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

781–790 of 871 posts

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#781

Post by throwworhtthrow »

shepherdjerred wrote: post #717
drpepper42 wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Standards for "functioning democracy" were much lower then.

Most people were ineligible to vote in the 18th and 19th centuries. [1] Not even 20% of the US population voted in presidential elections until the 20th century. [2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_rights_in_the_United_St...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Vote_for_President_a...

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#782

Post by johnnyanmac »

marcusverus wrote: post #751
throwaway902984 wrote: post #740

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He wrote that the FCC wasn't a government agency. Hard to argue that is correct, or that their political pursuit of one of trump's "enemies" isn't actually political. It was more that a tweet no, but an interview with Benny johnson, an avowed political figure paid by Russians at one point?

> He wrote that the FCC wasn't a government agency. Hard to argue that is correct You're harping on a detail that hardly matters in order to avoid the broader point, which is rather silly. The FCC is a government agency. Brendan Carr made an ill-advised tweet, which doesn't hold a candle to Biden's use of the FBI to spread misinformation and induce censorship for political purposes. > or that their political pursuit…

>Ah, I see that I'm wasting my time here.

When you're ignoring the comment talking about people arrested for criticizing a political pundit to argue about minutae and claiming "both sides are bad", yes.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#783

Post by johnnyanmac »

eudamoniac wrote: post #651
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…

I'm convinced that abortion is the worst thing the Democratic party could have ever taken up. You simply cannot sway a vote of a person who believes you support murdering babies. (I am pro abortion, but a substantial amount of people think it is morally murder.) Those people have to vote R their whole life no matter what. Nothing is worse than murdering babies. Democrats would probably never lose again if they public…

This has the same energy as "Democrats would fair better if they let slavery be legal again". Aren't democrats critisized by their actual voter base by trying to continually appeal to a party that will never vote for them? It really just shows that the major parties are either center right or far right.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#784

Post by johnnyanmac »

eudamoniac wrote: post #768
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #709

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 co…

>I want to bridge the aisle with Republicans and voters.

Anyone saying this in 2026-2028 is going to be eviscerated by democrats. The bridge was long burned and now they are throwing citizens into the burning wreck. You don't "bridge the aisle" with people who threaten your life.

Also, anyone who wants to protect kids but isn't pushing the Epstein files to be released spoke wide and loud on what they really care about. So many motte and baileys out there.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#785

Post by greggoB »

mapontosevenths wrote: post #120
neom wrote: post #54

So I'm sitting here as a Canadian wondering what the American people are going to do? I understand a lot of what the President of The United States says - I even agree with some of it, the problem is I don't feel like we're engaging with the American people anymore. I really wonder where you guys are headed and what it means for the rest of us, I spent 15 years in the states, built a public company there, I really li…

> I wonder where you guys are headed. You need to know only two facts about America to guess that: * Fifty three percent of Americans now read below the sixth grade level. * As (ostensibly) a representative Democracy America's fate is dictated by the majority of it's citizens. Our future is to become a broken nation governed by middle-school student level thinking. The only way to build a better America is to build a…

> Fifty three percent of Americans now read below the sixth grade level.

I thought this was a joke. Like, holy shit I regret looking this up and finding out it's not BS

https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/08/02/us-literacy-rate/

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#786

Post by johnnyanmac »

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.

>rare cases where the womens life is in danger

well you saying this shows just how ignorant people are on pregnancy. I guess that's by design to pitch to people that "Abortion kills babies".

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#787

Post by throwworhtthrow »

naijaboiler wrote: post #623
throw0101d wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's basically nothing the American people can do short term. If there are ICE agents in your area follow and film them. Create evidence of their jackboot tactics. Most folks do not like force/violence, and the more people see the jackboot policies and actions of one side, the more folks will lean towards the side(s) that are against those policies.

58% of Americans were okay with goverment shooting at protesting students at Kent State shooting.

The source for this [1] is more nuanced (someone can be both "not okay" with it while also blaming the victims), but it's true that survey respondents were five times more likely to blame the students than the National Guard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings#cite_note...

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#788

Post by bluGill »

exe34 wrote: post #767
bluGill wrote: post #753

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It isn't just God says so. There are moral arguements against murder other than God.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#789

Post by johnnyanmac »

throwaway902984 wrote: post #736
immibis wrote: post #671

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So many people didn't vote for the Democrats in 2024 because they didn't support Palestine and they lost as a result. If the Democrats become identical to the Republicans then why would any non-Republican even bother voting?

You are so correct in your first statement yet imply something in your second I think is so incorrect in a wider context that it strikes me like whiplash. Paying lip service but not addressing that friction was a significant part of what killed the Harris campaign, IMO.

well yes. That's the big issue. Trump didn't get more votes, Harris got drastically less than Biden. People didn't come out.

She had a bad hand needing to start out 6 months into an election cycle, and she played it poorly to boot. That's why this "we need to appeal to moderates/right wing" narrative is so frustrating. That's exactly what Harris did by trying to downplay Palestine/defend Israel and refusing to talk about the tensions in the job market. She established herself as "more of the same". That doesn't win votes in increasingly bad times.

Re: Statement from Jerome Powell

#790

Post by johnnyanmac »

palmotea wrote: post #642
bloppe wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's true that partisan politics provides only coarse choices. That's true of America's bipartisan system as well as multiparty parliamentary systems. But the parties are still dynamic coalitions that can change dramatically over time. Just look at the difference between the 1950s Democrats vs the 2000s Democrats, or the 2015 Republicans vs the 2020 Republicans. The coarse options that are available at election time…

> It's true that partisan politics provides only coarse choices. That's true of America's bipartisan system as well as multiparty parliamentary systems. But the parties are still dynamic coalitions that can change dramatically over time. Just look at the difference between the 1950s Democrats vs the 2000s Democrats, or the 2015 Republicans vs the 2020 Republicans. You're missing my only point, which is how (say) a co…

>which is how (say) a coarse 51% victory for a coalition gets frequently and deliberately misrepresented as "the American people" wanting that coalition's unpopular policies.

I think the larger point is "we have 2 bad choices, but we chose the worse one". Because "both sides are the same".

> it's about minority ideological factions jockeying for power to subject the American people to their vision.

Yeah, the current vision unfortunately sucks much worse than status quo neoliberalism, though. But we overall chose that. People ignoring the issues with Trump only reinforces how bad things have gotten.

Post reply on HN