TulsaRevolution
Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2008
- Messages
- 278
I was wondering if anyone had specifics on just exactly how deep the relationship between the Federal Reserve banking system and the President are. Do they work intimately together in planning fiscal policy? Can the Fed be influenced by policies of the POTUS? Or are some administrations tighter with the bankers than others?
From my examination of very simple data, it appears to me that the Bush administration has seemed much more "in cahoots" with the Federal Reserve than the Clinton administration was. But I thought the Fed worked independently from the government? Bush comes into office, and immediately rates start dropping. I'm wondering if this was by design to make things "rosier" and give the illusion of a brighter economic picture under a Republican presidency, or if I am reading too much into things (the rate drops could have been due to the dotcom bubble burst, and the following economic turmoil with crooked bookkeeping)
Still, I'm looking at historical data and trying to figure out why in the hell Greenspan did what he did. The conspiracy theorist in me looks at how low those rates were going into 2004. He kept them low just long enough to get us through the 2004 election, then had to raise them up systematically as fast as possible afterwards, to try to catch up for all the damage done by having them too low for too long. Almost like it was his final act, from the moment the election was cinched for Bush in 2004, to the day Greenspan's term expired in 2006, saw a steep increase in rates. After that, it wasn't Greenspan's problem.
Could Greenspan have been that much in cahoots with the Bush administration? If so, who was the boss of who?
What percent of the mess we are in right now is Greenspan's fault? 50%? 90%? It would seem just about everything we have going on right now occurred due to the sustained way-too-low interest rates followed by the sharp rise as Greenspan was on his way out.
From my examination of very simple data, it appears to me that the Bush administration has seemed much more "in cahoots" with the Federal Reserve than the Clinton administration was. But I thought the Fed worked independently from the government? Bush comes into office, and immediately rates start dropping. I'm wondering if this was by design to make things "rosier" and give the illusion of a brighter economic picture under a Republican presidency, or if I am reading too much into things (the rate drops could have been due to the dotcom bubble burst, and the following economic turmoil with crooked bookkeeping)
Still, I'm looking at historical data and trying to figure out why in the hell Greenspan did what he did. The conspiracy theorist in me looks at how low those rates were going into 2004. He kept them low just long enough to get us through the 2004 election, then had to raise them up systematically as fast as possible afterwards, to try to catch up for all the damage done by having them too low for too long. Almost like it was his final act, from the moment the election was cinched for Bush in 2004, to the day Greenspan's term expired in 2006, saw a steep increase in rates. After that, it wasn't Greenspan's problem.
Could Greenspan have been that much in cahoots with the Bush administration? If so, who was the boss of who?
What percent of the mess we are in right now is Greenspan's fault? 50%? 90%? It would seem just about everything we have going on right now occurred due to the sustained way-too-low interest rates followed by the sharp rise as Greenspan was on his way out.
