The Economist - "Inequality or middle incomes: which matters more?"

Duplicate post.

 

sure they are, things are very very calm now, and now that Bernanke has proved Friedman was right about the Depression with his handling of the recent housing crisis we have every reason to expect a smooth economic future.

 

mandate says inflation and employment which may or may not be directly related to manipulating supply and demand. Further, they cant possible know what supply and demand should be and so how to manipulate them. Its far far more accurate to say they try to reach the dual mandate without interfering with supply and demand.

 

Dot com bubble.

Housing bubble.

Those are the two most recent. There are several more.

 

Their inexpert manipulations of the money supply lead to economic booms and busts.

 

June 7 2017
CiC = $1,555,572,000,000
MB = $3,832,034,000,000

 

that is Austrian BS from the 1930's. Friedman and Bernanke have proved they have learned a lot by so skillfully handling housing crisis. Europe Japan China proved it too. Welcome to the 21st century!!!

 

that's your best example?? When they were trivial compared to Great Depression and World War 2. China has had 40 years of 6% growth and massive monetary intervention. This proves we now understand monetary policy.

 

Yes, the housing crisis, which was caused by the fed.

 

They are busts, which you said no longer happen since the great depression.

 

sure but trivial and likely to be more so as we continue to gain experience.

 

there were many many causes. First was probably Fanny/Freddy which at time of collapse owned or guaranteed 75% of Alt A and subprime mortgages.

 

You said that there have been no boom/bust cycles since the great depression. I gave you examples that disprove that statement.

 

You seem to be a free market guy. Why the sucking up to the federal reserve? You don't think that market can manage money without the government?

 

Correct, in 1880 we had 2000 curriencies

 

depends how you define but in any case they are getting more and more trivial as demonstrated by CHina with 40 years of 7% growth

 

You will never convince me that a nurse makes anywhere near a fast food vendor makes any sense whatsoever.

 

And......?

 

The 2008 bust was not trivial.

 

it was a bubble that no one saw coming but once it burst it was handled with great great skill with little trouble to the economy as compared to Depression for example. Now the world from China to Japan to USA and Europe has seen all that can go wrong and knows how to handle it based on 1000 times more experience than we had just 90 years ago. Now the only enemy is libsocialism.

 

Are you saying that the 2008 bust was trivial?

 

it was very very inefficient to have 2000 curriencies and no central bank currency,

 

it looked serious indeed at first becuase we didn't know how much Bernanke knew but yes trivial given how easily it was handled and how even that can be avoided the next time around.

 

They were all dollar banknotes, correct? How was that inefficient?

 

its like asking why did Europe switch to one currency. America had 2000 curriencies!!