Better For Whom?

We've been saying for a long time the Fed made a conscious decision to screw savers. retirees and the COLA. The includes lots of the elderly and the poor.

Here's a recent quote from The Vice Chair Stanley Fischer. He sloughs it off as making choices. We agree. They definitely chose the wealthy over the poor. Millions of Baby Boomers are facing retirement, joining others. Plus people are living longer, another big problem for elites we will get into later. Fischer is probably a BB himself with one huge difference. He most likely has a decent retirement plan in place, not to mention access to what can only be called insider information, a privilege he will most likely enjoy until he dies.

Well, clearly there are different responses to negative rates. If you’re a saver, they’re very difficult to deal with and to accept, although typically they go along with quite decent equity prices. But we consider all that and we have to make trade-offs in economics all the time, and the idea is the lower the interest rate, the better it is for investors.”

The better it is for investors for sure, but the phony wealth effect it's suppose to engender is just that--bogus. Moreover, there is a certain callous indifference in his comment, part of the "we know best" meme. They know best for whom? This is just one of a multitude of reasons the people call for the Fed to be dismantled and not replaced by any such centralized government agency.

Here a link to the article and the thoughts of someone taking issue with Fischer's basic understanding how markets work. Read it for yourself and decide.

mishtalk.com/2016/09/03/fed-vice-chairman-admits-fed-sponsors-wealth-inequality/

Inflation is way worse than they've been telling us, jobs and economy the same. We're probably looking at some stagflation real soon. Meanwhile, these over paid bureaucrats continue to bluster, bumble and fumble.