In the absence of a compromising let alone cooperating Congress, quantitative easing was the next best thing. Still waiting for a Republican jobs bill....

The fed chair is a appointee of the president. If you don't believe that policy is driven from the top down , I have some magic beans to sell you

Just as the President appoints Supreme Court justices, yet they do not always side with the President who appoints them in all rulings. The President has vast and overreaching powers IMO, but does not control the Fed. He appointed a like-minded chair perhaps, but she was hardly his puppet.

@Matticus

"ssorenn: The Federal Reserve controls interest rates, not the President..."

Yes, but the FED has connections to the federal govt ever since we had the CFPB put into place (supposed to be independent), which Obama created and was found unconstitutional by it's connections to the executive. During that time, we saw a LOT of liberals move into the reserve system also, and Obama definitely has based policy around rates (which have stayed very low for very long, covering Obama's faults)

"The bubble is suspected by some, but if it exists and bursts, would be quite less painful than the Great Recession."

Very true, but there definitely are still some unregulated industries that are inflated. The PROBLEM is gov't debt at current interest rates is 8% of our federal budget, and we're at VERY low interest rates. If they get back to bush-era level rates, Obama would have had to either 1. inflate the economy 2. raise taxes 3. massive gov't cuts. rates stayed low, and he's survived

"The wealth gap was further widened by the fallout from the Great Recession, not liberal economics."

well, one could argue the nature of the subprime mortgages were taking exceedingly high risks, thinking that pushing more and more product into the economy would only yield profits. It was VERY liberal in design, though not from a purely gov't perspective.

"The wealthy had the cash flow to take advantage of the steep economic down turn. Do you know monetary policy?"

The wealthy did take advantage, and it helps that Obama bailed out the banks. MOSt people point at 700 billion dollars being handed out, "but it's been paid back" no, only the banks and dividends have been payed back, and even then, it's still been a massive increase in money

@JK

"In the absence of a compromising let alone cooperating Congress, quantitative easing was the next best thing."

what is this in relation to? i can't find what you're directing commenting on

"Still waiting for a Republican jobs bill...."

that's because at least some Republicans have the common sense not to crowd out markets and produce inefficient products at taxpayer's expense

@Matticus

look up the CFPB and all of it's scandals and lawsuits it lost, and look at its connection to the FED, and then apologize to @ssorenn

And fools are easily parted from their money. Believe what you will

$700 Billion vs quite possibly the complete failure of the monetary system. I think we forget how close we came to it all crumbling down.

700B what. The fed put 4.5T on the balance sheet.

I would have been painful but I could have made an arguememt that a total collapse would have been better than TARP into 4 QEs.

I'm not sure most here understand what the lasting effects of zero interest rate policy is and that the world has multiple economies that jave negative interest rates.

President Obama may have very well had more influence than I knew over the FED. Ssorenn still placed all of the blame in Obama's lap, which is simply incorrect. I don't even enjoy most of what Obama's policies have done to the US over the past 8 years. Not a fan of people dumping all of the blame on an individual, even if he is the most powerful person in our government. If Trump's next 4 years go wrong, it won't all be his fault. He will receive all of the blame, and then I will defend him when/if appropriate.

Ogion touts the stock market. It's a completely lagging indicator. We have had to slowest recovery in history based on GDP growth. ogion is a fool in his own little corner. Wait till the dollar strengthens and all the foreign monies bail out of the real estate market and his presious Metin County home plummets in value. He will try to blame the right still. This is not left or right. Econ 101.

Merin^

Of course, the stock market in 2016 is not at all the result of Obama, but the debt is. Brilliant. Funny how everything bad is Obama's fault but everything good is Bush's. And I'm in my own corner. And I don't own an home in "Merin' county of any other.

Frankly the stock market isn't that important but it is one of many thngs that were massively stronger under Obama than Bush. The point is that any fair read doesn't make Ovama out to be the "worst president ever". A slow recovery is still vastly better than Bush record. No question. And I also notice that you ignore that work in health care and climate change

And speaking of Econ 101, if foreign money is bailing on the US that would taken the dollar and not strengthen it. In fact, blaming the right would make sense since you know who wants to strengthen the dollar? That's right: Donald Trump. Go figure

Also @Matticus

the big banks failing would not be an end to the monetary system, it'd kill off the wasteful, inefficient fat cats, and let smaller banks rise up the ranks.

also, @ssorenn is right overall monetary expenditures were 4.5 trillion dollars, much of which was entirely excessive

also this is my fault, when I blame Obama, i blame the regime centered around him. he specifically wasn't smart enough to blame for all the problems created

@Ogion

given that the government was the direct and final will over the national debt, and the stock market is based of businesses... and Obama is in government and not in businesses...

yes that is funny how that work

OH SHIT I FORGOT

Ogion muted me.

THAT EXPLAINS SO MUCH!!!

he's not very good at sourcing

https://docs.google.com/document/d/12xNqkdz8NRTwQ079Ln8knOUpGI4TuVz1zZI8rkeEQq4/edit

Ogion likes to make up things----i have never brought up bush.

He also doesn't understand monetary policy. He thinks dollar strengthens and weakens not on whether people put money in or out of the stock or real estate market.

@ssorenn

it's kind of fun because ever since he muted me, now i can insult him and NOT get into an argument!

We should build a new Jerusalem in the middle of a Mexican desert and call it "Nerusalem"

The labor force participation rate is near a multi-decade low (https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet) with interest rates at a historic low (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/interest-rate) and GDP growth over the past 5 years being below the historical average (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growth), and yet the market has a historically high p/e ratio of 25.43 (http://www.multpl.com/table). Yep, 10/10 would say there is a 0% chance the asset markets are overpriced, in an overextended bull market that is now the second largest ever (http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/29/investing/stocks-2nd-longest-bull-market-ever/), and ready to collapse at a moments notice. To do so would be completely absurd. The current state of the economy is nothing less than stellar, right?

Not sure what point your making

The point I am making is that the market is not always reflective of how the economy is doing and that this economy we have had for the past 8 years has been a bad one, not a good one, despite the performance of the asset markets. Some in this thread were attempting to merit the good performance of the economy under Obama as one of his achievements, while I was pointing out that the notion the economy was good under him is actually incorrect.

We've had an atrocious economy. The worst and slowest recovery in history. That with zero interest rates. Inflated asset prices is because the fed printed trillions of dollars coupled with the low rates. With dovish fed buying assets and a devalued dollar, it drives up hard asset prices. I'd argue inflation has been rampet for years but the fed discounts food and energy. All commodity prices are traded in US dollar. Hence their values are higher,specifically precious metals. There's been tepid at best wage growth.

Yes, the QE has definitely contributed to the market's rapid rise in value. As for inflation, they do publish multiple inflation values. The one you mention is the core rate of inflation where food and energy are excluded because their prices change so much so quickly, but inflation rates with all items included are available, and have they have actually been lower than the core rate of inflation in recent years because the energy sector has been in a bear market with the prices of oil, natural gas, and coal all going lower for years until recently. Median household income is still below where it was before the Great Recession began (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N).

My point of inflation was centered around the cost of gas and milk that hit the every day consumer. That with stagnant wage growth is a whamy on the populous

Oh, for sure.

Why aren't you talking about how much of a bastard Thomas Jefferson was?

Oil and presious metal have been in a decline for several reasons. One being the strength of th US dollar and the premise that higher interest rates will stagnate the economy further. That and troubles in the euro zone and Brexit will keep a lip on possible world output for some time.

Thomas Jefferson = Jamiet99uk??