It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Pressuring the Fed to juice the economy as he seeks re-election, the president is toying with an unprecedented challenge to its independence.
https://nytimes.com/2019/06/20/us/politics/trump-fed-chairman-powell.htmlIf Mr. Trump did demote Mr. Powell and the latter filed a lawsuit challenging whether it was lawful to strip him of his chairmanship, the outcome could turn on the philosophy that a judge brings to the question of how to interpret statutes......A judge who analyzes the dispute based on the text alone would most likely rule that Mr. Trump could demote Mr. Powell, while a judge who thinks the statute should be analyzed in light of Congress’s intent of structuring the Fed to be able to resist political pressure could rule the other way.
© 2015 Mutual Fund Observer. All rights reserved.
© 2015 Mutual Fund Observer. All rights reserved. Powered by Vanilla
Comments
Makes the Watergate break-in seem trivial. At least Nixon outsourced his criminality to contractors. Obama corrupted the FBI leadership.
Is this what we have to look forward to here for the next 18 months?
Donnie is meddling where he shouldn't be and abusing his exec privileges once again. Remember this when you vote in 2020.
The Fed should not be another one of Donnie's political puppets. We have enough of those.
@JoeD - You are taking the bait that Edmond threw out there. That’s the purpose behind such a blatantly political and provocative post. That way we can all crawl in the gutter together and deal with substantive issues form a purely emotional and partisan standpoint. Problem with that? It serves to obscure the actual issues. Lots of smoke. Lots of anger and angst. Perhaps even hate. Nothing accomplished by way of understanding the issues or working out differences.
For better or worse, its always about taking sides here in the US - Republican or Democrat. If I thought we could really change the system, I'd be all for it.
Right now, we can't even be sure the 2020 Election will not be interfered with by other countries (cough, Russia) thanks to Donnie INVITING such mayhem. Especially since it works to his advantage.
How do you "work out differences" with people who would support that kind of garbage?
Yes, I'd put Donnie's head on a pike. You watch him act like he's Dictator of the US, and you watch his minions blindly follow, and you wonder what kind of country you are now living in.
Donnie belongs in jail. If he wasn't holding the title of POTUS, he probably would be incarcerated by now. The U.S. Congress is a joke. SOMEHOW, he gets away with murder (or close to it). Its sickening.
He will tilt the Fed's actions to benefit his 2020 re-election. And we sit idly by.
Are you seriously advocating taking to the streets with arms to resolve political differences?
Utter Nonsense.
Hey everybody. This is Mutual Fund Observer - Not Facebook.
But I'm not going to be gullible here. McConnell has made sure to get his GOP picks onto the Supreme Court. You can place your faith in the system and the US govt, but I keep my eyes wide open. "That's all we have" doesn't cut it.
Here we are more than a year before the election and this garbage is already infiltrating a board dedicated to investing. Expect more Edmunds to surface and attempt to sow discord here and everywhere online over the next 15 or so months. You and I have the choice of being drawn into pointless and counterproductive vitriol or ignoring such and continuing on with discussion of investing.
I feel that Trump is fine with the Supreme Court making decisions where he will be counting on a 5-4 vote in his favor, whatever the issue. You can believe that the SC would remain objective, but I am not so certain.
Would be interesting to see how that plays out.
I’m arguing for (1) adherence to the primary mission here which is investing, and (2) fair play and moderation when investment discussions inadvertently stray into the political realm. Perhaps we can’t exclude politics completely from the board, but we can at least be judicious, open-minded, tolerant and considerate in how we approach the political issues that arise.
I won’t have any more to say on this. I’ve sorely overstepped the bounds of topicality here. But, as I hope you can tell, I feel strongly about the issues.
Anyway, maybe MFO could re-consider the "ignore" feature for posters (although Ted would never allow it, as I recall from prior discussions).
Edmond's post fits that description.
Hank and I (and many other very long-time MFO posters) have in the past trudged through extended periods where gratuitous political attacks, instigated by posters such as Edmond, have threatened to destroy the civility and basic stability of MFO. Many of us believe that a posting environment which frequently devolves into heated exchanges of partisan bickering and propaganda does a serious disservice to MFO, resulting in the departure of posters who do not appreciate that type of atmosphere.
Hank is expressing his fear that by allowing a poster such as Edmond to set the tone of a posting thread, we set ourselves up to allow the hijacking of MFO, potentially creating that very sort of environment.
Faced with a post such as Edmond's, two choices are available: the first is to ignore it, perhaps flagging it as unacceptable so as to bring the poster to the attention of the moderators. It may take gentle nudges to engage the attention of the moderators, as they tend to run this shop with a very light hand. Past experience, though, suggests that if a poster proves to be predictably an instigator of trouble they will eventually be dealt with accordingly. The second option is to respond in kind.
I agree with hank that if the offensive post is entirely unrelated to financial affairs, the first option is preferred. However, if the post makes unsupportable allegations of a financial nature, my personal instinct is to engage in a point-by-point challenge and rebuttal. Trust me, there are quite a number of posters here, including hank, who are more than capable of holding their own in that sort of contest.
I certainly can't improve on hank's observation:
@JoeD... a personal note: I completely agree with you with respect to Mitch McConnell, the blatant partisan unfairness of his Supreme Court manipulations, and the dubious quality of future SC decisions which most likely will result from that. However I also agree with hank that that subject, standing alone without reference to a specific financially related topic, is inappropriate for this posting thread.
https://thereformedbroker.com/2019/06/21/yes-of-course-trump-could-fire-the-fed-chairman/
So, it seems, the Trumpster will get his man if he so chooses.
By the way, I liked Edmond's message. I believe others on the board have taken the same liberty in making comments, on their views, about Trump when they themselves are now calling out Edmond for making his.
I'm now off the board for a while to enjoy the rest of the summer.
I appreciate the many spirited and thoughtful comments above, many of which fall in the "oh, come on, let's not hop into the gutter with the rest of the web" camp. In support of that end, I've closed this discussion since the temptation to respond to some later silliness will be nearly overwhelming. (That's pretty much the reason I don't keep cookies anywhere in the house, since the routinely swamp my resolve.)
Take care. Ireland was great. Pictures to follow!
David