The Fed is a criminal organization that steals from the American people

[Toddsterpatriot]

So you're right for once. Congrats!

That you know of. Pay more attention.

Feel free to ping me the next time you're right.
I'll be glad to point out your error.

 

[Wilbur Right]

Feel free to ping me the next time you're right.
I'll be glad to point out your error.

Let's see. Kaz is a dipshit.

 

[eddiew]

Adding money to the money supply does not add value. Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10. No value was created.

No one but the left should hate the Fed more. When the government adds taxes, every time, they disproportionately tax the rich. The Fed printing money is a regressive tax because the "rich" have investments which compensate for the reduction in the buying power of a dollar.

The "poor" take the full hit because they spend what they earn, and every new dollar created by the Fed hits them in proportion to spending, which is higher for them.

If leftists actually believe what you say, and you grasped what the Fed does, you'd be the first to demand it's abolished. The reality though is you don't give a shit about the poor, you care about government power. Which is why you are the Fed's biggest advocate.

Once again you support what you say you oppose and fuck the people you claim to defend

And here I thought it was the republican do nothing congress

And here I thought

I doubt that. I guess there's a first time for everything, but I'd need to see proof.

Can we start with their refusal to put up the dough for infrastructure and add their idiocy in not agreeing to tax deals to get our trillions back from overseas?? and before I forget, not wanting to raise taxes on those easily affording it ,,billionaires??

We're talking about the Federal Reserve, snapperhead.

Obama's stimulus deal, passed by Dems only, didn't fix enough infrastructure?
What did he spend it on, blunts and 40s?

Which tax deal did Obama propose to get companies to repatriate overseas earnings?
Was it one that said, fuck you, the tax rate is 35%?

President Barack Obama's fiscal 2016 budget will seek new taxes on trillions of dollars in profits accumulated overseas by U.S. companies, and a new approach to taxing foreign profits in the future, but Republicans were skeptical of the plan on Sunday.

Reviving a long-running debate about corporate tax avoidance, Obama will target a loophole that lets companies pay no tax on earnings held abroad, the White House said. But his proposal was certain to encounter stiff resistance from Republicans.

In his budget plan to be unveiled on Monday, Obama will call for a one-time, 14 percent tax on an estimated $2.1 trillion in profits piled up abroad over the years by multinationals such as General Electric (GE.N), Microsoft (MSFT.O), Pfizer Inc (PFE.N) and Apple Inc (AAPL.O).

ADVERTISING
inRead invented by Teads
He will also seek to impose a 19 percent tax on U.S. companies' future foreign earnings, the White House said.

At present, those earnings are supposed to be taxed at a 35-percent rate, but many companies avoid that through the loophole that defers taxation on active income that is not brought into the United States, or repatriated.

The $238 billion raised from the one-time tax would fund repairs and improvements to roads, bridges, transit systems and freight networks that would replenish the Highway Trust Fund as part of a $478 billion package, the White House said.

The annual budget proposal is as much a political document as a fiscal roadmap, requiring approval from Congress. Given Washington's current political division, much of what will be laid out on Monday is unlikely to become law.

Obama's budget will set a spending target of $4 trillion for fiscal year 2016, including a $474 billion deficit, which would represent a manageable 2.5 percent of U.S. Gross Domestic Product, The New York Times reported on Sunday. The budget also includes $105 million for “trade adjustment assistance” to help workers who have been affected by free trade pacts, it said.

Obama's latest tax proposals are part of

 

[JimBowie1958]

We certainly don't want to stop American currency from going to China or India.
By the way, I can still charge $1.00 for a pencil if that extra currency doesn't get to the region where my business is located.

You an also keep prices from going up by 10% by expanding the economy and having 10% more pencils available, counterbalancing the increased money supply with increased commodity supply.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Adding money to the money supply does not add value. Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10. No value was created.

No one but the left should hate the Fed more. When the government adds taxes, every time, they disproportionately tax the rich. The Fed printing money is a regressive tax because the "rich" have investments which compensate for the reduction in the buying power of a dollar.

The "poor" take the full hit because they spend what they earn, and every new dollar created by the Fed hits them in proportion to spending, which is higher for them.

If leftists actually believe what you say, and you grasped what the Fed does, you'd be the first to demand it's abolished. The reality though is you don't give a shit about the poor, you care about government power. Which is why you are the Fed's biggest advocate.

Once again you support what you say you oppose and fuck the people you claim to defend

And here I thought it was the republican do nothing congress

And here I thought

I doubt that. I guess there's a first time for everything, but I'd need to see proof.

Can we start with their refusal to put up the dough for infrastructure and add their idiocy in not agreeing to tax deals to get our trillions back from overseas?? and before I forget, not wanting to raise taxes on those easily affording it ,,billionaires??

We're talking about the Federal Reserve, snapperhead.

Obama's stimulus deal, passed by Dems only, didn't fix enough infrastructure?
What did he spend it on, blunts and 40s?

Which tax deal did Obama propose to get companies to repatriate overseas earnings?
Was it one that said, fuck you, the tax rate is 35%?

President Barack Obama's fiscal 2016 budget will seek new taxes on trillions of dollars in profits accumulated overseas by U.S. companies, and a new approach to taxing foreign profits in the future, but Republicans were skeptical of the plan on Sunday.

Reviving a long-running debate about corporate tax avoidance, Obama will target a loophole that lets companies pay no tax on earnings held abroad, the White House said. But his proposal was certain to encounter stiff resistance from Republicans.

In his budget plan to be unveiled on Monday, Obama will call for a one-time, 14 percent tax on an estimated $2.1 trillion in profits piled up abroad over the years by multinationals such as General Electric (GE.N), Microsoft (MSFT.O), Pfizer Inc (PFE.N) and Apple Inc (AAPL.O).

ADVERTISING
inRead invented by Teads
He will also seek to impose a 19 percent tax on U.S. companies' future foreign earnings, the White House said.

At present, those earnings are supposed to be taxed at a 35-percent rate, but many companies avoid that through the loophole that defers taxation on active income that is not brought into the United States, or repatriated.

The $238 billion raised from the one-time tax would fund repairs and improvements to roads, bridges, transit systems and freight networks that would replenish the Highway Trust Fund as part of a $478 billion package, the White House said.

The annual budget proposal is as much a political document as a fiscal roadmap, requiring approval from Congress. Given Washington's current political division, much of what will be laid out on Monday is unlikely to become law.

Obama's budget will set a spending target of $4 trillion for fiscal year 2016, including a $474 billion deficit, which would represent a manageable 2.5 percent of U.S. Gross Domestic Product, The New York Times reported on Sunday. The budget also includes $105 million for “trade adjustment assistance” to help workers who have been affected by free trade pacts, it said.

Obama's latest tax proposals are part of

President Barack Obama's fiscal 2016 budget will seek new taxes on trillions of dollars in profits accumulated overseas by U.S. companies,

Lame duck says what?

 

[eddiew]

And here I thought it was the republican do nothing congress

And here I thought

I doubt that. I guess there's a first time for everything, but I'd need to see proof.

Can we start with their refusal to put up the dough for infrastructure and add their idiocy in not agreeing to tax deals to get our trillions back from overseas?? and before I forget, not wanting to raise taxes on those easily affording it ,,billionaires??

We're talking about the Federal Reserve, snapperhead.

Obama's stimulus deal, passed by Dems only, didn't fix enough infrastructure?
What did he spend it on, blunts and 40s?

Which tax deal did Obama propose to get companies to repatriate overseas earnings?
Was it one that said, fuck you, the tax rate is 35%?

President Barack Obama's fiscal 2016 budget will seek new taxes on trillions of dollars in profits accumulated overseas by U.S. companies, and a new approach to taxing foreign profits in the future, but Republicans were skeptical of the plan on Sunday.

Reviving a long-running debate about corporate tax avoidance, Obama will target a loophole that lets companies pay no tax on earnings held abroad, the White House said. But his proposal was certain to encounter stiff resistance from Republicans.

In his budget plan to be unveiled on Monday, Obama will call for a one-time, 14 percent tax on an estimated $2.1 trillion in profits piled up abroad over the years by multinationals such as General Electric (GE.N), Microsoft (MSFT.O), Pfizer Inc (PFE.N) and Apple Inc (AAPL.O).

ADVERTISING
inRead invented by Teads
He will also seek to impose a 19 percent tax on U.S. companies' future foreign earnings, the White House said.

At present, those earnings are supposed to be taxed at a 35-percent rate, but many companies avoid that through the loophole that defers taxation on active income that is not brought into the United States, or repatriated.

The $238 billion raised from the one-time tax would fund repairs and improvements to roads, bridges, transit systems and freight networks that would replenish the Highway Trust Fund as part of a $478 billion package, the White House said.

The annual budget proposal is as much a political document as a fiscal roadmap, requiring approval from Congress. Given Washington's current political division, much of what will be laid out on Monday is unlikely to become law.

Obama's budget will set a spending target of $4 trillion for fiscal year 2016, including a $474 billion deficit, which would represent a manageable 2.5 percent of U.S. Gross Domestic Product, The New York Times reported on Sunday. The budget also includes $105 million for “trade adjustment assistance” to help workers who have been affected by free trade pacts, it said.

Obama's latest tax proposals are part of

President Barack Obama's fiscal 2016 budget will seek new taxes on trillions of dollars in profits accumulated overseas by U.S. companies,

Lame duck says what?

what about his tax deal NOW trying to get the money out at much less than reg rates Why won't pubs go along ,,,,,,,,or are they the big business party and all this talk about the middle class is just bull shit?

 

[kaz]

Adding money to the money supply does not add value. Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10. No value was created.

No one but the left should hate the Fed more. When the government adds taxes, every time, they disproportionately tax the rich. The Fed printing money is a regressive tax because the "rich" have investments which compensate for the reduction in the buying power of a dollar.

The "poor" take the full hit because they spend what they earn, and every new dollar created by the Fed hits them in proportion to spending, which is higher for them.

If leftists actually believe what you say, and you grasped what the Fed does, you'd be the first to demand it's abolished. The reality though is you don't give a shit about the poor, you care about government power. Which is why you are the Fed's biggest advocate.

Once again you support what you say you oppose and fuck the people you claim to defend

And here I thought it was the republican do nothing congress

Doing nothing is the best thing a congress can do since everything they do is bad for the economy. I like how with W it was his fault, with Obama it's congress. Basically you accept no responsibility at all, do you, Slick?

 

[kaz]

That isn't the entire economy, prices rise in percentage of the money printed versus the total economy, not the Fed's balance sheet

The Fed multiplied their balance sheet by 500%. Prices did not rise 500%.
According to what you've posted here, that should be impossible.

Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10.

They added 400%. How much did the price of a pencil rise?

THE FED BALANCE SHEET IS NOT THE ECONOMY. Odd you quoted me then ignored what I said. Trying to help with your hearing

 

[kaz]

Adding money to the money supply does not add value. Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10. No value was created.

No one but the left should hate the Fed more. When the government adds taxes, every time, they disproportionately tax the rich. The Fed printing money is a regressive tax because the "rich" have investments which compensate for the reduction in the buying power of a dollar.

The "poor" take the full hit because they spend what they earn, and every new dollar created by the Fed hits them in proportion to spending, which is higher for them.

If leftists actually believe what you say, and you grasped what the Fed does, you'd be the first to demand it's abolished. The reality though is you don't give a shit about the poor, you care about government power. Which is why you are the Fed's biggest advocate.

Once again you support what you say you oppose and fuck the people you claim to defend

And here I thought it was the republican do nothing congress

And here I thought

I doubt that. I guess there's a first time for everything, but I'd need to see proof.

He didn't back it up either, did he, Toddster?

 

[g5000]

Adding money to the money supply does not add value. Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10. No value was created.

The problem with the crash is that the demand for pencils plunged. The pencil you bought for a dollar couldn't be sold for a nickel. The velocity of money slowed to a crawl. No one trusted that pencil you were selling wasn't balsa wood with no lead.

That's why the Fed printed more money. To try to get the velocity of money moving again and get pencils back up to at least 75 cents.

ZIRP is what is robbing the American people. Zero interest rates on your savings. You have to make astronomical carry trades, or invest in junk bonds, to make any money these days, and only the biggest financial firms can do that.

It's a huge bailout of the banks at the expense of every saver.

 

[kaz]

Adding money to the money supply does not add value. Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10. No value was created.

No one but the left should hate the Fed more. When the government adds taxes, every time, they disproportionately tax the rich. The Fed printing money is a regressive tax because the "rich" have investments which compensate for the reduction in the buying power of a dollar.

The "poor" take the full hit because they spend what they earn, and every new dollar created by the Fed hits them in proportion to spending, which is higher for them.

If leftists actually believe what you say, and you grasped what the Fed does, you'd be the first to demand it's abolished. The reality though is you don't give a shit about the poor, you care about government power. Which is why you are the Fed's biggest advocate.

Once again you support what you say you oppose and fuck the people you claim to defend

And here I thought it was the republican do nothing congress

And here I thought

I doubt that. I guess there's a first time for everything, but I'd need to see proof.

Can we start with their refusal to put up the dough for infrastructure and add their idiocy in not agreeing to tax deals to get our trillions back from overseas?? and before I forget, not wanting to raise taxes on those easily affording it ,,billionaires??

We're talking about the Federal Reserve, snapperhead.

Obama's stimulus deal, passed by Dems only, didn't fix enough infrastructure?
What did he spend it on, blunts and 40s?

Which tax deal did Obama propose to get companies to repatriate overseas earnings?
Was it one that said, fuck you, the tax rate is 35%?

President Barack Obama's fiscal 2016 budget will seek new taxes on trillions of dollars in profits accumulated overseas by U.S. companies, and a new approach to taxing foreign profits in the future, but Republicans were skeptical of the plan on Sunday.

Reviving a long-running debate about corporate tax avoidance, Obama will target a loophole that lets companies pay no tax on earnings held abroad, the White House said. But his proposal was certain to encounter stiff resistance from Republicans.

In his budget plan to be unveiled on Monday, Obama will call for a one-time, 14 percent tax on an estimated $2.1 trillion in profits piled up abroad over the years by multinationals such as General Electric (GE.N), Microsoft (MSFT.O), Pfizer Inc (PFE.N) and Apple Inc (AAPL.O).

ADVERTISING
inRead invented by Teads
He will also seek to impose a 19 percent tax on U.S. companies' future foreign earnings, the White House said.

At present, those earnings are supposed to be taxed at a 35-percent rate, but many companies avoid that through the loophole that defers taxation on active income that is not brought into the United States, or repatriated.

The $238 billion raised from the one-time tax would fund repairs and improvements to roads, bridges, transit systems and freight networks that would replenish the Highway Trust Fund as part of a $478 billion package, the White House said.

The annual budget proposal is as much a political document as a fiscal roadmap, requiring approval from Congress. Given Washington's current political division, much of what will be laid out on Monday is unlikely to become law.

Obama's budget will set a spending target of $4 trillion for fiscal year 2016, including a $474 billion deficit, which would represent a manageable 2.5 percent of U.S. Gross Domestic Product, The New York Times reported on Sunday. The budget also includes $105 million for “trade adjustment assistance” to help workers who have been affected by free trade pacts, it said.

Obama's latest tax proposals are part of

Yes, Obama is further trying to drive US corporations overseas because socialist countries, think about that, SOCIALIST COUNTRIES treat their corporations worse than we do, and you and Obutthead want to make it worse. Yeah, that's going to improve jobs and the economy ...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And here I thought

I doubt that. I guess there's a first time for everything, but I'd need to see proof.

Can we start with their refusal to put up the dough for infrastructure and add their idiocy in not agreeing to tax deals to get our trillions back from overseas?? and before I forget, not wanting to raise taxes on those easily affording it ,,billionaires??

We're talking about the Federal Reserve, snapperhead.

Obama's stimulus deal, passed by Dems only, didn't fix enough infrastructure?
What did he spend it on, blunts and 40s?

Which tax deal did Obama propose to get companies to repatriate overseas earnings?
Was it one that said, fuck you, the tax rate is 35%?

President Barack Obama's fiscal 2016 budget will seek new taxes on trillions of dollars in profits accumulated overseas by U.S. companies, and a new approach to taxing foreign profits in the future, but Republicans were skeptical of the plan on Sunday.

Reviving a long-running debate about corporate tax avoidance, Obama will target a loophole that lets companies pay no tax on earnings held abroad, the White House said. But his proposal was certain to encounter stiff resistance from Republicans.

In his budget plan to be unveiled on Monday, Obama will call for a one-time, 14 percent tax on an estimated $2.1 trillion in profits piled up abroad over the years by multinationals such as General Electric (GE.N), Microsoft (MSFT.O), Pfizer Inc (PFE.N) and Apple Inc (AAPL.O).

ADVERTISING
inRead invented by Teads
He will also seek to impose a 19 percent tax on U.S. companies' future foreign earnings, the White House said.

At present, those earnings are supposed to be taxed at a 35-percent rate, but many companies avoid that through the loophole that defers taxation on active income that is not brought into the United States, or repatriated.

The $238 billion raised from the one-time tax would fund repairs and improvements to roads, bridges, transit systems and freight networks that would replenish the Highway Trust Fund as part of a $478 billion package, the White House said.

The annual budget proposal is as much a political document as a fiscal roadmap, requiring approval from Congress. Given Washington's current political division, much of what will be laid out on Monday is unlikely to become law.

Obama's budget will set a spending target of $4 trillion for fiscal year 2016, including a $474 billion deficit, which would represent a manageable 2.5 percent of U.S. Gross Domestic Product, The New York Times reported on Sunday. The budget also includes $105 million for “trade adjustment assistance” to help workers who have been affected by free trade pacts, it said.

Obama's latest tax proposals are part of

President Barack Obama's fiscal 2016 budget will seek new taxes on trillions of dollars in profits accumulated overseas by U.S. companies,

Lame duck says what?

what about his tax deal NOW trying to get the money out at much less than reg rates Why won't pubs go along ,,,,,,,,or are they the big business party and all this talk about the middle class is just bull shit?

What about his stupid tax deal? Drop the tax rate for repatriated profits to zero.

Stop trying to tax overseas corporate earnings. We're the only major economy that tries to do that.

 

[SmokeALib]

Adding money to the money supply does not add value. Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10. No value was created.

No one but the left should hate the Fed more. When the government adds taxes, every time, they disproportionately tax the rich. The Fed printing money is a regressive tax because the "rich" have investments which compensate for the reduction in the buying power of a dollar.

The "poor" take the full hit because they spend what they earn, and every new dollar created by the Fed hits them in proportion to spending, which is higher for them.

If leftists actually believe what you say, and you grasped what the Fed does, you'd be the first to demand it's abolished. The reality though is you don't give a shit about the poor, you care about government power. Which is why you are the Fed's biggest advocate.

Once again you support what you say you oppose and fuck the people you claim to defend

And here I thought it was the republican do nothing congress

And here I thought

I doubt that. I guess there's a first time for everything, but I'd need to see proof.

Can we start with their refusal to put up the dough for infrastructure and add their idiocy in not agreeing to tax deals to get our trillions back from overseas?? and before I forget, not wanting to raise taxes on those easily affording it ,,billionaires??

We're talking about the Federal Reserve, snapperhead.

Obama's stimulus deal, passed by Dems only, didn't fix enough infrastructure?
What did he spend it on, blunts and 40s?

Which tax deal did Obama propose to get companies to repatriate overseas earnings?
Was it one that said, fuck you, the tax rate is 35%?

President Barack Obama's fiscal 2016 budget will seek new taxes on trillions of dollars in profits accumulated overseas by U.S. companies, and a new approach to taxing foreign profits in the future, but Republicans were skeptical of the plan on Sunday.

Reviving a long-running debate about corporate tax avoidance, Obama will target a loophole that lets companies pay no tax on earnings held abroad, the White House said. But his proposal was certain to encounter stiff resistance from Republicans.

In his budget plan to be unveiled on Monday, Obama will call for a one-time, 14 percent tax on an estimated $2.1 trillion in profits piled up abroad over the years by multinationals such as General Electric (GE.N), Microsoft (MSFT.O), Pfizer Inc (PFE.N) and Apple Inc (AAPL.O).

ADVERTISING
inRead invented by Teads
He will also seek to impose a 19 percent tax on U.S. companies' future foreign earnings, the White House said.

At present, those earnings are supposed to be taxed at a 35-percent rate, but many companies avoid that through the loophole that defers taxation on active income that is not brought into the United States, or repatriated.

The $238 billion raised from the one-time tax would fund repairs and improvements to roads, bridges, transit systems and freight networks that would replenish the Highway Trust Fund as part of a $478 billion package, the White House said.

The annual budget proposal is as much a political document as a fiscal roadmap, requiring approval from Congress. Given Washington's current political division, much of what will be laid out on Monday is unlikely to become law.

Obama's budget will set a spending target of $4 trillion for fiscal year 2016, including a $474 billion deficit, which would represent a manageable 2.5 percent of U.S. Gross Domestic Product, The New York Times reported on Sunday. The budget also includes $105 million for “trade adjustment assistance” to help workers who have been affected by free trade pacts, it said.

Obama's latest tax proposals are part of

Nobody here gives a shit what Obama - aka "The Blamer", wants to do or not do. This clown has made the US the laughing stock of the globe and doubled the national debt. Worst piece of shit ever elected to the white house.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That isn't the entire economy, prices rise in percentage of the money printed versus the total economy, not the Fed's balance sheet

The Fed multiplied their balance sheet by 500%. Prices did not rise 500%.
According to what you've posted here, that should be impossible.

Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10.

They added 400%. How much did the price of a pencil rise?

THE FED BALANCE SHEET IS NOT THE ECONOMY. Odd you quoted me then ignored what I said. Trying to help with your hearing

THE FED BALANCE SHEET IS NOT THE ECONOMY.

How do you measure what the Fed adds to money supply?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Adding money to the money supply does not add value. Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10. No value was created.

No one but the left should hate the Fed more. When the government adds taxes, every time, they disproportionately tax the rich. The Fed printing money is a regressive tax because the "rich" have investments which compensate for the reduction in the buying power of a dollar.

The "poor" take the full hit because they spend what they earn, and every new dollar created by the Fed hits them in proportion to spending, which is higher for them.

If leftists actually believe what you say, and you grasped what the Fed does, you'd be the first to demand it's abolished. The reality though is you don't give a shit about the poor, you care about government power. Which is why you are the Fed's biggest advocate.

Once again you support what you say you oppose and fuck the people you claim to defend

And here I thought it was the republican do nothing congress

And here I thought

I doubt that. I guess there's a first time for everything, but I'd need to see proof.

He didn't back it up either, did he, Toddster?

No, he has never provided proof he thinks.....ever.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Adding money to the money supply does not add value. Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10. No value was created.

The problem with the crash is that the demand for pencils plunged. The pencil you bought for a dollar couldn't be sold for a nickel. The velocity of money slowed to a crawl. No one trusted that pencil you were selling wasn't balsa wood with no lead.

That's why the Fed printed more money. To try to get the velocity of money moving again and get pencils back up to at least 75 cents.

ZIRP is what is robbing the American people. Zero interest rates on your savings. You have to make astronomical carry trades, or invest in junk bonds, to make any money these days, and only the biggest financial firms can do that.

It's a huge bailout of the banks at the expense of every saver.

It's a huge bailout of the banks at the expense of every saver.

ZIRP doesn't help the banks, it compresses their interest rate spread.

 

[kaz]

That isn't the entire economy, prices rise in percentage of the money printed versus the total economy, not the Fed's balance sheet

The Fed multiplied their balance sheet by 500%. Prices did not rise 500%.
According to what you've posted here, that should be impossible.

Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10.

They added 400%. How much did the price of a pencil rise?

THE FED BALANCE SHEET IS NOT THE ECONOMY. Odd you quoted me then ignored what I said. Trying to help with your hearing

THE FED BALANCE SHEET IS NOT THE ECONOMY.

How do you measure what the Fed adds to money supply?

Money printed

divided by

The size of the economy

Money "printed" refers to all money the fed adds to the economy that wasn't there before. For example, they lend money that didn't exist. Don't you know what it means to say the government is "printing" money? That it's electronically released now doesn't change the concept, the term printed is still used. When is the last time you actually "dialed" a phone?

 

[MisterBeale]

Adding money to the money supply does not add value. Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10. No value was created.

No one but the left should hate the Fed more. When the government adds taxes, every time, they disproportionately tax the rich. The Fed printing money is a regressive tax because the "rich" have investments which compensate for the reduction in the buying power of a dollar.

The "poor" take the full hit because they spend what they earn, and every new dollar created by the Fed hits them in proportion to spending, which is higher for them.

If leftists actually believe what you say, and you grasped what the Fed does, you'd be the first to demand it's abolished. The reality though is you don't give a shit about the poor, you care about government power. Which is why you are the Fed's biggest advocate.

Once again you support what you say you oppose and fuck the people you claim to defend

Adding money to the money supply does not add value.

Adding money to the money supply during and after the crisis did add value.

that makes no sense. no economic value is created by adding currency to an economy, it just reduces the nominal value of everything in the economy

no economic value is created by adding currency to an economy

So you claim.

it just reduces the nominal value of everything in the economy

If the Fed adds 20% to money supply and prices only increase 5%, they've added value.
If the Fed adds 20% to money supply and prices increase 20%, they've added no value.
If the Fed adds 20% to money supply and prices increase 50%, they've destroyed value.

You don't add value by printing money.

You don't add value by tapping some digits into a computer.

An idiot knows this.

You're proof that an idiot doesn't know this.

What ever. I have gotten past what compulsory education and mass propaganda have tried to do, and learned the lessons of my forefathers that built this great nation. They warned the folks that built real wealth what would happen.

The truth about why the Deep State is making war on the Islamic world.

If I'm an idiot, so was Thomas Jefferson.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That isn't the entire economy, prices rise in percentage of the money printed versus the total economy, not the Fed's balance sheet

The Fed multiplied their balance sheet by 500%. Prices did not rise 500%.
According to what you've posted here, that should be impossible.

Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10.

They added 400%. How much did the price of a pencil rise?

THE FED BALANCE SHEET IS NOT THE ECONOMY. Odd you quoted me then ignored what I said. Trying to help with your hearing

THE FED BALANCE SHEET IS NOT THE ECONOMY.

How do you measure what the Fed adds to money supply?

Money printed

divided by

The size of the economy

Money "printed" refers to all money the fed adds to the economy that wasn't there before. For example, they lend money that didn't exist. Don't you know what it means to say the government is "printing" money? That it's electronically released now doesn't change the concept, the term printed is still used. When is the last time you actually "dialed" a phone?

Money "printed" refers to all money the fed adds to the economy that wasn't there before.
FRB: H.4.1 Release-- Factors Affecting Reserve Balances -- Thursday, May 5, 2016

At the above link, the Fed balance sheet is now about $4.5 trillion.
On May 8, 2008, it was about $900 billion.
Based on those 2 numbers, how much money did the Fed "add to the economy"?

 

[kaz]

That isn't the entire economy, prices rise in percentage of the money printed versus the total economy, not the Fed's balance sheet

The Fed multiplied their balance sheet by 500%. Prices did not rise 500%.
According to what you've posted here, that should be impossible.

Say the value of a pencil is $1. And the fed adds 10% to the money supply. The price of a pencil just goes up to $1.10.

They added 400%. How much did the price of a pencil rise?

THE FED BALANCE SHEET IS NOT THE ECONOMY. Odd you quoted me then ignored what I said. Trying to help with your hearing

THE FED BALANCE SHEET IS NOT THE ECONOMY.

How do you measure what the Fed adds to money supply?

Money printed

divided by

The size of the economy

Money "printed" refers to all money the fed adds to the economy that wasn't there before. For example, they lend money that didn't exist. Don't you know what it means to say the government is "printing" money? That it's electronically released now doesn't change the concept, the term printed is still used. When is the last time you actually "dialed" a phone?

Money "printed" refers to all money the fed adds to the economy that wasn't there before.
FRB: H.4.1 Release-- Factors Affecting Reserve Balances -- Thursday, May 5, 2016

At the above link, the Fed balance sheet is now about $4.5 trillion.
On May 8, 2008, it was about $900 billion.
Based on those 2 numbers, how much money did the Fed "add to the economy"?

You can't calculate that based on the numbers you presented, but the size of the US economy is $18 trillion. So say they added $1.8 trillion, that would be a 10% dilution on the value of a nominative dollar. All else held equal.