There is a regular meeting of the "Governors" -- that decides our Economic Future -- a meeting that hardly ever gets any press. Thing is, these "Governors" aren't elected; these "Governors" often have "other interests" in mind, besides the gainfully employment of America's citizens ... afterall these governors already have a job; they already made it to ... that Top One Percent ...
What was striking about this vote was that all 5 governors voted for this measure obviously feeling that the potential benefits in the form of stronger growth and lower unemployment outweighed any risks of higher inflation. However 3 of the 5 voting bank president opposed the measure, apparently viewing the threat of inflation as being a greater concern than any possible growth and employment dividend.
This raises an obvious question about the interests being represented by the bank presidents. Inflation is especially bad news for banks because it reduces the value of their assets. On the other hand bankers may not be very concerned about unemployment. They have jobs, as is probably the case for most of their friends as well.
It is hard not to wonder whether the bank presidents voting against further steps to spur growth and reduce unemployment were acting in the best interest of the country as a whole or whether they were representing the banks in their district. If the latter is the case, then it is reasonable to ask why we are giving the banks a direct role in setting the country's monetary policy. There is no obvious reason that they should have any more voice in determining monetary policy than anyone else.
Why Do the Bankers Decide How Many People Will Be Unemployed?
by Dean Baker,
Center for Economic and Policy Research (
CEPR) --Sept 21 2011
Progressive Economist Dean Baker is musing about the motives of these ultimate Money-Changers, who cavalierly steer America's course, without much public awareness or oversight:
The Federal Reserve Board's Open Market Committee (FOMC)
Current Interest Rates
Primary Credit 0.75%
Secondary Credit 1.25%
Seasonal Credit 0.20%
Fed Funds Target 0.0 - 0.25%
Zero Percent Interest Target for their AAA Prime Customers -- Wall Street Bankers. Yep, that will solve everything ... as if.
These Fed Governors have their "interests and goals" -- thing is, those goals do not always sync up with yours (if you're among the 99%) ...
The governors are appointed by the president and approved by Congress for 14-year terms. [...]
The other members of the FOMC are the presidents of the 12 district banks. These presidents are essentially appointed by the banks in the district. All 12 district bank presidents sit in on the FOMC meeting, but only 5 vote at one time.
So the Federal Reserve's own "steering committee" routinely decides such weighty matters -- as to whether they should make it even cheaper to "borrow money" or should they focus their attention on reigning in that ever-present specter of "inflation"?
Apparently, they can't figure out how to fight BOTH at once. And apparently 0.75% interest rates are still too expensive for some of their best money-consuming customers.
Here's an idea Governors -- as long as you're printing wheel barrels full of money for AAA Banks to "loan out" again {wink, wink} -- Isn't there any way to earmark some of that hot cash, for companies that are actually planning to hire Americans?
Is there anyway -- to prevent those best banks from taking your "near-free money" from your discount teller window -- and "taking it down to the tracks and betting on the ponies again?"
Because Fed Banking Governors, you know, there already are Employment laws on the books, directing you to "connect the monetary policy with the Presidential economic policy."
And right now the Presidential economic policy is focused on putting Americans back to Work -- hey Fed, is there any way you could print a Trillion or two, to help fix the bridges, and roads, and schools, and airports, in the this Country. How about some of that EZ-credit from your magic Discount Window for some of these important "national interest" projects?
How about letting such Construction Firms, apply for some Quick Cash, at great rates? What do Wall Street Bankers add to this equation again?
Yes, there ALREADY are Laws on the Books -- for whenever Republicans, or the Private Sector, or Wall Street, are TOO SLOW to act towards meeting our National Priority -- to put Americans back to work again.
Senators Humphrey and Hawkins thought that keeping America Working, was important enough -- YES -- to pass a Law to forever encourage this as our National goal ... (they must have met the Bankers and Corporate greed, even then too.) ...
[...]
In the United States, the Humphrey-Hawkins Full Employment Act of 1978 allows the government to create a "reservoir of public employment" in case private enterprise does not provide sufficient jobs. These jobs are required to be in the lower ranges of skill and pay so as to not draw the workforce away from the private sector. However, the act did not establish such a reservoir (it only authorized it), and no such program has been implemented in the United States, though the unemployment rate has generally been above the rate (3%) targeted by the act.
A "Reservoir of Public Employment" ... that sounds pretty good,
But What are the "Triggers"??? ... er nothing, except the "Lack of Full Employment" and a Private Sector that is dragging its feet about Re-hiring ... Unemployed Americans!
Full Employment Act
The Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act (known informally as the Humphrey–Hawkins Full Employment Act), is an act of legislation by the United States government.
[...]
The Act set specific numerical goals for the President to attain. By 1983, unemployment rates should be not more than 3% for persons aged 20 or over and not more than 4% for persons aged 16 or over, and inflation rates should not be over 4%. By 1988, inflation rates should be 0%. The Act allows Congress to revise these goals over time.
If private enterprise appears not to be meeting these goals, the Act expressly allows the government to create a "reservoir of public employment." These jobs are required to be in the lower ranges of skill and pay to minimize competition with the private sector. [...]
In the fine print, from that link Full Employment Act ... this next legislative directive, should sync up with the President's stated employment goals ...
-- Requires the Chairman of the Federal Reserve to connect the monetary policy with the Presidential economic policy.
Hey, Fed Banking Governors obviously, what you're doing is barely working. So how about taking a serious look at your other fiscal responsibility, as spelled out by the Full Employment Act -- to steer the Economy, to reach Full Employment -- Why don't you set that, as one of your "Targeted Goals" (along with a 0% interest rate) for a change?
How about for once, by-passing the Wall Street middle-men Bankers, and earmark some cash that will actually put Americans BACK to Work? Do that -- and you'll see Economic Growth, like we haven't seen -- since the 90's ... and I don't remember too many people 'fretting about inflation' back in those boom years. Not many except the old-style Bankers, pre-Gramm-Leach-Bliley, which tore down those quaint Glass-Steagall barriers. ... and "freed the Bankers" to do terrifyingly great things ...
Can't wait to see what those Bankers do next ... hold on your underwear folks, they're working on some Credit Swap derivative, to leverage those too, rumor is.