Chairman Powell is now speaking to the Senate Banking Cmte. and, sadly, both sides of the aisle are asking the wrong questions.
Inflation is too hot, sure. But the Senators (and the public they represent) fail to understand that inflation represents the FIRST DERIVATIVE (1/12)
of price and interest rates represent the SECOND DERIVATIVE of price.
Thus, the Fed can only affect the 2nd & 3rd derivatives of price -- price being what the consumer actually complains about -- by the level and speed at which interest rates rise. (2/12)
These tools are necessarily quite blunt and difficult to apply.
Moreover, the Fed can only influence aggregate demand, not supply, business profitability or overall consumer confidence.
All of these issues are exclusively the realm of CONGRESS, which continuously fails (3/12)
on both sides of the aisle to properly manage SUPPLY by appropriate TAX, Spending and Microecomomic Regulation.
Congress fails, here, because of widely excessive partisanship and bickering principally coming from the DO-NOTHING, "never-tax-me", obstinate and ecomomically (4/12)
illiterate Republican Party.
On the other hand, the high inflation has also led to amazing increases in jobs and wages of the kind that hasn't been seen in over 40 years. And these increased jobs and wages tend to be very "sticky."
Thus, the Fed's goal is to temper the (5/12)
rise in prices by raising interest rates and reducing the money supply (i.e., buying back debt and "reducing the balance sheet"), in order to stem BUSINESS demand without at the same time allowing prices to continue to rise so fast that businesses decide to (6/12)
begin laying off employees in seriously large numbers -- which always signals the onset of a recession.
It is up to Congress to influence supply through appropriate TAX policy (raising taxes on some business lines and reducing taxes on others), as well as influencing (7/12)
profitability by Congress's SPENDING and TAX policies in given microecomomies (by setting Government spending policies and allocations, and by its tax policies).
And it's Congress's job to affect both supply & demand by its SPENDING policies, especially regarding (8/12)
INFRASTRUCTURE SPENDING & REGULATION which have the net effect of influencing the efficiency of American business & personal spending and, indirectly, of prices, wages and inflation over the very long term.
Here, the Republicans constantly badger Democrats on the issue of (9/12)
AGGREGATE TAX & SPENDING, which distracts from the real issues, above, and which confuses and benights the Public's understanding of what Government is actually for.
We have seen just how the insane levels of partisanship among the MAGA crowd have hurt us. (10/12)
It's high time for the rest of the cowardly, obsequious and pusillanimous #GOP/#GOPCowards to stiffen their spines, resist Trump & his many MAGgots, and work truly collegially with the Democrats to continue adjusting Federal SPENDING & TAX policies to limit inflation and (11/12)
bolster the economy, without also causing a recession.
It's always a very tricky proposition, given that food, oil and other energy prices are set by OPEC and international supply chain issues (i.e., Putin).
But Congress has ultimate responsibility, here, not the Fed. (12/12)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In keeping with Brown, Griswold, Roe, Casey, and Lawrence, all of SCOTUS' civil rights jurisprudence hangs on the principle that there must be a limit to the Government's interference in our private lives.
(1/23)
In Lawrence, SCOTUS wrote :
"These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime [e.g., love, procreation], choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. ..."
(2/23)
But right now, in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, SCOTUS is about to issue its final decision on the question, "Are all previability prohibitions on elective abortions unconstitutional?"
Reviewing J. Alito's [leaked] majority opinion, I have to say that the (3/23)
The issue of regulating guns is complex and much contested:
SCOTUS’ decisions in Heller and McDonald guarantee all American adults the right to own and “bear arms”, which SCOTUS has interpreted as the right to a personal self-defense using a common pistol. (01/21)
Many on the Right swear that they should be able to arm themselves with whatever gun they wish (not true, even under the 2A; see Heller). The Left, on the other hand, would often like to eliminate all handguns from the Nation (albeit not sporting and hunting rifles), (02/21)
intoning that this would surely reduce the terrible rate of crime & murder practiced, here.
The Right retorts that the only way to reliably stop a bad man with a gun is to proliferate as many guns as possible into the hands of good men: Essentially, that the MORE guns (03/21)
Here's what should be done to repeal & replace the 2nd Amendment:
1. Enact the 28th Amendment, guaranteeing the States the right to raise and control their own National Guards, setting minimal necessary constraints & outlawing "private militias", "posses" & vigilantes. (1/10)
Enact the 29th Amendment:
1. Every natural person legally residing in the United States & the Territories or Lands subject to its jurisdiction shall have the right to a meaningful self-defense.
2."Self-defense" means the protection, whether in the home or underway, (2/10)
of oneself, one's family, friends and/or associates, by the use of a single-shot, non-repeating, personal firearm, having a single magazine.
3. "Magazine" means a refillable container of ammunition holding no more than 10 rounds of ammunition. (3/10)