Hi Hal, All
Hal: I hope this gives us a start. I clearly don't expect you to dive into this tonight !!!!
I have started a "New Thread" for this. I hope folks respect it and not "clutter it" with other comments.
It took me a good hour to gather the initial posts that got this started with an interest in "completeness" and getting any with an "interest" on board.
I recognize from past posts there are widely divergent views out there so I wanted to be careful that we define things and keep the discussion "meaningful".
Here is the link again, to the Fed. Mandate article. This is the best "starting point" that I can come up with.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/mishkin20070410a.htm
I strongly suggest reading the entire article.
Below is a one paragraph excerpt that identifies the key points.
"According to this legislation, the Federal Reserve's mandate is "to promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates." Because long-term interest rates can remain low only in a stable macroeconomic environment, these goals are often referred to as the dual mandate; that is, the Federal Reserve seeks to promote the two coequal objectives of maximum employment and price stability. In the remainder of my remarks today, I will describe how these two objectives are consistent with our ultimate purpose of fostering economic prosperity and social welfare. I will then talk about some important practical challenges in implementing these goals."
END OF EXCERPT
-------
The term "social welfare" I believe DOES NOT MEAN WHAT MANY MAY INFER. A better choice of words would have been "Social Well Being" and I think that becomes clear if you read the article.
I will not clutter this post with my own comments. I will add them in a separate post.
What follows are the posts that got this started.
I included in [ comments that I though presented the fair/correct drift as the posts progressed without one having to wade through them all to get up to speed.
------
The list of prior posts:
The Beginning:
[I had to delete all of the tfc links to get this to post.
[You will have to start here and work down through the original thread if you want more than my included comments, which should be enough
http://tfc-forum.tradingcharts.com/forum/index.cgi/read/529461
wayne to forum Date: Thursday, 28 April 2011, at 4:06 p.m.
[comments on Dx, federal debt
lee to wayne Date: Thursday, 28 April 2011, at 4:42 p.m.
[lee lit the fire with the comments....
No argument at all with your comments !!!
The Dx may be "allowed to drop" until signs of Treasury sales show signs of weakening ???
I don't want to "start a Fed. argument" on the Forum but I think there are some "pretty talented folks" in there.
I think the message has been "sent" to the politicians that they had better get the deficit under control or there won't be much the Fed. can do. I think the "recovery" has gone pretty much the way the Fed. indicated it would. I think that is quite remarkable.
BUTTTT, as noted in your "Wally" post, Crude is taking it's toll. The Fed. has no control over the price of Crude and now the damage is starting to show up.
If the politicians don't get their act together, I don't have much hope. And if our bond rating gets downgraded the "ball game is over" in my opinion !!
hal to lee Date: Thursday, 28 April 2011, at 5:33 p.m.
[hal fires back: Fed could bring crude down by announcing end to qeii
[AND WE ARE OFF TO THE RACES !!!!!
lee to hal Date: Thursday, 28 April 2011, at 7:53 p.m.
[I have to get back later, posted link to Fed. Mandate article
[I should have added, but didn't ... NOT FED'S JOB TO EXPLICITLY CONTROL PRICE OF CRUDE
lee to hal Date: Friday, 29 April 2011, at 7:09 a.m.
[Comment on basis for/of discussion
hal to lee Date: Friday, 29 April 2011, at 7:28 a.m.
[Comment on - may be good discussion but after days trading
lee to hal Date: Friday, 29 April 2011, at 7:51 a.m.
[Agreed, lets try over the weekend
--------
This is where we left it, I started new thread "Federal Reserve Mandate"
--------
Hopefully we can make some sense of this issue.
Thanks, Lee
