Author Topic: Federal Reserve is expected to raise interest rates just before Trump is sworn i  (Read 1065 times)

Offline Bronx

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3112
  • Gender: Male
Oh I wonder why.  And its not because Trump saved 800 job with Carrier or IBM is bring 25,000 jobs to the market. Maybe, just maybe it's Obama's last hit on the American worker.

You folks that wanna buy a house, car, or get a student loan might wanna take a good look look at this. Also you home owners that wanted to re-fi might wanna look into this.

I say...............Audit the Feds....!

Federal Reserve is expected to raise interest rates just before Trump is sworn in

The Federal Reserve is expected to raise interest rates for the first time in a year during a key policy meeting that ends Wednesday, the Associated Press reports.

According to Politico, markets are on edge as they await the Fed’s outlook for the economy under President-elect Donald Trump, which is expected to see continued growth. But economists also expect to see higher levels of inflation, which would lead to even higher interest rates.

READ MORE...........

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2016/12/14/federal-reserve-is-expected-to-raise-interest-rates-just-before-trump-is-sworn-in/




Adjusted font size.
walks
« Last Edit: December 15, 2016, 06:30:33 AM by walkstall »


People sleep peacefully at night because there are a few tough men prepared to do violence on their behalf.

Bowtech Experience  70lb, QAD HDX, HHA DS 5519, 400 gr Black Eagle Carnivores, 100gr Grim Reaper, True-Fire Hardcore 4 thumb.

Offline Solar

  • -
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 52578
  • Gender: Male
Politics, pure politics!
The interest rate should have been raised in 2009 and never lowered till the economy recovered, but it never recovered, we've been in the nation's longest depression since our inception.
We know the economy never recovered, so why raise them now? Politics, pure politics!
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline Billy's bayonet

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4440
  • Gender: Male
  • Fighting Communism since 1969
Now what I wanna know is if this is part of the "economic boom" that Trump inherited from the democrats
Evil operates best when under a disguise

Deplorable and Proud of it

Offline Solar

  • -
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 52578
  • Gender: Male
Now what I wanna know is if this is part of the "economic boom" that Trump inherited from the democrats
I think the "economic boom" Dims refer to, was actually the economy going down in flames.
No boom, just a long slow burn.
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline The Boo Man...

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15397
  • Gender: Male
  • Trees are just tall weeds children climb
Well they would never do it before the election but it does have to be done. From a political standpoint do it now.

Offline Hoofer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2910
  • Gender: Male
  • HAM Radio - the last form of free expression
Oh I wonder why.  And its not because Trump saved 800 job with Carrier or IBM is bring 25,000 jobs to the market. Maybe, just maybe it's Obama's last hit on the American worker.

You folks that wanna buy a house, car, or get a student loan might wanna take a good look look at this. Also you home owners that wanted to re-fi might wanna look into this.

I say...............Audit the Feds....!

Federal Reserve is expected to raise interest rates just before Trump is sworn in

The Federal Reserve is expected to raise interest rates for the first time in a year during a key policy meeting that ends Wednesday, the Associated Press reports.

According to Politico, markets are on edge as they await the Fed’s outlook for the economy under President-elect Donald Trump, which is expected to see continued growth. But economists also expect to see higher levels of inflation, which would lead to even higher interest rates.

READ MORE...........

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2016/12/14/federal-reserve-is-expected-to-raise-interest-rates-just-before-trump-is-sworn-in/

Rates have been going up since the low in September/October.
http://www.bankrate.com/mortgage.aspx?type=refinance&market=236&propertyvalue=300000&loan=240000&perc=20&prods=215,393,216,392&fico=740&points=Zero&cs=0&ic_id=home_smart-spending_mortgages_globalnav

Now that optimism has returned - so have interest rates.


Adjusted font size.
walks
« Last Edit: December 15, 2016, 06:31:34 AM by walkstall »
All animals are created equal; Some just take longer to cook.

Online supsalemgr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9768
  • Gender: Male
Rates have been going up since the low in September/October.
http://www.bankrate.com/mortgage.aspx?type=refinance&market=236&propertyvalue=300000&loan=240000&perc=20&prods=215,393,216,392&fico=740&points=Zero&cs=0&ic_id=home_smart-spending_mortgages_globalnav

Now that optimism has returned - so have interest rates.

Obama and the Fed have kept them artificially low for too long. It is not a disaster that they rise if it is not drastic like we saw in the 70's.


Adjusted font size.
walks
« Last Edit: December 15, 2016, 06:28:10 AM by walkstall »
"If you can't run with the big dawgs, stay on the porch!"

Offline zewazir

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 850
  • TANSTAAFL!
Obama and the Fed have kept them artificially low for too long. It is not a disaster that they rise if it is not drastic like we saw in the 70's.
Whether a bump in the prime is a good thing or not, one thing we can be absolutely certain of: the INTENT of the Obama administration is anything BUT desiring to hand Trump a growing economy.

Offline Hoofer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2910
  • Gender: Male
  • HAM Radio - the last form of free expression
Obama and the Fed have kept them artificially low for too long. It is not a disaster that they rise if it is not drastic like we saw in the 70's.

Which has puzzled me - why is the FED in BED with the liberals!?   If the economy takes another dip, they're sure to blame it on the Pubs... like the sun rising in the morning, "SEE!!!  I told you, global warming - every morning!"
All animals are created equal; Some just take longer to cook.

Offline Solar

  • -
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 52578
  • Gender: Male
Which has puzzled me - why is the FED in BED with the liberals!?   If the economy takes another dip, they're sure to blame it on the Pubs... like the sun rising in the morning, "SEE!!!  I told you, global warming - every morning!"
Marxists have been infecting every aspect of business in America, the Fed is not immune, and money has a strange effect on man, some will even sell out their family for greed and power.
Hell, just look at the GOP. :biggrin:
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline Econ4Every1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
Obama and the Fed have kept them artificially low for too long. It is not a disaster that they rise if it is not drastic like we saw in the 70's.


Adjusted font size.
walks

When I ask this, I'm not asking about whether rates should be higher or lower, that's a different question, but when you say "artificially lower", what do you mean?

Online supsalemgr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9768
  • Gender: Male
When I ask this, I'm not asking about whether rates should be higher or lower, that's a different question, but when you say "artificially lower", what do you mean?

There is no reason for interest rates to be as low as they are based on our economy. It is not booming, but if we can believe the government we do have some growth. Also, the unemployment rate is very low, once again if you believe the government. The only thing these low interest rates have done is to provide fuel for Wall Street investors. Now, if one wants to say it is to keep the economy going one would have to admit the Obama economy is a disaster. Anybody who has been on this planet for any length of time knows these rates are unbelievable. In 1981 the interest rate for a 30 year mortgage was over 18% and now it is around 3%. A few 1/4% increases should not hurt the economy if Trump can generate some increased growth in GDP. I trust that provides some insight for you.
"If you can't run with the big dawgs, stay on the porch!"

Offline Econ4Every1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
There is no reason for interest rates to be as low as they are based on our economy.

I think the reason that is given is that higher rates would result in less consumption.

It is not booming, but if we can believe the government we do have some growth.

I agree it's not booming as to whether I agree with the government, I think overall statistics mask real underlying trends.  For example, if 99.99% of the money in the nation were controlled by 1 person, if that person got a 20% raise, the economy, measured as a whole might appear, on average (by dollars, not people) to have receved a raise. 

I think media needs to stop reporting by education level, race, and geography, and simply report by economic quintile.  If the media reported this way, the average person might realize that 80% of the nation is no better off than it was 18 years ago and even worse, that 60% was actually worse off.

That 60% spoke loud and clear to the Dems when they elected DT.

Also, the unemployment rate is very low, once again if you believe the government.

Again, no I don't.  The unemployment rates does not accurately reflect the quality of jobs that people have.  If a person is capable of a job that pays $80,000 but can only find a job for $40,000, that person is underemployed and his/her potential productivity is being wasted, though there is no statistic that accounts for this fact.

A few minutes searching the BLS stats and you can learn what you need to know, but of course the government doesn't report meaningful numbers because people are too apathetic to be bothered to take the time to understand them.

If you are attacking Obama hoping I'll defend him and other dems, I won't.  However, I can find just as many, perhaps even more problems with Republican proposals on the economy.

The only thing these low interest rates have done is to provide fuel for Wall Street investors.

I'll agree it's helped the financial economy immensely, but I'd argue that lowering the rent paid on borrowed money helps people on Main St. as well.  The problem is that the gap between those at the top and those in the middle/bottom grows with the low rates we have now.

But, can't we solve this problem through policy change?  Can't we have low rates to help Main St. and prevent some of the financial shenanigans on Wall St?  I mean, should companies be allowed to purchase their own stock to artificially inflate the stock price (as an example)?

Now, if one wants to say it is to keep the economy going one would have to admit the Obama economy is a disaster.

I think its helped keep things going and yes I admit it's a disaster.

Anybody who has been on this planet for any length of time knows these rates are unbelievable. In 1981 the interest rate for a 30-year mortgage was over 18% and now it is around 3%. A few 1/4% increases should not hurt the economy if Trump can generate some increased growth in GDP. I trust that provides some insight for you.

I'd argue that 18% under Volcker was more unbelievable than .5% under Bernanke/ Yellen simply because the "natural" rate of interest in our fiat economy is zero.  At least today now that there's no gold standard.  In a fiat economy, money isn't scarce as the Fed can supply all the liquidity the market needs.  Anything above zero is artificial by definition.  Now that doesn't mean that I think the rate should necessarily be zero, but if the reason for raising rates is to prevent the wealthy from leveraging virtually free money to invest (gamble), it seems that there are other ways to solve that problem.  This way the weak private sector can have the lower rates it needs and the wealthy have proper regulation to prevent gambling with borrowed money.

Online supsalemgr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9768
  • Gender: Male
I think the reason that is given is that higher rates would result in less consumption.

I agree it's not booming as to whether I agree with the government, I think overall statistics mask real underlying trends.  For example, if 99.99% of the money in the nation were controlled by 1 person, if that person got a 20% raise, the economy, measured as a whole might appear, on average (by dollars, not people) to have receved a raise. 

I think media needs to stop reporting by education level, race, and geography, and simply report by economic quintile.  If the media reported this way, the average person might realize that 80% of the nation is no better off than it was 18 years ago and even worse, that 60% was actually worse off.

That 60% spoke loud and clear to the Dems when they elected DT.

Again, no I don't.  The unemployment rates does not accurately reflect the quality of jobs that people have.  If a person is capable of a job that pays $80,000 but can only find a job for $40,000, that person is underemployed and his/her potential productivity is being wasted, though there is no statistic that accounts for this fact.

A few minutes searching the BLS stats and you can learn what you need to know, but of course the government doesn't report meaningful numbers because people are too apathetic to be bothered to take the time to understand them.

If you are attacking Obama hoping I'll defend him and other dems, I won't.  However, I can find just as many, perhaps even more problems with Republican proposals on the economy.

I'll agree it's helped the financial economy immensely, but I'd argue that lowering the rent paid on borrowed money helps people on Main St. as well.  The problem is that the gap between those at the top and those in the middle/bottom grows with the low rates we have now.

But, can't we solve this problem through policy change?  Can't we have low rates to help Main St. and prevent some of the financial shenanigans on Wall St?  I mean, should companies be allowed to purchase their own stock to artificially inflate the stock price (as an example)?

I think its helped keep things going and yes I admit it's a disaster.

I'd argue that 18% under Volcker was more unbelievable than .5% under Bernanke/ Yellen simply because the "natural" rate of interest in our fiat economy is zero.  At least today now that there's no gold standard.  In a fiat economy, money isn't scarce as the Fed can supply all the liquidity the market needs.  Anything above zero is artificial by definition.  Now that doesn't mean that I think the rate should necessarily be zero, but if the reason for raising rates is to prevent the wealthy from leveraging virtually free money to invest (gamble), it seems that there are other ways to solve that problem.  This way the weak private sector can have the lower rates it needs and the wealthy have proper regulation to prevent gambling with borrowed money.

It seems we agree for the most part. The question is what is a reasonable level for interest rates which are good for the most. I suggest we go back to the 1950's for a base line. We had a booming economy and the interest rate for a 30 year mortgage was around 5%-6%. This level does not impede borrowing and provides some comfort for those depending on interest income.
"If you can't run with the big dawgs, stay on the porch!"

Offline Econ4Every1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
It seems we agree for the most part. The question is what is a reasonable level for interest rates which are good for the most. I suggest we go back to the 1950's for a base line. We had a booming economy and the interest rate for a 30 year mortgage was around 5%-6%. This level does not impede borrowing and provides some comfort for those depending on interest income.

With all due respect, that's a simple correlation.  One of the reasons the 50's were such a good time is the enormous deficit spending that occurred just a few years earlier.  Coincidently, private debt was at an all-time low and savings was extremely high.  Interest rates at the time reflected the availability of money.

Today, debt to income ratios are extremely high, savings is extremely low and deficit spending, with the exception of 2016 fell for 5 straight years (2009-2016).

Lastly, the amount banks have to lend has nothing to do with savings.

If you wish to raise rates simply too slow down the immoral profit taking banks, there are other less destructive ways to accomplish that goal.

 

Powered by EzPortal