Archive for the ‘legislation’ Category
Representative John Campbell (R-CA), Chairman of Financial Services Subcommittee on Monetary Policy and Trade, discusses new legislation to eliminate “Too Big to Fail” with Peter Cook on Bloomberg Television’s “In the Loop with Betty Liu”. Campbell’s legislation, the Systemic Risk Mitigation Act, would prevent future taxpayer-funded bailouts of large financial institutions that currently pose a systemic risk.
Federal Reserve Governor Daniel Tarullo, Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher and Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH ) have all said recently that the 2010 financial reform legislation better known as Dodd-Frank has failed to reduce the size of the big banks even though its law promised to do just that. Now Republican Congressman John Campbell of California has introduced his own bill to deal with too big to fail institutions.
Its purpose: to protect the banking system while eliminating the implicit guarantee of a government bailout paid for by taxpayers.
Campbell told Yahoo’s Lauren Lyster:
Campbell’s Systemic Risk Mitigation Act would require banks with at least $50 billion in assets to hold additional capital, including at least 15% of their assets in long-term bonds. If a bank were to fail, those bondholders would have to take of loss of at least 20% on their investment, which could pressure banks to reduce their debt and protect taxpayers from a government bank bailout.
“Having investors with a lot of skin in the game is a better regulator than having a government regulating watchdog,” says Campbell.
His bill would also repeal the Volcker Rule which is included in Dodd-Frank and bans proprietary trading. Campbell says the Volcker rule wouldn’t be necessary with the additional capital banks would be required to hold but it “wouldn’t hurt things if you left it in.”
While this is a good start, it doesn’t go far enough. 15% capital isn’t sufficient, not for the kind of leverage we know that the TBTF banks have been using. It is imperative that everyone understand that the banks have ZERO capital requirements, which lack of requirements were implemented courtesy of Henry Paulson and with the passage of EESA and TARP. At minimum, what is needed is the restoration of Glass-Steagall, which would ensure that banks could not co-mingle commercial banking and investment banking or preferably implementation of Karl Denninger’s One-Dollar-Of-Capital. To do anything less, is nothing but an exercise in futility.
How many people know that today is not the birthday of our nation in terms of the war of Independence, nor the day on which peace was achieved, free of British rule?
Rather, it was the day that a handful of brave men stood and affixed signatures to a document we call The Declaration of Independence.
I wish to quote it, in full, and annotate it in the context of the present day.
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
It is only fair to tell people why you are driven to tell the present government to “Go to Hell“, and challenge them that should they refuse to let you be in peace, you will, if necessary, endeavor to send them to Hell before they do so to you.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
It was held that you are not entitled to happiness — only its pursuit. That is, there is no guarantee of success in human endeavors. Indeed, it is often the attempt that is as rewarding, or nearly so, as the achievement itself.
— That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
Government has no power that the people do not consent to. Any such taking of power by government is illegitimate.
— That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Should government take powers without consent of the governed the people have the right to rise and alter or abolish that government, through peaceful means if possible, but through force if necessary.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
Men and women are, for the most part, unwilling to commit to the most-serious of change and its potential consequence. This is a good thing and aligns with the best outcomes for the people in the general sense.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
It is not just the right of the people to rise and demand that government cease abusive practices, it is the duty of the people to do so.
— Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
Gee, where have we seen this of late? Barclays anyone? Rigging LIBOR is just part of it. Despite claims that “Nobody committed any crimes” (ala Gary Johnson and President Obama) the fact of the matter is that the government has jailed people for rigging the price of cardboard boxes! Yet banksters have laundered money for drug cartels, ripped off each and every resident in an entire county (Jefferson County), committed hundreds of thousands of admitted counts of perjury with robosigned and otherwise defective affidavits and assignments knowingly presented to courts (which, incidentally, they’re still doing in that they’re presenting affidavits claiming that a particular entity owns a given mortgage while fully aware that they don’t) and now, it turns out, they riggedthe largest interest-rate market base used in worldwide commerce, in concert and intentionally so as to skim off profits from their derivative contracts.
The common word for most of this, under any rational examination, is RACKETEERING. RICO is a law that was put in place to bust gangsters who conspired among themselves and with others to rig various contracts and steal from people on a pretty-much continual basis.
But when banks do it nobody will jail them.
And incidentally, Barclays has suggested that The Fed knew the banks were rigging LIBOR and did nothing about it. This means that under any reasonable interpretation of the law, if this is true then The Fed was complicit and therefore the institution and those within it should be held personally and corporately to criminal account.
Or how about GlaxoSmithKline, which was just fined $3 billion for a long-running scam in which it both promoted drugs off-label and failed to report safety data that put people at risk?
I note that $3 billion is less than 3% of GSK’s market capitalization and under 7% of one year’s revenue. Despite pleading guilty to criminal charges not one individual has been charged or imprisoned and the firm can, and will, simply add the cost of the fines to the price of its products, forcing you, the patient, to pay for its criminal conduct.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
You mean like Obamacare?
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
What need of a Representative House (or Senate, in this case) when you simply ignore the constitutional requirements thereof (specifically, to pass a budget)?
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
Ditto. Oh, as for those invasions, what of the TSA’s invasions of the people?
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
Who needs to be naturalized? In the US you need only steal your way into America and under Obama you can then steal from everyone else — forever! Oh, and lest you think this is just a Democrat problem, you’re wrong. The Republicans won’t put a stop to this crap either, and neither will Gary Johnson, allegedly-Libertarian, who thinks it’s just fine that 20 million people began their life in the United States by committing a criminal act as their very first act upon entry to the country!
What a nice standard we set for expected behavior (and we then are surprised when thuggery becomes, for many, a way of life?)
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
What the hell happened with Roberts? I don’t recall anyone (yet) suggesting articles of Impeachment for him, although he damn well ought to be for his torture of the Constitution in upholding PPACA.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.
You mean like the TSA?
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
You mean like the Drug Warriors who have raided state-licensed and approved marijuana dispensaries?
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.
Not yet….. I don’t think, anyway.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
“What is the UN” for $200 Alex.
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
Oh, gee, the list here is too long to compile in a reasonable form. NDAA, The Patriot Act, PPACA, TARP and on and on and on.
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
What is forcing States to assent to everything from driver license requirements (e.g. REAL ID) to drinking ages (21) to the former “double nickel” speed limit?
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
See above, plus PPACA.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
You mean like raiding the wrong house, which can and occasionally has resulted in the cops shooting innocent people?
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Yeah, the people said 300:1 NO to TARP. John McCain and Obama, along with Congress, said this to the people:
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
So let’s see….
Theft and fraud en-masse, at a scale dwarfing all other crime by citizens, committed by banksters and other corporate interests, including drug companies.
Intentional and admitted criminal conduct by both in multiple cases, including criminal conduct that has caused death and severe injury.
Intentional concealment by government of unlawful activity (“Gunwalker”) that also has led to death of innocent citizens and peace officers.
Sexual assaults on a daily basis of persons doing nothing more than attempting to travel, without articulable suspicion or probable cause (the TSA.)
and much more (like we need more?)
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
Hmmmm…. not yet.
And, I hope, not necessary.
But on this 4th Day of July, 2012, let us all remember exactly how America was born. Tax rates that were one tenthof today’s, along with usurpations and abuses that were trivial compared to that suffered by the people of this nation today on a daily basis.
Yet those usurpations of 1776, truly trivial in scope and oppression compared to that which we suffer today, led the people to rise and demand that government cease and desist, and when it refused, they took arms and expelled that government, replacing it with one of their own design.
In 1776 nobody was imprisoned for consuming (or growing) a plant.
In 1776 nobody had their breasts and genitals groped simply because they attempted to travel within the boundaries of what was to become The United States.
In 1776 nobody questioned your right to ride a horse or operate a carriage for your own personal conveyance upon the roads of the day.
In 1776 you decided when to pay a doctor, and you were never compelled to pay for someone else’s attendance by a physician or stay in a hospital.
In 1776 government did not routinely protect the firms responsible for more than one quarter of all gross domestic product from ruin and personal imprisonment of their officers and employees when they committed gross offenses of theft, fraud and even caused death among the population.
In 1776 nobody needed a permit to fashion, sell, or possess a firearm.
In 1776 nobody needed permission to speak, or to assemble upon the public square.
In 1776 nobody was forced to pay someone else’s debts to which they had not consented or were related to.
Finally, in 1776, free of all of these usurpations of today, the American middle class was alive and well, and our nation-to-be enjoyed a standard of living that, on a comparable basis, was arguably the best in the world. Free enterprise provided true upward mobility for anyone of sufficient desire, wealth was for the most part yours to keep once lawfully acquired with tax rates a tiny fraction of what is assessed today, the right to protect oneself and one’s family was unquestioned and the right to personal travel using the means common to the day on an unfettered basis formed a key part of the mobility and vitality of our nation-to-be’s people and business ventures.
Lacking all of the technological marvels of the day and having none of the modern conveniences and knowledge of science, medicine and industry, we were far more free, far more prosperous on a comparable basis and actually had a reason to look forward to the next morning with more, rather than less, freedom in our future.
So as you gather around the BBQ, play on your boats and drink beer with your friends on this 4th of July, please take the time to contemplate what life was really like in 1776, what it is really like today, and why you, I, and everyone else continue to consent to the abuses and usurpations that are shoved down our throats by the thugs in both industry and government.
Perhaps that will add a bit of sobriety to your celebration.
The USSC upheld Obamacare by, basically, twisting the Constitution into a pretzel, crapping on it, whizzing on that and then eating it.
Finding first that the Commerce Clause bars the government from compelling one to enter into commerce, the analysis then turned to whether there was any way to save the constitutionality of the act.
The justices found one.
They re-interpreted the penalty clause as a tax.
And of course, Congress can levy taxes.
That’s the path taken by this tortured process — a path that could only be dreamed up if someone had already determined the outcome they sought instead of being an independent jurist.
The real surprise, however, is that Chief Justice Roberts, believed to be a strict constructionist on the court, managed to not only agree with this piece of tortured logic he found and constructed it as the opinion is his!
So much for judicial restraint and strict construction!
You really ought to read the dissent that starts on page 127 of the opinion. Justice Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy and Alito eviscertate the majority, saying in part:
Here, however, Congress has impressed into servicethird parties, healthy individuals who could be but are not customers of the relevant industry, to offset the undesirable consequences of the regulation. Congress’ desire to force these individuals to purchase insurance is motivatedby the fact that they are further removed from the marketthan unhealthy individuals with pre-existing conditions, because they are less likely to need extensive care in the near future. If Congress can reach out and command even those furthest removed from an interstate market to participate in the market, then the Commerce Clause becomes a font of unlimited power, or in Hamilton’s words, “the hideous monster whose devouring jaws . . . spare neither sex nor age, nor high nor low, nor sacred nor profane.” The Federalist No. 33, p. 202 (C. Rossiter ed. 1961).
What little was left of The Constitution died today, June 28th, 2012.
And incidentally, the math on federal health spending coupled with this decision means that by the time a 55 year old man reaches 85 (his life expectancy, roughly) the Federal government will be attempting to spend roughly $15 trillion a year on health care.
(No it won’t, no we won’t get that far, and the detonation of our government on the fiscal side is now assured — or your health care will be sacrificed. This is mathematics, not politics.)
This is a short enough bill (H.R. 4966) to print in full:
H.R.4966 — Sequester Replacement Act of 2012 (Introduced in House – IH)
HR 4966 IH
H. R. 4966
To amend the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to replace the sequester established by the Budget Control Act of 2011.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
April 27, 2012
Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Budget, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
To amend the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to replace the sequester established by the Budget Control Act of 2011.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘Sequester Replacement Act of 2012′.
SEC. 2. CONTINGENT EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Act and the amendments made by it shall take effect upon the enactment of the Act provided for in section 201 of H. Con. Res. 112 (112th Congress) and this Act and the amendments made by it shall have no force or effect if such Act provided for in such section is not enacted.
SEC. 3. PROTECTING VETERANS PROGRAMS FROM SEQUESTER.
Section 256(e)(2)(E) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 is repealed.
SEC. 4. ACHIEVING $19 BILLION IN DISCRETIONARY SAVINGS.
(a) Revised 2013 Discretionary Spending Limit- Paragraph (2) of section 251(c) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 is amended to read as follows:
‘(2) with respect to fiscal year 2013, for the discretionary category, $1,047,000,000,000 in new budget authority;’.
(b) Discretionary Savings- Section 251A(7)(A) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 is amended to read as follows:
‘(A) FISCAL YEAR 2013-
‘(i) FISCAL YEAR 2013 ADJUSTMENT- On January 2, 2013, the discretionary category set forth in section 251(c)(2)(A) shall be decreased by $19,104,000,000 in budget authority.
‘(ii) SUPPLEMENTAL SEQUESTRATION ORDER- On January 15, 2013, OMB shall issue a supplemental sequestration report for fiscal year 2013 and take the form of a final sequestration report as set forth in section 254(f)(2) and using the procedures set forth in section 253(f), to eliminate any discretionary spending breach of the spending limit set forth in section 251(c)(2)(A) as adjusted by clause (i), and the President shall order a sequestration, if any, as required by such report.’.
SEC. 5. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 314 OF THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET AND IMPOUNDMENT CONTROL ACT OF 1974.
Section 314(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 is amended to read as follows:
‘(1) IN GENERAL- The chair of the Committee on the Budget of the House of Representatives or the Senate may make adjustments as set forth in paragraph (2) for a bill or joint resolution, amendment thereto or conference report thereon, by the amount of new budget authority and outlays flowing therefrom in the same amount as required by section 251(b) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
‘(2) MATTERS TO BE ADJUSTED- The chair of the Committee on the Budget of the House of Representatives or the Senate may make the adjustments referred to in paragraph (1) to–
‘(A) the allocations made pursuant to the appropriate concurrent resolution on the budget pursuant to section 302(a);
‘(B) the budgetary aggregates as set forth in the appropriate concurrent resolution on the budget; and
‘(C) the discretionary spending limits, if any, set forth in the appropriate concurrent resolution on the budget.’.
SEC. 6. TREATMENT FOR PAYGO PURPOSES.
The budgetary effects of this Act and any amendment made by it, and the budgetary effects of the Act provided for by section 201 of H. Con. Res. 112 (112th Congress), shall not be entered on either PAYGO scorecard maintained pursuant to section 4(d) of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010.
SEC. 7. ELIMINATION OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2013 SEQUESTRATION FOR DEFENSE DIRECT SPENDING.
Any sequestration order issued by the President under the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to carry out reductions to direct spending for the defense function (050) for fiscal year 2013 pursuant to section 251A of such Act shall have no force or effect.
Mr. Ryan, you are a festering pustule on the ass of Congress that your constituents would do well to banish to the dustbin of history.
You repeatedly claim to propose a so-called “budget” that “controls” spending, you take part in amandatory sequester that is intended to force Congress to deal with runaway deficit spending, you go on CNBC and everywhere else and pretend to be fiscally responsible and then you introduce this legislation, which effectively repeals the very law you trumpeted as necessary, proper and good, and should this pass you will blow a $500 billion deficit hole next year in the budget with this one-page piece of legislation.
To S&P, Moody’s and Fitch: If you do not downgrade the US Credit Rating now, citing this as the direct cause as the US Congress has demonstrated that they are intentionally dishonest and have absolutely no intention to ever get control of our out-of-control spending then you are utterly worthless.
My God, there’s intelligent life in The House.
I’m talking about H.R. 4180, which you can find on http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php or your favorite other site (sorry, no direct link as Thomas has a hissy with that.)
I have been pointing out for the last five years, since I started writing The Ticker, that asset price inflation is in fact inflation and that due to the monetary system we have (along with all other modern economies) that issue money as debt instruments you can measure actual monetary inflation trivially because we track all debt instruments.
That is, one need only look at the Fed Z1 to find out how much “moneyness” is in the system. One need look at the GDP statistics to determine the total value of all goods and services sold in the United States.
Since MV = PQ by definition it is thus trivially easy to determine the degree of monetary inflation, that is, the rate at which the expansion of “money” exceeds that of aggregate production.
Here it is:
Note that The Fed claims to have an “excellent record” on price stability. But inflation is not all consumer prices — it is all prices — and asset prices are prices. The Fed just intentionally ignores that little issue.
If you though the early 1980s were bad on inflation you’re delusional — you’ve been screwed, blued and tattooed with much-worse inflation for the last 20 years. It just came in places you thought you liked — such as your house. The problem is that all inflation is in fact debasement of purchasing power and it’s all bad, not good, in the end. When it shows up in assets the negative side is deferred but not avoided.
By the way, you’ve seen the same chart in a slightly different form a lot in the Ticker; it’s found here:
Here’s the problem — nobody in their right mind will make those sorts of loans — that is, credit expansion — on a sound basis. There is no set of assets to pledge against said expansion. By definition such an expansion is fraudulent and is functionally equivalent in the economy as counterfeiting of the nation’s currency.
Instead of resolving the problem by forcing those who had issued fraudulent credit in the 1990s to eat their bad loans we instead blew another bubble, this time in housing, with even bigger and more-fraudulent loans. And when that blew up in 2007 and 2008 we then “decided” to have the federal government take on more and more debt to prevent the debt bubble from deflating, transferring the fraudulent credit from the private sector where it should have remained and been allowed to blow up the issuers and takers of said bogus loans to the government’s balance sheet where the taxpayer became directly liable for same.
So now we have HR 4180, which has a nice passel of co-sponsors incidentally (31 at last count) which says, among other things:
The Congress finds the following:
(1) Monetary policy can only affect the level of employment in the short term because nonmonetary factors determine the level of employment in the long term. At best, the Federal Reserve may temporarily increase the level of employment through monetary policy, but such efforts risk the possibility of price inflation and increased business cycle volatility in the future. However, the Federal Reserve can achieve price stability in the long term through monetary policy. Price stability is desirable because both price inflation and price deflation damage the U.S. economy. Therefore, to maximize long-term economic growth and achieve the highest sustainable level of real output and employment, price stability should be the objective of monetary policy.
(2) Countries whose central bank has a single mandate for price stability generally have a better record of achieving stable prices than countries whose central bank has a mandate that gives equal weight to other objectives such as maximum employment or low interest rates.
(3) In general, an overly accommodative monetary policy inflates both asset prices and prices for goods and services. However, an overly accommodative monetary policy may sometimes cause a misallocation of capital that inflates asset prices disproportionately, creating unsustainable bubbles in asset prices, while prices indices for goods and services do not register significant price inflation. When asset bubbles burst, many investments must be liquidated at considerable cost to the U.S. economy in terms of lower real output and employment.
(4) Price stability cannot always be measured solely through price indices for goods and services since such indices exclude changes in asset prices.Therefore, the Federal Reserve should monitor (A) the prices of, and the expected returns from, major asset classes (including equities, residential real estate, commercial and industrial real estate, agricultural real estate, gold and other commodities, corporate bonds, U.S. Government bonds, State and local government bonds, and other securities), (B) the value of the U.S. dollar relative to other currencies, and (C) the value of the United States dollar relative to gold, as metrics to determine whether the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy is consistent with long-term price stability.
I’ll only disagree with one point — Gold is not a separate asset class as it is a commodity. Therefore, there is no reason to separate it out and in fact doing so is an error.
But other than that, yep.
The bill then goes on to mandate the inclusion of asset prices in the Fed’s definition of “stable prices” and formally establish and disseminate in semi-annual testimony to Congress the means by which compliance with the mandate is being monitored and its success.
There’s more to like in this bill, but that’s plenty to start your Tuesday reading assignment.
And once you’ve done so, get on the horn and insist that your Representative co-sponsor and demand passage of this legislation.
Oh, incidentally, one name not on the list of co-sponsors is Ron Paul, and none of the candidates for President, including the one who claims to be a Libertarian, Gary Johnson, has come out in support of this.
Gee, I wonder why not? Might it be because he’s nearly $200 large in the hole in his campaign against $11k in cash, a loan that no bankster in his right mind would make to a campaign with no assets behind the loan on other than outrageously-usurious terms were it not for the ability to counterfeit the nation’s currency?
PS: Thank you Kevin Brady (R-TX 8)
Discussion (registration required to post)
23 (ii) A declaration by the beneficiary made under the penalty of perjury stating that the beneficiary is the actual holder of the promissory note or other obligation secured by the deed of trust shall be sufficient proof as required under this subsection. A violation of this subsection (7)(a)(ii) is a class C felony as provided in RCW 28 9A.20.020 and 9A.20.021.
Bingo. If this bill becomes law and you file a document foreclosing in Washington State claiming to be the beneficiary of a given mortgage and really aren’t, because, for instance, the trust never had the actual mortgage tendered into it, you go to prison.
It’s about damn time.
The bill is SB6199 and if you live in Washington State you can find your State Reps here: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/Default.aspx
Discussion (registration required to post)