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

761–770 of 871 posts

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#761

Post by treebeard901 »

The entire reason the markets give the response wanted after a rate cut is because of the decision being made independently of politics. A politically enforced rate cut may still boost the economy in the short term, over the longer term the interest rate mechanism will not be trusted. This will defeat the entire purpose for very limited gain.

Behind all of this is another fact that the conditions around the U.S. reserve currency are changing quickly. This is happening with just interest payments on existing debt being the largest cost every year.

No matter who controls the Government, soon they will all be forced to cut spending in a large way and be forced to try to inflate themselves out of this coming debt crisis.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#762

Post by Youden »

Aurornis wrote: post #616
Youden wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In defence of young people, it's "determined" by the people who actually go out and vote the same way a child "determines" what's for dinner when asked "would you like broccoli or brussels sprouts?" American democracy is broken. Not in an abstract, hand-wavy feelings way but a hard, numerical, mathematical way. A two party system results in no real choice. First past the post results in a two party system. America us…

Margins in recent elections have been thin enough that higher voter turnout among young generations could have easily changed the outcome. Blaming broken democracy is just a cop out. Youth voter turnout for primary elections, where there are many candidates, is also low. More parties isn’t going to change anything.

You're missing the point. There were only two possible outcomes: Democrats or Republicans. Both were bad and unappealing. Both are too dependent on the status quo to serve as vehicles for real change (so primaries are pointless too).

"More parties", through elimination of first past the post, absolutely changes things. It allows you to vote for someone who truly represents you and your interests without "throwing away" your vote. That's impossible today.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#763

Post by shimman »

sapphicsnail wrote: post #499
mrtksn wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course there’s, it’s just that anti-Trump people don’t care as much and are not as brave as the pro-Trump people. MAGA people stormed the capitol, anti-Trump people just write well thought concerns on the internet. MAGA people for years endured deplatforming and being outcasts but developed methods to deal with it, the anti-Trump people are scared to lose what they have and are too concerned about their difference…

People are out there protesting right now even though ICE and the police have a history of shooting unarmed protestors. Leftists protestors are and always have been more harshly treated by this government than the other side.

If anyone is doubting this, look at how the police treat "ecoterrorists" versus mass shooters. Ecoterrorists in quotes because the real ecoterrorists are those polluting and destroying the planet for money, not a group of people that stop a machine from raping the land.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#764

Post by shimman »

naijaboiler wrote: post #624
LorenPechtel wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fundamentally, people don't like situations with no good answer. I see it again and again, present a problem with no good answer and most people will resort to the answer that aligns with their political leanings even when faced with clear evidence they are wrong. Look how quickly big business rolled over for The Felon--because they saw what mot people have been denying since the election.

big business will always act in the interest of big business. Only a stupid business man will confront the full-might of the executive branch of the federal government heads on, particularly when the President is showing that he is willing to use that power against anybody

Big business will always side with the oppressors, it's like we learned nothing from history about colonialism, imperialism, or the history of european fascism. I mean FFS it was corporations that financed Mussolini. As you said they don't care, they just want to make money.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#765

Post by beepbooptheory »

aisengard wrote: post #752
beepbooptheory wrote: post #729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe ask the young people if they actually wanted to vote for the options they had, before jumping to them being apathetic or hypocritical. And yes, I know the adult-in-the-rooms will be quick to point out that its simply rational and responsible to hold your nose and vote for the lesser evil, and the kids should know that, etc etc. But while it may be a good prescription to people, it doesn't actually address the p…

I mean, they tried that in the primaries and young people still stayed home. If they actually came out in force for Bernie like you said they would, he would have won every primary. Young people simply don't vote because of a lot of different reasons. Probably some of the reasons are immaturity and a lack of belief that they have agency, which is understandable given how society works in the US. You have basically ze…

I guess I just didn't realize that was the settled reason why Bernie lost!

I just think even granting this framing, what is the point or the lesson here? Is the idea that Clinton in 2016 was more well-rounded, had broader appeal as a candidate and young people were too immature to realize this?

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#766

Post by windowpains »

I like jpow so I’m biased for sure. But when I zoom out, I think the thing some people are missing is the arbitrage aspect. With US politics, we typically get a choice between two people. Often it’s a choice between the lesser evil. Many of Trumps voters were not people who liked Trump, but people who were horrified by Kamala. This means Trump can arbitrage that gap, and do all sorts of disagreeable things as long as he remains the lesser evil to his voters, those disagreeable acts will be ignored come election time. Many Trump voters will be aghast at him weaponizing the courts to chip away at the independence of the fed, but they’ll vote for him and his preferred candidates because they feel the alternative is even worse.

The important implication is that resistance or countering with extremism in the other direction only makes him stronger. To defeat Trump the left will need to move closer to the middle so he has less room for that kind of political arbitrage. Alas emotion seems to be in greater supply than strategic thinking so probably things will get worse before they get better.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#767

Post by exe34 »

bluGill wrote: post #753
exe34 wrote: post #719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That does not follow. That you think it does shows how little you understand the complexity of what people think.

Oh yeah, the people of "my God says it's murder, therefore you can't do it" are well known for subtlety and complexity of thought.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#768

Post by eudamoniac »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #709
eudamoniac wrote: post #684

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, everyone knows that D widely supports abortion. It's been shouted from the rooftops for decades. It wouldn't be very believable in one cycle even if they tried, which they didn't; neglecting to bring up the topic is not close to publicly dropping support. Part of why it's so bad for them is because it will be very difficult to get disentangled from it. From a pro-life perspective, "well they didn't make it ea…

To me your phrase "publicly dropped support for abortion" sounds like "neglecting to bring up the topic". If you mean that Democratic leaders should somehow convince their members to support abortion restrictions that they oppose, I'm not sure why you would presume that's possible.

I'm imagining a candidate saying something like, "I want to help America with x y z [blue team related] issues. I want to bridge the aisle with Republicans and voters. To that end, I vow to not support any measures for the expansion of abortion. I believe that right now it's more important to help Americans in other ways. This is a contentious issue, but if we can set it aside for the moment, I believe D and R can come together to solve x y and z."

Maybe Democrats would never vote for this, but that's kind of the problem.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#769

Post by malshe »

hvb2 wrote: post #693
malshe wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember watching a clip from Jimmy Kimmel on YouTube where they asked people on the street in LA whether they planned to vote in the 2024 presidential election. The twist was that they were doing this one day AFTER the election. It was so disappointing to see that many young people had no idea that the election was over and yet they said they planned to vote. One guy even asked who was running.

I would envy the person who can live in the US and be unaware a presidential election was yesterday... Like, they start running ads 18 months ahead of it... How do you miss all of those ads

This is likely because for many young people the only source of news is social media. And they are unlikely to be targeted to see the political ads.

Interestingly, occasionally I see political ads on Willow.tv which I use to watch Cricket. And most of these ads have Noem threatening to deport people ("if you are here illegally, we are coming after you..."). I am a US citizen.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#770

Post by throwworhtthrow »

hvb2 wrote: post #693
malshe wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember watching a clip from Jimmy Kimmel on YouTube where they asked people on the street in LA whether they planned to vote in the 2024 presidential election. The twist was that they were doing this one day AFTER the election. It was so disappointing to see that many young people had no idea that the election was over and yet they said they planned to vote. One guy even asked who was running.

I would envy the person who can live in the US and be unaware a presidential election was yesterday... Like, they start running ads 18 months ahead of it... How do you miss all of those ads

Presidential ads run in swing states. Not in California, whose delegates are a foregone conclusion.

Californians are hassled for political donations, not votes.

Post reply on HN