Statement from Federal Reserve Chair
federalreserve.gov
federalreserve.gov
Or at least, that's what he claims for himself and ICE murderers.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_v._United_States
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_immunity_in_the_U...
I wonder what his opinion would be on what happens if a Federal agent shot Trump. But let's not pretend the current administration believes one word they're saying.
He learned from his mistake, and this administration is much less prone to defect than the first one.
Autocrats need to constantly be sending a message: stay loyal or else.
Because he (thinks he) can.
This is not about logic but about power and trying to flex it. To show people who's the boss. To bully.
If no one pushes back hard enough, then it's a fait accompli. If there's push back then there will be another attempt later on. And again. Until the push gets through.
Reality is, these institutions have failed for a long time. It gave me a chuckle when I read the line "maximum unemployment and price stability". The official fed numbers for those are way off, you tell Americans spending >50% on their groceries compared to 2-3yrs ago that the inflation is 4%. Or unemployment rates for that matter. All the numbers are garbage, nothing means anything anymore.
If congress and Fed had a spine to enforce meritocracy, Jerome and all the "transitory" shenanigans would have been out long ago. And so there you have it. Officials with 10 years terms with zero accountability for their decisions with revolving doors to follow having big bucks consulting gigs for big banks awaiting moment they retire will say and do anything to preserve the self-serving institutions. Not its mandate. And cherry on top, if they are lucky to play out well, on their way out will get the glory of "serving the people and protecting the institutions".
Where are your numbers that disprove the fed's numbers?
That would presumably show up in personal/household income figures, but everything looks normal:
For example, food away from home is down. People cannot afford to go out to eat as much. Rather than reflect the higher cost of going out to eat, the consumption basket reduces the proportion of food away from home.
There are also hard limits on food spending. People have limited money. Instead what you seeing is a continued increase in SNAP and record food bank usage.
Make no mistake. The young family or median person is worse off with food security today despite spending more.
He specifically mentions "groceries" so trying to retcon his argument to being about food away from home doesn't make any sense.
Moreover BLS publishes price indices for each item in the basket, so you can exclude the effect of the basket weights changing. Looking at the "Food Away from Home" category, that only rose 33% since the pandemic, not much higher than the overall inflation of 25.4%, and a far cry from ">50% on their groceries".
One of the major reasons that software was hit hard is that it grew accustomed to 10 years of insanely low interest rates that for some reason didn't cause inflation, and then when things started returning to historical averages, it couldn't continue in the same way.