Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Statement from Jerome Powell

federalreserve.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

711–720 of 871 posts

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#711

Post by scoofy »

Dusseldorf wrote: post #9

He certainly doesn't beat around the bush here. Very nice too see someone of his stature stand up and call out these shenanigans for what they are.

His term ends on May 15, 2026, so it's almost pointless to file these charges now.

I see what's happening now as game-theory signaling, not as a real threat to Powell. I would suggest that this action is better seen as a latent threat to the next Fed chairman to let them know that they will either enact Trumps desired Fed policies or they will be prosecuted for anything that the administration can manufacture.

It's also important to remember that Powell is not the only Federal Reserve Board of Governors to have very odd accusations of wrongdoing and investigations launched. He's also done this with Lisa Cook. It seems pretty blatant at this point what's really happening.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#712

Post by bpt3 »

LastTrain wrote: post #610
Aurornis wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is the political will of a plurality of American voters. This fallacy gets repeated over and over, but it's obviously false. Have you really never voted for a candidate who went on to do things you didn't agree with? It's a quintessential fact of politics that voting for a candidate is not equivalent to an endorsement of everything that candidate does in the future. It's a premise that is obviously false when…

He is the most popular Republican president, among other Republicans, we have had in our lifetime. Anecdotal: I live in a red state with red friends and red family. They might not like this or that but they are unwavering in their support for Trump the man. It is still very uncomfortable to say even the most superficially negative thing about him or his policies. So, maybe there is some internal dialog going on there…

When you say "our lifetime" you must be talking about people who were born after 2004? Reagan was certainly more popular among Republicans, and I think W was at the end of his first term (he definitely was right after 9/11 when approval ratings for anything American were approximately 100% within America).

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#713

Post by tsimionescu »

0ckpuppet wrote: post #588
fyredge wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a fallacy, simply an opinion you disagree with. But one which I strongly agree with. I'm not American, and though I may not agree completely with the politicians I voted for, I have not been blindsided yet. The second election of Trump is a symptom of Americans either unable or unwilling to look beyond single issues or sports team politics. To then turn around and act surprised is just a way to convenient…

You're missing some history that pushed former Democratic vorers to vote Trump. Taxpayer funding of NGOs that were writing grants to organizations that were effectively censoring onlinespeech. This and the Disinformation Board, and the direct phone calls from US senators and Congressmen to takedown opposition ideas n social media was a direct attack on the First Amendment by the Democrats. Yes Trump's FCC threats ove…

Someone would have have to be deeply ignorant to think that Donald Trump, notorious for his numerous lawsuits and public threats to silence any critique of himself in the press, and whose campaign was coordinating with Twitter to take down posts while he was sitting president (just as the Democrats were, but they weren't in office) would champion Free Speech in any, way, shape or form.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#714

Post by jrochkind1 »

cal_dent wrote: post #203

The US drift into Adam Curtis' broad thesis in hypernormalisation(a) continues apace I see. Great to see J Pow putting up a fight but I fear this is all going one way. (a) >We live in a world where the powerful deceive us. We know they lie. They know we know they lie. They don't care. We say we care but do nothing.

Who is "we"? I'm not doing nothing. Why are you doing nothing?

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#715

Post by mcphage »

doom2 wrote: post #607
Aurornis wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is the political will of a plurality of American voters. This fallacy gets repeated over and over, but it's obviously false. Have you really never voted for a candidate who went on to do things you didn't agree with? It's a quintessential fact of politics that voting for a candidate is not equivalent to an endorsement of everything that candidate does in the future. It's a premise that is obviously false when…

> It's just navel-gazing to pretend like what he's doing has high approval Then how is it being reflected in Congress? Where are the Republicans speaking loudly on behalf of their dissatisfied constituents and voting on bills accordingly? We shouldn't have to wait every two years for a midterms or general election for the negative approval rating to make itself known, politicians can choose any time to act in a way t…

> Then how is it being reflected in Congress?

“What people support” and “what politicians do” isn’t as strongly correlated as one might hope.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#716

Post by aisengard »

eudamoniac wrote: post #665
pjc50 wrote: post #661

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Throwing an awful lot of maternal lives away for that one. Similar story for lots of other unpopular issues, like the Civil Rights act.

Well you can be right, or you can win. This thread is a consequence of being right.

Well, some people can win. Other people will simply die of massive blood loss. As long as it's not you, right?

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#717

Post by shepherdjerred »

drpepper42 wrote: post #430
shepherdjerred wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is literacy so important? Wasn’t literacy lower in the US at other points in time?

The Lippmann school of democracy sort of predisposed that people were too stupid and that through journalists would emerge a reasonable set of choices. For the most part that matches the way politics worked in the USA and most democracies until recently. Unfortunately the internet disrupted things such that suddenly everyone needs to actually be democratically adept in at least some form more akin to the Dewey school…

Truthfully I’m not familiar with any of this. I’m just curious how we managed a functioning democracy through the 1800s when literacy was certainly lower. And, how other democratic nations with similar literacy rates are doing.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#718

Post by bpt3 »

oenton wrote: post #478
jordanpg wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stated differently, if things really are so bad (and I would be the first to agree that things are pretty bad), then why are so many comfortable people (like me) not out on the street every day? There are a lot of reasons for that, of course, but the bottom line is that when things get bad enough -- much worse than they are today -- then more people will take to the street, along with whatever sacrifice that entails.…

I was just talking to someone close to me about what to expect if (when?) Trump starts annexing Greenland. I truly believe a national strike is our best bet. But the reality is many (most?) people are living paycheck to paycheck and can’t risk that. But knowledge workers and especially software engineers can probably fare much better in the event of immediate job loss. Now that’s not to downplay or minimize that risk…

I will say upfront that I do not condone or support annexation of Greenland, but I have to ask why on earth you or anyone else think that would inspire any meaningful portion of the US population to organize a general strike?

Whatever happens in Greenland has no impact on at least 99.99% of the US population, and a general strike will have no impact on the small fraction of the US population that would support annexation.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#719

Post by exe34 »

bluGill wrote: post #691
exe34 wrote: post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

being against abortion is equivalent to condemning women to death when their pregnancy is going wrong. you see how moral absolutes (don't) work?

That was the point. democrats often point out those rare cases where the womens life is in danger and then use that as the absolute we must allow all abotions. Nobody will argue for the compromise and so you lose a lot who won't acpept the absolute.

any bill to ban abortions (because "muh sacred life") should include funding for childcare, medical coverage, and school lunches. Pro-lifers are unfortunately only pro births when it comes to voting.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#720

Post by jghn »

Aurornis wrote: post #429
JeremyNT wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is ample ability to change events, but people must believe they can act and act together, as they have for centuries of democracy and for all human history. This is the political will of a plurality of American voters. They certainly can't claim they didn't know what they would get, and they seem unconcerned by any of these actions that many of us find terrifying. It is difficult to see how we can democracy o…

> This is the political will of a plurality of American voters. This fallacy gets repeated over and over, but it's obviously false. Have you really never voted for a candidate who went on to do things you didn't agree with? It's a quintessential fact of politics that voting for a candidate is not equivalent to an endorsement of everything that candidate does in the future. It's a premise that is obviously false when…

> It's just navel-gazing to pretend like what he's doing has high approval.

Will these people vote for the opposition party? Or will they just say they don't like it and continue to vote GOP?

Post reply on HN