excuse me but what the hell. the federal reserve is not congress they should have no power over this. hell this isnt even the sec.
These rules only apply to Federal Reserve staff. Were you confused by the title?
Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks
161–170 of 232 posts
Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks
#162The relatively low salaries compared to the huge amounts of power is almost begging for insider trading, influence peddling, etc. > The salary of a Congress member varies based on the job title of the congressman or senator. Most senators, representatives, delegates and the resident commissioner from Puerto Rico make a salary of $174,000 per year. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/pay-salary/congressman-... Then a…
This is an example of the "you can pay people not to be corrupt" argument. It relies on people who are both willing to be corrupt, and happy to leave money on the table. It's exactly the same argument as paying for media not to include advertisements. What we should do is stop filtering for trash by having jobs that pay $174K require multi-million dollar application fees (i.e. a campaign.) That's exactly how you woul…
> The best a centrist can do is wait for the courts to fix it.
That is not how corruption is fixed.
Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your last sentence is really the key thesis. This isn't an argument to pay representatives (whether that be Congressional or at monetary policy orgs) more, but to have robust controls to better detect and action corruption. Greed knows no bounds (see: corrupt billionaires and Dark Triad personality traits [1]) and humans will be humans, so strong systems must be designed and implemented to defend against improper beh…
Living in DC on 174k/yr with a family and a spouse whose job prospects are limited by your profession is a tough order. You are effectively demanding that policy makers be self sufficient, which selects for those policy makers most likely to benefit financially from policy decisions.
Have you ever looked at the spouses of Congressional reps? Many are very well employed. Bankers, layers, professors, etc.
And $174k is a solid upper middle class income, even in DC. Many Congressmen live near my parents in Alexandria in lovely homes.
Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
People who live in normal nations laugh at both the people subject to the China authoritarian monstrosity and the people subject to the USA authoritarian monstrosity. Building and subjecting oneself to such a giant voracious parasitic automaton is obvious folly. They don't laugh too loudly, however, because they've read The Jakarta Method . China is actually less of a threat (except to close neighbors like Vietnam) b…
>because they have millennia of tradition and scholarship encouraging them not to care too much what barbarians say. Except if the barbarians talk about Taiwan (see Jon Cena) or Uygars. China has cowed even the NBA and western movie companies from going near those subjects.
I would draw a distinction between "pay conservative factions in the Indonesian military to kill a million communists, communist sympathizers, and random unaffiliated villagers" [0] and "don't do business with entertainment firms whose biggest stars say things you don't like". Others might not draw such a distinction.
Also, this Uighur thing is blown totally out of proportion. [1][2] I'm not suggesting anyone believe Chinese officials or media. I only suggest we view USA officials and media with a modicum of skepticism.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_mass_killings_of_19...
[1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/19/china-uighurs-genocide-...
[2] https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/f/xinjiang-staying-a...
Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
People who live in normal nations laugh at both the people subject to the China authoritarian monstrosity and the people subject to the USA authoritarian monstrosity. Building and subjecting oneself to such a giant voracious parasitic automaton is obvious folly. They don't laugh too loudly, however, because they've read The Jakarta Method . China is actually less of a threat (except to close neighbors like Vietnam) b…
While I think all western countries can easily be considered authoritarian countries, given most of them demand half of the profits of everyone doing anything productive on their land, you're terribly deluded if you think they rank anything close to what China is. China has concentration camps, kill businesses with a whip of the hand and apparently have half of the world (probably including your government) on their…
That link appears to describe a public discussion about Taiwan's membership status with respect to WHO?
I have no doubt that many in my government are on China's payroll, especially at the state and local levels. USA government is not a monolith, however, and MIC still pays enough people to keep the whole "security" hoax going.
Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure that's necessarily fair. If you're 75, you probably don't want your retirement nest egg in 100% stocks. There isn't a policy congress could institute that guarantees stocks will retain their value in a 4 year window.
If they're 75 they should focus on retirement.
Yes frankly a lot of the US' problems are probably related to the fact that it's governed by people who won't be living there in 20 years
Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
Living in DC on 174k/yr with a family and a spouse whose job prospects are limited by your profession is a tough order. You are effectively demanding that policy makers be self sufficient, which selects for those policy makers most likely to benefit financially from policy decisions.
Have you ever looked at the spouses of Congressional reps? Many are very well employed. Bankers, layers, professors, etc. And $174k is a solid upper middle class income, even in DC. Many Congressmen live near my parents in Alexandria in lovely homes.
Ok, but there’s no way the speaker from California could afford a decent home in Alexandria, VA and a nice home in SF on that kind of salary. It’s quite likely these congressmen are already wealthy.
Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am following you until your last sentence. How does having less regulation help here?
There is a term called regulatory capture where large corporations lobby governments to write regulations that stifle competition. When hundreds of millions or billions ride on such regulations that is created by a few individuals, they have enormous power that is susceptible to corruption. And its very difficult to remove this corruption. The long term stable approach is to have as few regulations as possible that r…
While I certainly agree that tech has been able to 'dominate,' your use as an example of a 'stable approach' with 'as few regulations as possible' that 'removes such absolute power from a few unelected individuals' feels ironic, considering the... absolute power that unelected individuals like Zuck have.
Alas, I don't think it's likely any legislative body will pass meaningful tech regulation anytime soon.
Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks
#169The relatively low salaries compared to the huge amounts of power is almost begging for insider trading, influence peddling, etc. > The salary of a Congress member varies based on the job title of the congressman or senator. Most senators, representatives, delegates and the resident commissioner from Puerto Rico make a salary of $174,000 per year. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/pay-salary/congressman-... Then a…
This is an example of the "you can pay people not to be corrupt" argument. It relies on people who are both willing to be corrupt, and happy to leave money on the table. It's exactly the same argument as paying for media not to include advertisements. What we should do is stop filtering for trash by having jobs that pay $174K require multi-million dollar application fees (i.e. a campaign.) That's exactly how you woul…
Yet they get randomly replaced every few years. Ask Hilary Clinton how mucb she managed to raise. That randomness keeps a potential American Xi or Putin on their toes.
Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
Living in DC on 174k/yr with a family and a spouse whose job prospects are limited by your profession is a tough order. You are effectively demanding that policy makers be self sufficient, which selects for those policy makers most likely to benefit financially from policy decisions.
To claim living on an income of $174k is a tough order is the most HN thing I've heard in a while. That's an absolute ton of money. You can live comfortably (but not luxuriously) anywhere on earth with that salary.
Unfortunately, Congress people must live in the districts they represent. And while $174k is quite decent even in SF, this person will have a standard of living below even what a software engineer with no management responsibilities is going to have.