Fed Bailout Only Helps The Reckless Rich
Chartsky.com Has Been Ranting About This For Over A Month
At least it’s finally starting to trickle into the corporate media . . .
By Allan Sloan
Fortune’s Senior Editor-At-Large
September 28, 2007
(Fortune Magazine) — One of the core principles of the U.S. medical profession is the Hippocratic oath, the most famous part of which is “Do no harm.” It’s too bad that the governors of the Federal Reserve Board don’t have to take such a pledge when they assume office, because their recent interest rate cut has done a lot of harm to those of us who’ve managed our finances prudently.
Even though the Fed’s stated reason for cutting short-term interest rates by half a point was to help keep the economy from falling into recession, anyone who’s been paying attention knows that a major motivation - if not the major motivation - was to try to calm the turbulence that has been roiling the markets since August.
The players in the biggest trouble, of course, were the ones who’d taken the biggest fliers in junk mortgages, ultra-risky leveraged buyouts, and other financial esoterica that proved to be malignant.
The stock market, which had been begging for a bailout and hasn’t ever seen an interest rate cut that it didn’t like, responded to the Fed’s half-pointer by running prices up. Ben Bernanke, the Street decided, is just what the doctor ordered.
However, if you look at the financial markets’ overall reaction to the Fed move - not at just the stock market’s reaction - you realize that as a result of the cut, those of us who keep score in dollars and didn’t need to be bailed out are less wealthy than we were in terms of anything other than our home currency.
Why? Because the rate cut contributed heavily to the dollar’s recent sharp drop in the currency markets - parity with the Canadian dollar, for God’s sake! - and to the price spike in hard assets like gold, silver, copper, and oil. So our wealth, relative to these other things, has diminished.
And wait, there’s more. Even though the Fed has cut short-term rates, long-term rates, which it doesn’t control, have risen in reaction to the cut. So whatever economic benefits may flow from lower shortterm rates will be partly offset by the rise in long rates, which are at least as important to the economy as short rates.
Finally, consider this. Even though Bernanke’s cut may mean that some junk mortgages will reset at lower rates, the cost of large, high-quality fixed-rate mortgages, which are tied to long rates, will be higher than they’d otherwise be. (Yeah, penalize the people who are prudent - way to go!)
When I talk about prudent people being penalized, I don’t mean just the decline in their wealth in terms of anything other than the dollar. I’m also talking about the price paid by investors who wouldn’t play the subprime mortgage game and thus got lower returns than players who took bigger risks.
The folks who didn’t get carried away (and avoided huge losses) look smart today - but they looked prudish and foolish until the housing bubble finally popped.
North American Union
This is long, but you’re not going to hear a single word about any of it in the corporate propaganda media . . . and it tells a sick story about a President just as hell-bent to sell our sovereignty as he was to invade Iraq.
President Bush is apparently not satisfied with hurting this country only through his wars of aggression.
He is secretly pushing a merger of the United States, with Mexico and Canada, into a new North American Union. Part of that will be to replace the U.S. dollar with a new currency, the Amero. The super-highway linking Mexico, the United States and Canada is part of the grand plan too.
Just Google “North American Union” and you can read for days . . .
While many play word-games to imply this is nothing more than a tin-foil hat conspiracy. I know it’s not.
A Congressman from Virginia knows it’s not either.
Rep. Virgil Goode (R-Va.) introduced H.C.R. 40 which is titled, “Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada”
Listen, you need to find out what this group of rogues is trying to do to our great country. They have sold out to the bankers and corporations and are trying to deliver our great nation up on a platter for profit.
Congressman Goode was recently asked if the president was risking electoral success for the Republican Party in 2008 with his insistence on pushing for North American integration via the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP.
“Yes,” Goode answered. “You won’t hear the leadership in the Republic Party admit it, but there are many in the House and Senate who know that illegal immigration has to be stopped and legal immigration has to be reduced. We are giving away the country so a few very rich people can get richer.”
How did he react when President Bush referred to those who suggest the SPP could turn into the North American Union as “conspiracy theorists”?
“The president is really engaging in a play on words,” Goode responded. “The secretary of transportation came before our subcommittee,” he explained, “and I had the opportunity to ask her some questions about the NAFTA Superhighway. Of course, she answered, ‘There’s no NAFTA Superhighway.’ But then Mary Peters proceeded to discuss the road system that would come up from Mexico and go through the United States up into Canada.”
“So, I think that saying we’re ‘conspiracy theorists’ or something like that is really just a play on words with the intent to demonize the opposition,” Goode concluded.
Goode stressed that the Bush administration supports both a NAU regional government and a NAFTA Superhighway system: “The Bush administration as well as Mexico and Canada have persons in the government in all three countries who want to a see a North American Union as well as a highway system that would bring goods into the west coast of Mexico and transport them up through Mexico into the United States and then in onto Canada,” Goode confirmed.
The Virginia congressman said he believes the motivation behind the movement toward North American integration is the anticipated profits the large multinational corporations in each of the three countries expect to make from global trade, especially moving production to China.
“Some really large businesses that get a lot from China would like a NAFTA Superhighway system because it would reduce costs for them to transport containers from China and, as a result, increase their margins,” he argued.
“I am vigorously opposed to the Mexican trucks coming into the country,” Goode continued. “The way we have done it and, I think, the way we should do it in the future, is to have the goods come into the United States from Mexico within a 20-mile commercial space and unloaded from Mexican trucks into U.S. trucks. This procedure enhances the safety of the country, the security of the country, and provides much less chance for illegal immigration.”
The United States Department of Transportation has begun a Mexican truck “demonstration project” under which 100 Mexican trucking companies are being allowed to run their long-haul rigs throughout the U.S. as you read this. I have truck driver friends who tell me it’s already causing serious problems because the Mexicans cannot read English road signs and they intentionally fail to follow speed and safety regulations — since there’s no way to enforce those laws when they are back in Mexico 2-3 days later.
Previously, Mexican trucks have been limited to a 20-mile commercial zone in the United States, with the requirement that goods bound for locations in the U.S. beyond the 20-mile commercial zone be off-loaded to U.S. trucks.
This is all a major sell-out of our country in favor of greedy corporations and, thankfully, the Washington politicians are more afraid of getting booted right out of their cushy “jobs” and are not supporting the plan.
Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., successfully offered an amendment to the Department of Transportation Fiscal Year 2008 appropriations bill to block DOT from spending any federal funds to implement the truck project.
Dorgan’s amendment passed 75-23, after Sen. Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C., changed her vote to support Dorgan.
By a voice vote, the House passed an amendment offered by Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., to the DOT appropriations bill comparable to Dorgan’s, designed to block the agency from using federal funds to implement the truck project.
DeFazio chairs the House transportation subcommittee that oversees motor carriers.
“With the Trans-Texas Corridor, which I would say is part of the NAFTA Superhighway system, and with this NAFTA plot with the Mexican trucks just coming in and not loading off to U.S. trucks, they will just drive right over the Rio Grande and come on over into Texas,” Goode argued. “A lot of these Mexican trucks will be bring containerized cargo from the west coast of Mexico where they will be unloaded in Mexican ports to avoid the fees and costs of unloading at U.S. ports.”
“So, when you look at the total package,” he continued, “we do have a NAFTA Superhighway system already in place. There are those in all three countries that believe we should have a North American Union and the Security and Prosperity Partnership, in my opinion takes us down that road. And I am vigorously opposed to the loss of our sovereignty.”
Why, WND asked, do so many congressmen and senators insist on writing and telling their constituents that they don’t know anything about the Security and Prosperity Partnership, or that SPP working groups are really just to increase our competitiveness?
“In the House, a strong majority voted to provide no money in the transportation funding bill,” Goode responded. “I commend Congressman Duncan Hunter for submitting an amendment to the Department of Transportation funding bill [which] got over 360 votes that said no funds in the transportation appropriation measure, prohibiting Department of Transportation funds from being used to participate on working groups that promote the Security and Prosperity Partnership.”
“So, I think a majority the House, if you had an up or down vote on the SPP, would vote down on the SPP,” Goode concluded. “But some still say, and it’s a play on words, that we don’t have a Security and Prosperity Partnership that will lead to a North American Union. I don’t think they can say anymore that we don’t have a Security and Prosperity Partnership arrangement between the U.S., Mexico, and Canada, because that was done in Waco, Texas, on March 23, 2005, and the recent meeting at Montebello was to talk about it further.”
All meetings to discuss this are always held in private with no media allowed anywhere near.
For example, on August 21, 2007, in one of a dozen or so meetings the corporate media has refused to tell you about, George W. Bush, Mexico’s President Felipe Calderon, and Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper all met privately at The Fairmont Le Chateau, literally in the middle of the Quebec woods, to discuss the Security and Prosperity Partnership while various public advocacy groups, environmental groups, labor unions – and the press – were physically excluded by the military.
Should SPP working group meetings be open to the public?
“I wish they were,” Goode responded. “If it is as the Bush administration says, ‘We’re not planning any North American Union,’ then why wouldn’t those meetings be open, why wouldn’t you let the media in?” Goode asked.
“But some of the very big corporations want the goods from China to come in here unchecked,” he continued. “It costs money for U.S. trucks to transport Chinese goods from West Coast ports like Los Angeles or Long Beach. But if you can have a Mexican truck and Mexican truck driver, that’s going to be cheaper. And it’s all about the margins. The margins relate directly to how much money the multi-national corporations are going to make.”
Has the Senate debate on the Dorgan amendment brought the issues of the NAU and NAFTA Superhighways more to the attention of the Senate?
“I think so,” Goode said. “That debate had a very positive effect. You had grassroots support calling the Senate on the Dorgan amendment.
“The Bush administration engages in the same play of words with all these issues,” Goode added. “Take a look at the Kennedy-McCain comprehensive immigration reform, which the Bush administration has now tried to jam through the Senate not once, but twice.
“The Bush administration claims it’s not [amnesty] when you let someone stay in the country and give them a path to citizenship,” Goode pointed out. “Well, that’s their definition, not my definition, and not the definition of the majority of the public. The majority of the public called in and buried the amnesty bill because of public pressure. Public pressure also got de-funded the pilot program on Mexican trucks in this country.”
So should the U.S. pull out of the SPP?
“Yes,” Goode answered, “but the best way to end SPP would be to have a chief executive that wouldn’t do anything with it.”
What does Goode think of the state legislatures that are passing anti-NAU, anti-NAFTA Superhighway and anti-SPP resolutions?
“If enough state legislatures pass resolutions like that, it surely should have an impact on the House and the Senate,” Goode said.
“President Bush’s position is that we need to carry out NAFTA and we need to have this free flow of goods with Mexico and Canada,” Goode explained. “Well, Bush’s approach involves a derogation of our sovereignty and it also undermines the security and the safety of the country.
“It will be much easier for a truck to get a container on the west coast of Mexico and haul in a biological or radiological or nuclear weapon than it would be if you are going to have to unload the trucks on the Texas-Mexico border and put the goods and material in a U.S. truck,” he continued.
“The problem is that the NAU, NAFTA Superhighways and SPP all go back to money,” Goode stressed. “The multinational companies want their goods from Mexico and China because they want the cheap labor.”
Credit to Jerome Corsi and World Net Daily
Corporate Greed Assisted By Federal Courts
In 2006, United Airlines was in bankruptcy, whining how it was so broke the pensions had to be written off . . .
Then, magically, they later find they have $16 BILLION in extra assets they can cash-in on now that those pesky pensions have been “legally looted.”
May 10, 2005 — Bankruptcy Judge Eugene Wedoff approves United’s plan to terminate employee pensions, clearing the way for the largest corporate-pension default in American history.
September 25, 2007 — Spinning off units could raise $16 Billion for United.
Related Stories:
USA Today Timeline of UAL Bankruptcy . . .
UAL Board Looking AT Asset Sales . . .
First He Predicted The .com Bubble Burst, Now . . .
This sure gets my attention: “Yale economist and housing expert Robert Shiller warned that ‘the collapse of home prices might turn out to be the most severe since the Great Depression.’ Shiller was the economist who predicted the bursting of the dot-com bubble earlier this decade.”
Plenty of troubling signs on U.S. horizon
By David Crane
The consensus among economic forecasters seems to be that we are headed for a soft landing from the current turmoil in financial markets –- a bit of a slowdown but nothing too serious.
This is the tone, for example, in the latest global forecast from the Economist Intelligence Unit.
But don’t bet on it.
One troubling sign –- the risk of a recession in the United States. In an appearance before the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress a few days ago, Yale economist and housing expert Robert Shiller warned that “the collapse of home prices might turn out to be the most severe since the Great Depression.” Shiller was the economist who predicted the bursting of the dot-com bubble earlier this decade.
Such a decline would have a spillover effect across the economy through what economists call the wealth effect. It has been estimated that $4 trillion (U.S.) in household wealth would be lost if U.S. house prices fell 20 per cent.
Americans would feel much poorer and this would affect a broader range of consumer spending, from autos and appliances to travel and electronics. Shiller has warned that “we could see much more than the 15 per cent real drop in national home price indices that we saw the last time.” That was between 1989 and 1996.
Another troubling sign –- continued weakness of the U.S. dollar. Indeed, it may be that the recent cut in interest rates by the U.S. Federal Reserve is designed to lower the value of the U.S. dollar and boost U.S. exports while lowering imports. This would protect some American jobs at the expense of other countries, including Canada.
The Canadian dollar is now within reach of the U.S. dollar, the Japanese currency has strengthened, and this past week the euro rose above 1.40 to the U.S. dollar for the first time.
Another bad sign for the U.S. dollar is Saudi Arabia’s plan to break its peg to the U.S. dollar. The Saudis reportedly have $800 billion (U.S.) in their Future Generation Fund and the Gulf Co-operation Council countries altogether have an estimated $3.5 trillion under management.
There are concerns that the cut in U.S. interest rates will discourage foreign investors from continuing to invest in U.S. dollar securities and drive the dollar down further.
In an International Monetary Fund seminar earlier this month, Nouriel Roubini of New York University warned that a U.S. recession was inevitable.
“I expect that this financial turmoil is going to persist and it will be a vicious circle where the real economy gets worse and the financial markets get tighter and vice versa, the tightening of financial conditions leads to a slower economy,” he warned.
How The Falling Dollar Affects Americans
US consumers’ standard of living may drop as they pay more for foreign goods, but demand for American labor will rise, say economists.
By Rob Scherer
Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
from the September 24, 2007 edition
New York - The saga of the sagging dollar continues.
All year, the dollar has drooped compared with other major currencies. Last week, after the Federal Reserve reduced interest rates, it fell even further – now at a level not seen since 1997. The Canadian loonie is even stronger – on par with the greenback for the first time in 30 years.
But does a less prestigious portrait of George Washington (on the dollar bill) have any meaning for most Americans?
Economists say the falling dollar has pluses and minuses for the economy. For consumers who like to buy European automobiles or French cheeses, it means their standard of living will go down as they pay more money for these goods. But for American workers on the assembly lines at places such as Boeing or Caterpillar, it means their employers’ products will be more in demand.
“After the pluses and minuses are all netted out, I think the lower-valued dollar is good for the economy,” says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com. “The growth we’re getting from trade is helping to cushion the blow to the economy from housing.”
The last time that the buying power of the US dollar was this low was about a decade ago, according to Federal Reserve Board statistics. But the major difference was that the dollar was rebounding from its low point in the mid-1980s when the major industrial nations decided it was overvalued. It was also easier to make changes in the trade numbers because the price of oil ranged from $22 a barrel (in 2006 dollars) to $26 a barrel, and China’s exports were tiny. The US trade deficit was about $230 billion.
This time, the dollar has been on the skids for the past five years. The price of oil is about $80 a barrel. The Census bureau reports the trade imbalance with China alone is $141 billion through July.
So far this year, the greenback is down 7.6 percent, including another 2 percent last week after the Fed reduced interest rates by half of a percentage point.
One of the greatest concerns is that a lower-valued dollar will add to the inflation rate, since imports could become more expensive. So far that hasn’t shown up in the inflation numbers.
“It will take awhile to build into the system,” says Bill Witherell, chief global economist at Cumberland Advisors in Vineland, N.J. “Right now, it’s [inflation from imports] within the bounds which permitted the Fed to move.”
However, some other economists aren’t sure a falling dollar will help improve the trade deficit. They argue that the two major components of the trade deficit – oil and imports from China – are not really affected by the dollar gyrations. In July, the two areas represented 80 percent of America’s trade imbalance.
“If you can’t adjust imports of oil, and most are priced in dollars, and you can’t adjust currencies against Chinese yuan, which is pegged to the dollar, depreciating the dollar does not get you where you want to go,” says Peter Morici, an economics professor at the University of Maryland’s business school.
Mr. Zandi, however, counters that the rising price of oil will eventually mean that Americans get serious about alternatives or cutting down on consumption. “It’s having an impact, but it’s just not as noticeable yet,” he says.
He believes China’s slow appreciation of its currency – about 10 percent in the past two years – will ultimately result in fewer Chinese exports. “It will have a big impact two to four years down the road,” he predicts.
Some Federal Reserve watchers are not surprised that chairman Ben Bernanke opted to lower interest rates. Mr. Bernanke is a keen observer of the Great Depression in the 1930s. “In his studies of the Depression, one of his main criticisms is that the US was on the gold standard and did not get off of it,” says Axel Merk, president of Merk Hard Currency Fund in Palo Alto, Calif. “Had they been able to lower the value of the dollar, Bernanke argues, “the officials could have reduced the hardship.”
Some investors, including Mr. Merk, are skeptical that sacrificing the dollar is beneficial to an individual’s pocketbook. Globally, that skepticism has seeped over into the gold market and is one reason the price of gold is now above $732 a troy ounce, a 27-year high. So far this year, gold is up about 15 percent.
“Gold appreciates as the dollar declines,” says Merk.
So far the weak dollar has not kept investors from buying stocks, bonds, and real estate. The Dow Jones Industrial Average is up about 10.5 percent year-to-date and the Standard & Poor’s 500 index is up 7.1 percent year-to-date.
“You could argue it’s a problem if there is a rout of the dollar and it affects stock prices,” says Zandi. “But we are not there yet, and as long as the decline is orderly, it is one of the key conduits which helps ease the problem.”
Christian Science Monitor . . .
C.P.I. Lies About Inflation . . .
CPI’s Lie on Household Inflation Doesn’t Wash
By John F. Wasik
Sept. 24 (Bloomberg) — The U.S. consumer price index continues to be a testament to the art of economic spin.
Since wages, Social Security cost-of-living increases and some agency budgets are tied to it, the government has a vested interest in keeping it as low as possible.
Yet your real cost of living — what you keep after taxes, medical bills, college expenses and other household costs — is probably much higher than the 2 percent annual rate the government reported in July, showing a slight decline.
Millions are falling behind inflation because wage increases aren’t keeping pace with the cost of medical care, lost employment benefits, homeownership expenses, energy and transportation.
And there’s also a goliath looming in the U.S. economy that makes the government’s consumer gauge more deceptive. Even with the stinging reality that housing values are dropping in many markets, homeownership costs such as taxes, maintenance and financing are still rising much faster than the index.
Last week’s half-point cut in the Federal Reserve’s target rate — to 4.75 percent — will do little to shield more than 2 million homeowners from foreclosure for adjustable-rate mortgages that are resetting to monthly payments people can’t afford.
The recently expired U.S. housing boom is continuing to strain household budgets, though little of this home-related inflation is measured by the consumer index.
Little Relief
Rising home values forced up assessments for property taxes, which are slow to fall when the housing market recedes. Since these levies are based on rising home values for last year, few will see relief in 2007.
Gerald Prante, an economist with the Washington-based Tax Foundation, found that median real-estate taxes on owner- occupied housing went from $1,614 in 2005 to $1,742 last year.
“That’s an increase of 7.93 percent, more than double the inflation rate in that time period,” Prante says.
Those tax levels may sound like nirvana to a New Jersey resident, where median levies are almost $6,000. Vermont, Illinois, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut and New Hampshire all have rates that are more than $3,000, with many upscale areas exceeding $15,000 per year.
The single-largest expense for most Americans is housing, accounting for as much as a third of household outlays. Yet the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics only tracks “owner’s equivalent rent,” or what a home would yield if it was rented out. Rental units and homes are two very different animals, though, and the government casts a blind eye to total homeownership expenses.
Mistaken Perception
Most critics of the CPI have had a field day with the index based on the unrealistic tracking of housing costs. The bureau, which compiles the index, has stated that it isn’t a complete cost-of-living index. The common and mistaken perception still persists that consumer inflation is represented in this measure.
Medical expenses are given short shrift as well. It wasn’t that long ago when employers could cover almost all of an employee’s health-care bills.
Now workers are shelling out an average of $3,281 from their paychecks for family medical coverage, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, a non-profit organization based in Menlo Park, California. The average premium for a family policy is more than $12,000 annually.
Since 2001, health premiums have risen 78 percent while wages have only gained 19 percent. The government’s inflation measure during that stretch was 17 percent.
Lost Benefits
You are keeping pace with inflation if your income can cover losses in benefits or other household items costing more. If you are paid in bonuses and commissions, you can often close the gap in good years.
Salaries often fall short, though, because many raises are based solely on the consumer index.
What no government gauge can tally is a household’s net worth. This is all of your wealth — home equity, stocks, bonds, business capital, retirement plans — minus your debts.
Having a positive net worth is a step in the right direction. Yet most families don’t experience this sense of wealth until their children are out of college — another huge expense that has been climbing at triple the rate of the consumer index.
If you were counting on home equity to boost your net worth, the housing bust will certainly give you pause for reflection.
Are you in an area where home values are stable? That’s largely dependent on local employment and economic conditions. In a market glutted with homes that can’t sell, you have a reason to be concerned and shouldn’t depend entirely on selling your home at a future date to create a retirement fund.
Inflation Hedge
Not relying upon home equity exclusively for your nest egg is smart financial planning.
One of the best ways to beat inflation is to own securities that hedge inflation risk and its many facets. Don’t go out shopping for energy, health-care and gold stocks, though.
Think long-term and diversify. Over the last 80 years, large- and small-company stocks have beaten an average inflation rate of 4.3 percent, according to Ibbotson Associates, a Chicago-based research firm owned by Morningstar Inc.
Small stocks, generally companies with market values of less than $1 billion, averaged almost 13 percent annually since 1926, with large firms returning about 10 percent.
Since these two asset classes are among the most volatile investments, you can’t expect those returns every year. During the Great Depression, small companies lost from 10 percent to 60 percent.
Make your inflation-beating strategy simple. Invest in index or exchange-traded funds through your 401(k) or retirement plans. Two big-basket vehicles include the Vanguard Total Stock Market VIPERs or its Small-Cap VIPERS.
When making goals for your portfolio returns, it’s wise to avoid using the government’s inflation rate as a benchmark. Aim higher. Shoot for outpacing your household’s cost-of-living increase. That’s the most important number to beat.
Saudi Arabia “Divorcing” The U.S. Dollar?
The London Telegraph reports that Saudi Arabia seems poised to re-peg its currency to avoid inflationary pressure caused by the weakening American Dollar. This move would have serious effects on the United States.
The first major consequence of this is that any change in the Riyal to the Dollar would significantly impact the cost of oil. By increasing the value of the Riyal relative to the value of the dollar, the cost to produce and transport oil within Saudi Arabia would increase (from the U.S. consumer’s perspective) overnight. Nearly all oil traded in the Middle East is done using the Riyal pegged to the dollar.
The second consequence is that Saudi Arabia, our close friend and ally, holds a significant number of U.S. Treasury Bonds as well as other public and private securities. As the dollar weakens against other international markets, investing in the United States becomes less and less attractive. The only way to make U.S. Treasuries more attractive is to increase the interest rate, which is exactly the opposite of what the Fed recently did when cutting interest rates to spur the stagnating economy.
Other countries seem very concerned about the U.S. dollar. Meanwhile, in America, the government is practically shutting-down to castigate MoveOn.org about a newspaper ad . . .
Ron Paul Blasts Fed Chairman Bernake
Good!
It’s about time!
Ron Paul blasted Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke for deliberately killing the value of the dollar to artificially bail out Wall Street while poor and middle class people lose their homes and have their living standards lowered.
During a Congressional Banking Committee hearing on Capitol Hill last Wednesday, the Texas Congressman confronted Bernanke and accused the Fed of trying to solve the problem of inflation with more inflation by creating artificially low interest rates that have no effect because of the dollar’s weakness.
Here’s the video:
http://www.youtube.com/v/AeHWW5gbc0w