean, and wheat, have almost doubled. Commodity and equity inflation, financed in part by the Fed’s flood of excess dollars going abroad, has profound effects on the emerging markets. But in many emerging countries, food and fuel make up 25-50% of disposable income. Families in these countries can go from subsistence to starvation during such a Fed-fueled commodity boom.”

“Inequality of wealth and privilege in American society is intensified by the Fed-induced inflationary process. The subsidized banking and financial community, combined with an overvalued dollar -- underwritten by China -- have also submerged the manufacturing sector, dependent as it is on goods traded in a competitive world market. In a word, the government deficit and the Federal Reserve work hand in hand, perhaps unintentionally, to undermine the essential equity and comity necessary in a constitutional republic. Equal opportunity and the harmony of the American community cannot survive perennial inflation.”

Mr. Lehrman continued, “A dollar convertible to gold would provide the necessary Federal Reserve discipline to secure the long term value of middle income savings, to backstop the drive for a balanced budget. The gold standard would terminate the world dollar standard, by prohibiting official dollar reserves, and the special access of the government and the financial class to limitless cheap Fed and foreign credit. “

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/252101#ixzz1H0C32vXa



Who's looking out for the middle class?  Why does it seem that the rich are getting even richer under Obama?  Paid for by the burden placed on the middle class and hard working Americans?

[WhiskeyGirl]

Rising energy and commodity prices have stirred inflation worries around the world and criticism that the Fed's vast expansion of bank reserves to buy Treasuries has stoked price rises.

Paul argued at the hearing that inflation hits low- and middle-income wage earners harder than affluent people.

"If you destroy a currency you will destroy the middle class," said Paul, whose long-standing antipathy to the Fed had found little support until the recent crisis.

read more here - http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/17/usa-fed-ronpaul-idUSN1718391320110317

For some reason, the rich continue to get richer under Obama, and the middle class is losing everything...nothing for Main Street.

Obamanomics...

[WhiskeyGirl]

TARP Was No Win for the Taxpayers
Treasury's claim that the bank bailouts will return a profit ignores the other, more costly programs enabling the banks to repay their TARP funds.

...The Special Inspector General for TARP criticized Treasury in October for inadequately disclosing a change in its valuation methodology that reduced a $45 billion loss in AIG to $5 billion, making TARP losses appear smaller than they really are. This data manipulation is only part of a much larger problem with Treasury's representations regarding the supposed success of the bank bailout payments that lie at the heart of TARP.

The focus on repayment fails to consider the huge taxpayer costs from non-TARP programs that directly and indirectly enabled many of the large banks to repay their TARP funds. These intertwined programs, operated by the Treasury and the Federal Reserve, dwarf the size of TARP and lack its accountability.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that Treasury's bailout of the GSEs will cost the taxpayers approximately $380 billion through fiscal year 2021. If only one-fourth of CBO's estimate ultimately benefits TARP recipients and other financial institutions, taxpayers will have provided a subsidy to these institutions of approximately $100 billion, which is not accounted for under TARP.

The government's efforts inside and outside of TARP have sown the seeds for the next crisis and, unfortunately, last year's 2,319-page Dodd-Frank Act does nothing to fix these problems. Treasury must be more transparent regarding TARP. The real myth that the Treasury secretary should dispel is that TARP is a big win for the taxpayer.

read more here - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703899704576204383282043422.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Who's looking out for Main Street?  Where's my billion dollar bailout?  Maybe Obamacash will flow once the dollar is worth less than Charmin?