Another Billionaire Warns Of The Danger Of Income Inequality

what would happen if the dollar continuously got more valuable?

why would a private entity give all its net-profits to the treasury department?

 

One dollar would be able to buy more goods and services than previously.

 

You've just highlighted the main problem with the FED. It's bad enough having a central bank on it's own but when it is private and not even accountable to elected officials then it is disastrous. You can't even properly scrutinize their economic policies because you don't have anyone watching over them. Not even something as simple as an audit.

 

How does one person holding a lot of money effect anyone's ability to get by?

 

that's a myopic, short-term view

the choice of a tactic to have slow, steady monetary-inflation (2% annually) is a wise one

if the dollar continually got more valuable, people that are able to, would postpone unnecessary spending

since this would give them more future purchasing power; this would lead to less spending and lower sales

that elicits less production, then more unemployment, reduced investment rates and potentially a downward spiral

in the end, wealthy people would respond by buying up everything they could, at pennies-on-the dollar

you're obviously missing the point and ill-informed on how it operates

how is giving all their net-profits to the government, a problem?

and the fed is held accountable in many ways

hearings, audits, legislation & etc



here's where congress tells the fed what its job is:


Federal Reserve Act

Section 2A. Monetary policy objectives

The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Open Market Committee shall maintain long run growth of the monetary and credit aggregates commensurate with the economy's long run potential to increase production, so as to promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates.



here's where congress makes the fed report their progress:


Section 2B. Appearances Before and Reports to the Congress

(a) Appearances Before The Congress.

In General. The Chairman of the Board shall appear before the Congress at semi-annual hearings, as specified in paragraph (2), regarding the efforts, activities, objectives and plans of the Board and the Federal Open Market Committee with respect to the conduct of monetary policy; andeconomic developments and prospects for the future described in the report required in subsection (b).
Schedule. The Chairman of the Board shall appear before the Committee on Banking and Financial Services of the House of Representatives on or about February 20 of even numbered calendar years and on or about July 20 of odd numbered calendar years;
before the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate on or about July 20 of even numbered calendar years and on or about February 20 of odd numbered calendar years; and before either Committee referred to in subparagraph (A) or (B), upon request, following the scheduled appearance of the Chairman before the other Committee under subparagraph (A) or (B).


(b) Congressional Report. The Board shall, concurrent with each semi-annual hearing required by this section, submit a written report to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Banking and Financial Services of the House of Representatives, containing a discussion of the conduct of monetary policy and economic developments and prospects for the future, taking into account past and prospective developments in employment, unemployment, production,investment, real income, productivity, exchange rates, international trade and payments, and prices.

(c) Public Access To Information. The Board shall place on its home Internet website, a link entitled 'Audit', which shall link to a webpage that shall serve as a repository of information made available to the public for a reasonable period of time, not less than 6 months following the date of release of the relevant information, including the reports prepared by the Comptroller General under section 714 of title 31, United States Code; the annual financial statements prepared by an independent auditor for the Board in accordance with section 11B; the reports to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate required under section 13(3) (relating to emergency lending authority); and such other information as the Board reasonably believes is necessary or helpful to the public in understanding the accounting, financial reporting, and internal controls of the Board and the Federal reserve banks.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/fract.htm

 

In just about every national poll, Ronald Reagan was ranked the best president since WWII.
So lets be honest here, you opinion is part of the fringe!

 

Annual GDP growth has been has been averaging roughly 3% over the last ten years. Under a stable money supply this would mean that holding $100 for the course of a year would result in its purchasing power rising to $103.

If someone wants a new shirt that costs $25, he's not going to delay a full year just so he can get it for $24.25.

 

you're missing the point

what you're calling a "stable money supply", doesn't result in stability

you're talking about gullible people

[video=youtube;VGdWIwiVMF4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGdWIwiVMF4[/video]

 

Has Carl Ichan dissolved all his assets and distributed them to the poor? If not, he need to (*)(*)(*)(*) and sit down.

 

According to the fringe left wing, everyone who does not agree with the left's agenda are "gullible people" to hell with the majority, even if they are independent thinkers! LOL

 

that's ridiculous

here's another billionaire telling the truth about taxation and income disparity:

[video=youtube;bBx2Y5HhplI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBx2Y5HhplI[/video]

i'm a moderate and the iran-contra scandal showed how dishonest reagan was

he talked about not negotiating with terrorist, but, he traded arms for hostages

[video=youtube;OiA-0HHDIAc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiA-0HHDIAc[/video]

 

If we restricted 75% of income from all US billionaires, please explain in your own words how that would help the average American?

A moderate you say? All anyone has to do is search your most recent started threads to figure out, that is ridiculous.

 

Obama traded nukes and got nothing in return including the hostages.

 

you really don't know what you're talking about

iran went from 19,000 centrifuges under bush's terms to under 6000 during obama's

our infrastructure is falling apart because republicans all conglomerate corporations to shirk their tax responsibilities

watch the video and learn something

all you're doing is showing that you don't know what you're talking about

 

Just exactly how naive are these Libs? They believe that Obama has entered into an agreement with a country that is going to play fair, but Iran's history has proven time and time again that they do not. Look up taqiyya... He has succumbed to everything they wanted and still did not get the hostages back. Let's take a trip down memory lane as to what he gave away to get the traitor Bergdahl back. He has given away the US position of strength and made us a weak nation that is the laughing stock of the world.

 

i've already demonstrated that y'all don't know what you're talking about in regards to iran

there's no need to double down on it

 

Appealing to the stupidity and ignorance of the raging masses is not an argument for much.

 

If the moderates were to form their own party, fixing the problem might be possible. But, moderates also lean right or left, so where is the common ground?

This is why there has only been two dominant parties throughout the history of the country. Any third party spilts the vote on either the right, or the left. For example, if Trump runs as an independent in 2016, the Republican vote will be split, since an overwhelming majority of his supporters are right-wingers that always vote for the most extreme conservative.

 

Were you saying that holding money harms other's ability to get by or that spending money to buy resources does? By your saying "such as to control natural resources", is sounds like you're referring to spending money to buy these resources, correct?

 

Here's my question:

How does one person holding a lot of money affect anyone's ability to get by?