MARKETWATCH
"Fed official: The fleeting impact from Trump’s stimulus is at its height right now"
By Steve Goldstein
Published: Sept 7, 2018 12:53 p.m. ET
The president of the Dallas Federal Reserve said Friday the tax cuts and federal spending increases are having their biggest impact right now, suggesting they will not make lasting changes to the economy.
Robert Kaplan, in an interview with Fox Business Network, said the economic impact from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act will decrease next year.
“It is our view and it’s my view at the Dallas Fed that we’re at the height of the impact of the stimulus right now, the fiscal stimulus."
"That will fade somewhat in ’19 and will fade further in ’20 and you still got some headwinds, sluggish labor force growth because the demographics [of] aging and sluggish productivity, those will start to kick in more as the fiscal stimulus fades,” he said.
Kaplan said trade disputes are having the impact of limiting capital expenditure growth.
“The tax legislation and tax reform cause companies to accelerate capex that they might have done a year or two from now to do it today because of the tax incentives,” Kaplan said.
“I also think you’re seeing additional capex in the energy business because of the production growth, high prices but I do think companies are telling me that they, yes, they are taking a wait-and-see approach because of the uncertainty around trade."
"So, it’s having a little bit of a chilling effect and so that’s something to just be aware of and take note of.”
As for the jobs report, Kaplan said it didn’t change his view of the U.S. economy.
He also said he’s been expecting wage growth to accelerate, as it did in August.
“I’ve been expecting for several months now that you’d see the wage number firming."
"And it’s consistent with a tight labor market, I still believe that a lot of the big structural drivers in the world, automation, globalization will mute overall inflation pressures."
"But I actually think the wage growth number is welcome and it is probably consistent with our outlook for the economy and what it’s been the last few months,” he said.
Kaplan, who isn’t a voter on the Federal Open Market Committee but participates in the meetings, said he’s in favor of bringing rates up to a range between 2.5% to 2.75%.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/fed-o ... ewer_click
POLITICS
Re: POLITICS
CBS NEWS
"Trump wants Sessions to find author of 'unfair' op-ed"
Reporting by Paula Reid and Jacqueline Alemany
7 SEPTEMBER 2018
President Trump wants his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, to figure out who is behind a scathing anonymous New York Times op-ed, which described a "resistance" operating within the Trump administration, defying his worst impulses and desires.
"It's national security," the president said on Air Force One, on the way to a rally in North Dakota Friday.
"I would say that Jeff should be investigating who the author of that piece was, because I really believe it's national security."
The Justice Department issued a response to the president's Air Force One remark, saying in a statement, "The department does not confirm, deny or otherwise acknowledge the existence or non-existence of investigations."
The president also said of the op-ed writer, "We're going to take a look at what he had, what he gave, what he's talking about, also where he is right now."
He offered another reason he wanted to know the identity of the author.
"Supposing I have a high level national security, and he has got a clearance, we talked about clearances a lot recently, and he goes into a high-level meeting concerning China or Russia or North Korea or something," he said.
"I don't want him in those meetings."
Asked whether any action should be taken against the Times, Mr. Trump responded, "I'm looking at that right now."
"It only happened yesterday."
Several Cabinet officials and agencies issued statements denying authorship of the op-ed.
The Justice Department is one of the few that has not issued such a statement.
During an interview that aired early Friday on "Fox & Friends," Mr. Trump expressed frustration about the op-ed, calling it "unfair."
"What's unfair, I don't mind when they write a book and they make lies because it gets discredited," Mr. Trump said, but it's more difficult "when somebody writes and you can't discredit because you have no idea who they are."
Mr. Trump gave no indication that he was close to identifying the author but speculated that it "may be a deep state person who's been there a long time" or perhaps one of many, many people who can be designated as a senior administration official, which is how the person was identified in the Times op-ed.
"So they take one person out of thousands," the president told Fox News.
Steven Portnoy contributed to this report.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... id=HPDHP17
"Trump wants Sessions to find author of 'unfair' op-ed"
Reporting by Paula Reid and Jacqueline Alemany
7 SEPTEMBER 2018
President Trump wants his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, to figure out who is behind a scathing anonymous New York Times op-ed, which described a "resistance" operating within the Trump administration, defying his worst impulses and desires.
"It's national security," the president said on Air Force One, on the way to a rally in North Dakota Friday.
"I would say that Jeff should be investigating who the author of that piece was, because I really believe it's national security."
The Justice Department issued a response to the president's Air Force One remark, saying in a statement, "The department does not confirm, deny or otherwise acknowledge the existence or non-existence of investigations."
The president also said of the op-ed writer, "We're going to take a look at what he had, what he gave, what he's talking about, also where he is right now."
He offered another reason he wanted to know the identity of the author.
"Supposing I have a high level national security, and he has got a clearance, we talked about clearances a lot recently, and he goes into a high-level meeting concerning China or Russia or North Korea or something," he said.
"I don't want him in those meetings."
Asked whether any action should be taken against the Times, Mr. Trump responded, "I'm looking at that right now."
"It only happened yesterday."
Several Cabinet officials and agencies issued statements denying authorship of the op-ed.
The Justice Department is one of the few that has not issued such a statement.
During an interview that aired early Friday on "Fox & Friends," Mr. Trump expressed frustration about the op-ed, calling it "unfair."
"What's unfair, I don't mind when they write a book and they make lies because it gets discredited," Mr. Trump said, but it's more difficult "when somebody writes and you can't discredit because you have no idea who they are."
Mr. Trump gave no indication that he was close to identifying the author but speculated that it "may be a deep state person who's been there a long time" or perhaps one of many, many people who can be designated as a senior administration official, which is how the person was identified in the Times op-ed.
"So they take one person out of thousands," the president told Fox News.
Steven Portnoy contributed to this report.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... id=HPDHP17
Re: POLITICS
ASSOCIATED PRESS
"The Latest: Obama says midterms chance at political 'sanity'"
9 SEPTEMBER 2018
ANAHEIM, Calif. — The Latest on former President Barack Obama (all times local):
12:55 p.m.
Former President Barack Obama says the midterm elections in November will give Americans the chance to — in his words — "restore some sanity in our politics" by changing control of Congress.
He's in California trying to help out a group of congressional candidates.
And Obama tells the crowd in Anaheim that "we're all in this together and that what makes America exceptional and unique is that from all around the world people ... came here because they believed in a certain set of ideals."
___
12:40 p.m.
Barack Obama has made a political appearance in California on behalf of Democratic congressional candidates he says have "decided to step up and bring out the best in our country."
The former president says "we're in a challenging moment" when enormous changes are taking place.
He says 'people feel unsettled, people feel scared," and they're worried about their children's future.
Obama says there are no problems that can't be solved if "we're working together and we're true to the traditions that are the best in America."
But he's also warning that it's "always tempting for politicians — for their own gain and for people in power — to try to see if they can divide people, scapegoat folks."
When that happens, he says, people become cynical and decide not to participate in the political process — creating a vacuum that lobbyists and special interests fill.
___
8:15 a.m.
Former President Barack Obama is in California to campaign for Democratic congressional candidates one day after issuing a stinging rebuke of his successor in the White House.
Obama is set to appear later Saturday at the Anaheim Convention Center in the heart of Orange County, a once-solid Republican stronghold that voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election that Donald Trump won.
Obama will share the billing with seven Democratic candidates in competitive U.S. House districts across California.
Those races are considered crucial to the party's efforts to retake control of the House from Republican.
Four of those districts are at least partly in Orange County.
Obama issued a scorching critique of President Donald Trump on Friday in a speech at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... id=HPDHP17
"The Latest: Obama says midterms chance at political 'sanity'"
9 SEPTEMBER 2018
ANAHEIM, Calif. — The Latest on former President Barack Obama (all times local):
12:55 p.m.
Former President Barack Obama says the midterm elections in November will give Americans the chance to — in his words — "restore some sanity in our politics" by changing control of Congress.
He's in California trying to help out a group of congressional candidates.
And Obama tells the crowd in Anaheim that "we're all in this together and that what makes America exceptional and unique is that from all around the world people ... came here because they believed in a certain set of ideals."
___
12:40 p.m.
Barack Obama has made a political appearance in California on behalf of Democratic congressional candidates he says have "decided to step up and bring out the best in our country."
The former president says "we're in a challenging moment" when enormous changes are taking place.
He says 'people feel unsettled, people feel scared," and they're worried about their children's future.
Obama says there are no problems that can't be solved if "we're working together and we're true to the traditions that are the best in America."
But he's also warning that it's "always tempting for politicians — for their own gain and for people in power — to try to see if they can divide people, scapegoat folks."
When that happens, he says, people become cynical and decide not to participate in the political process — creating a vacuum that lobbyists and special interests fill.
___
8:15 a.m.
Former President Barack Obama is in California to campaign for Democratic congressional candidates one day after issuing a stinging rebuke of his successor in the White House.
Obama is set to appear later Saturday at the Anaheim Convention Center in the heart of Orange County, a once-solid Republican stronghold that voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election that Donald Trump won.
Obama will share the billing with seven Democratic candidates in competitive U.S. House districts across California.
Those races are considered crucial to the party's efforts to retake control of the House from Republican.
Four of those districts are at least partly in Orange County.
Obama issued a scorching critique of President Donald Trump on Friday in a speech at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... id=HPDHP17
Re: POLITICS
"Rensselaer dump opponents get legal help"
By Brian Nearing, Albany, New York Times Union
Updated 3:49 pm EDT, Friday, September 7, 2018
Rensselaer - A national environmental group is providing legal assistance to local opponents of the state's largest construction and debris dump that continues growing in Rensselaer.
The Sierra Club has retained Albany lawyer John Barone to review the 2012 state permit issued for the sprawling Dunn landfill by the Department of Environmental Conservation.
"I have been retained, and am currently reviewing this permit and other documents," Barone said Friday.
He is a member of the Albany law firm of Tooher and Barone.
Barone is a former board member of Saratoga PLAN, a not-for-profit environmental advocacy group in Saratoga County.
"It is gratifying to have a group that is willing to help us legally prove our contention that we are suffering excessive impacts from the trucks going to and from this landfill all day long," said Lou Sebesta, a Partition Street resident who is part of a grassroots group called Stop Trucks From Assaulting Rensselaer.
"The state has not been taking our points seriously that we are being impacted, and that the dump is destroying our quality of life and the prospect of quality development in our community," he added.
Last month, DEC hit owner S.A. Dunn & Co. LLC, an affiliate of the regional waste company Waste Connections, with a $50,000 fine for four separate environmental violations at the dump, which accepts construction and demolition debris.
Neighbors like Sebesta and others have complained about dozens of large tractor trailer trucks that deliver loads to dump during weekdays, and question a 2012 state permit that allows up to 100 such vehicles daily.
The dump can legally accept concrete, sheetrock, asphalt, masonry, roofing materials, plumbing fixtures, insulation (but not asbestos), empty buckets, wood, plastics and "pulverized waste."
It cannot take regular household garbage or hazardous waste.
Sebesta that the 2012 DEC permit that allowed up to 100 trucks a day to visit the facility — a limit set when the facility was still only a sand and gravel mine — should never have been applied to the construction dump.
Partition Street, which is lined with homes, is the only way in and out of the facility.
The heavy trucks cause excessive noise, exhaust and rattle buildings as they pass, according to neighbors.
The trucks are also spreading dirt and dust through the area.
Since the dump opened in 2015, more than 50,000 trucks from multiple states have used the facility.
The state violations against Dunn last month did not address the underlying truck issues and 2012 permit that are being raised by dump opponents.
The violations included trucks using two roads to the facility that were not on the 2012 plan approved by the state, storm water running off the facility down Partition Street, dumping of hundreds of tons of dirt fill on nearby land that is being used to construct new athletic fields for the nearby Rensselaer Junior-Senior High School, and dust clouds blowing off the facility.
The agreement called for a fine of up to $100,000 against Dunn, but DEC will forgive half of that if the company fixes the problems, including plans to control dust.
The agreement also calls for Dunn to spend $225,000 for an unspecified project that benefits the Rensselaer School District and "the local community."
The athletic fields being built next to the high school are being done by Kubricky Construction, a Wilton-based construction firm where former Dunn mine owner Michael Dunn is now president.
According to a Feb. 2 DEC notice of violations to Dunn, Kubricky is "also the subcontractor that operates the Dunn facility mine."
In 2015, Dunn sold the 99-acre property to Waste Connections, a Texas-based corporation that is one of the nation's largest waste haulers.
As part of the $30 million sale, which also included a dump in Texas, Dunn received a $3 million bonus for obtaining the state and city agreements and permits necessary for the dump, according to a report that Waste Connections filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in 2016.
https://www.timesunion.com/business/art ... 212562.php
By Brian Nearing, Albany, New York Times Union
Updated 3:49 pm EDT, Friday, September 7, 2018
Rensselaer - A national environmental group is providing legal assistance to local opponents of the state's largest construction and debris dump that continues growing in Rensselaer.
The Sierra Club has retained Albany lawyer John Barone to review the 2012 state permit issued for the sprawling Dunn landfill by the Department of Environmental Conservation.
"I have been retained, and am currently reviewing this permit and other documents," Barone said Friday.
He is a member of the Albany law firm of Tooher and Barone.
Barone is a former board member of Saratoga PLAN, a not-for-profit environmental advocacy group in Saratoga County.
"It is gratifying to have a group that is willing to help us legally prove our contention that we are suffering excessive impacts from the trucks going to and from this landfill all day long," said Lou Sebesta, a Partition Street resident who is part of a grassroots group called Stop Trucks From Assaulting Rensselaer.
"The state has not been taking our points seriously that we are being impacted, and that the dump is destroying our quality of life and the prospect of quality development in our community," he added.
Last month, DEC hit owner S.A. Dunn & Co. LLC, an affiliate of the regional waste company Waste Connections, with a $50,000 fine for four separate environmental violations at the dump, which accepts construction and demolition debris.
Neighbors like Sebesta and others have complained about dozens of large tractor trailer trucks that deliver loads to dump during weekdays, and question a 2012 state permit that allows up to 100 such vehicles daily.
The dump can legally accept concrete, sheetrock, asphalt, masonry, roofing materials, plumbing fixtures, insulation (but not asbestos), empty buckets, wood, plastics and "pulverized waste."
It cannot take regular household garbage or hazardous waste.
Sebesta that the 2012 DEC permit that allowed up to 100 trucks a day to visit the facility — a limit set when the facility was still only a sand and gravel mine — should never have been applied to the construction dump.
Partition Street, which is lined with homes, is the only way in and out of the facility.
The heavy trucks cause excessive noise, exhaust and rattle buildings as they pass, according to neighbors.
The trucks are also spreading dirt and dust through the area.
Since the dump opened in 2015, more than 50,000 trucks from multiple states have used the facility.
The state violations against Dunn last month did not address the underlying truck issues and 2012 permit that are being raised by dump opponents.
The violations included trucks using two roads to the facility that were not on the 2012 plan approved by the state, storm water running off the facility down Partition Street, dumping of hundreds of tons of dirt fill on nearby land that is being used to construct new athletic fields for the nearby Rensselaer Junior-Senior High School, and dust clouds blowing off the facility.
The agreement called for a fine of up to $100,000 against Dunn, but DEC will forgive half of that if the company fixes the problems, including plans to control dust.
The agreement also calls for Dunn to spend $225,000 for an unspecified project that benefits the Rensselaer School District and "the local community."
The athletic fields being built next to the high school are being done by Kubricky Construction, a Wilton-based construction firm where former Dunn mine owner Michael Dunn is now president.
According to a Feb. 2 DEC notice of violations to Dunn, Kubricky is "also the subcontractor that operates the Dunn facility mine."
In 2015, Dunn sold the 99-acre property to Waste Connections, a Texas-based corporation that is one of the nation's largest waste haulers.
As part of the $30 million sale, which also included a dump in Texas, Dunn received a $3 million bonus for obtaining the state and city agreements and permits necessary for the dump, according to a report that Waste Connections filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in 2016.
https://www.timesunion.com/business/art ... 212562.php
Re: POLITICS
"Commentary: Embrace of Trump persona degrades nation"
By Abigail L. Meyer, Commentary
Albany, New York Times Union
Published 4:40 pm EDT, Saturday, September 8, 2018
Why is President Donald Trump's manner of speech — distinguished by its lack of tact, refinement, and civility — still defended by Republicans?
His supporters claim that it is a "breath of fresh air."
That it rejects the paradigm of censorship or political correctness or sensitivity that has supposedly devolved our nation over the past few decades.
That it reinstates a sense of power, pride, and strength in America.
Here are three reasons why that argument is inherently flawed.
First, it assumes that words which are eloquent or graceful in their construction cannot also be revolutionary or scandalous.
While this attack on the articulate most obviously responds to President Barack Obama's well-spokenness, it would also suggest that Thomas Jefferson's immortal words: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness," are incapable of greatness or innovation because they are artfully crafted.
While I am confident that no reasonable Trump supporter would dismiss Jefferson's words as such, I worry that this is merely because they are the words of Jefferson and not of an articulate politician in 2018.
I worry that Trump has set a precedent for many Americans to equate articulation alone with crookedness, corruption, or malicious intent.
Second, the argument supposes that Trump's lack of tact is a symptom of his humility — that he does not waste his breath on superfluous words because he is a champion of the common, unrefined man.
It is entirely true that great words do not require eloquence to be stirring or poignant.
Indeed, in times of adversity it can be found that the most basic and accessible of assertions are needed to bind a nation or people.
But Trump's manner of speech is neither binding nor can it claim to be a symptom of his "common" roots.
Furthermore, his crassness should not be mistaken as evidence for the president's uniquely "raw," "pure," or "unadulterated" character.
Interviews that predate Mr. Trump's campaign and presidency exhibit that his persona is a fabrication — that his crassness, his witlessness, his inanity are not a rejection of political mendacity but rather the epitome of it.
In a 1980 interview for NBC News, searchable on YouTube, the future president displays a certain calmness and relatively expansive vocabulary that is foreign to the Donald Trump of 2018.
He is the worst kind of buffoon because he is one that is entirely artificial and contrived.
Third, the argument devastatingly confuses incivility for bluntness.
It likes to pretend that his speech is returning to some status quo before political correctness or oversensitivity, but I cannot believe that in any past era of our nation's history, reputability was marked by such juvenile statements as the ones Trump produces.
This is referring not only to his remarks that have abused women, immigrants, war heroes and the disabled but also to the daily batch of comments that exhibit a gross lack of discretion.
Even now I recognize that I have become desensitized to the fact that my president's tweets possess as much acuity as those of my former middle school peers.
Ultimately, Trump has paved the road for an age of anti-intellectualism: where eloquence is made synonymous with corruption and bullying is mistaken for candor.
I have seen those on the right who would previously have spurned this movement now defend it with vehement spirit.
I do not know if this is merely the consequence of the two-party system or evidence of some larger deficiency in our society, but it has surely set a precedent of ignorance that devastates America as a people, as a polity, as a nation, and as an idea.
Abigail Meyer of Clifton Park is a graduate student studying linguistics at the University of Edinburgh, Scotland.
https://www.timesunion.com/opinion/arti ... 215049.php
By Abigail L. Meyer, Commentary
Albany, New York Times Union
Published 4:40 pm EDT, Saturday, September 8, 2018
Why is President Donald Trump's manner of speech — distinguished by its lack of tact, refinement, and civility — still defended by Republicans?
His supporters claim that it is a "breath of fresh air."
That it rejects the paradigm of censorship or political correctness or sensitivity that has supposedly devolved our nation over the past few decades.
That it reinstates a sense of power, pride, and strength in America.
Here are three reasons why that argument is inherently flawed.
First, it assumes that words which are eloquent or graceful in their construction cannot also be revolutionary or scandalous.
While this attack on the articulate most obviously responds to President Barack Obama's well-spokenness, it would also suggest that Thomas Jefferson's immortal words: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness," are incapable of greatness or innovation because they are artfully crafted.
While I am confident that no reasonable Trump supporter would dismiss Jefferson's words as such, I worry that this is merely because they are the words of Jefferson and not of an articulate politician in 2018.
I worry that Trump has set a precedent for many Americans to equate articulation alone with crookedness, corruption, or malicious intent.
Second, the argument supposes that Trump's lack of tact is a symptom of his humility — that he does not waste his breath on superfluous words because he is a champion of the common, unrefined man.
It is entirely true that great words do not require eloquence to be stirring or poignant.
Indeed, in times of adversity it can be found that the most basic and accessible of assertions are needed to bind a nation or people.
But Trump's manner of speech is neither binding nor can it claim to be a symptom of his "common" roots.
Furthermore, his crassness should not be mistaken as evidence for the president's uniquely "raw," "pure," or "unadulterated" character.
Interviews that predate Mr. Trump's campaign and presidency exhibit that his persona is a fabrication — that his crassness, his witlessness, his inanity are not a rejection of political mendacity but rather the epitome of it.
In a 1980 interview for NBC News, searchable on YouTube, the future president displays a certain calmness and relatively expansive vocabulary that is foreign to the Donald Trump of 2018.
He is the worst kind of buffoon because he is one that is entirely artificial and contrived.
Third, the argument devastatingly confuses incivility for bluntness.
It likes to pretend that his speech is returning to some status quo before political correctness or oversensitivity, but I cannot believe that in any past era of our nation's history, reputability was marked by such juvenile statements as the ones Trump produces.
This is referring not only to his remarks that have abused women, immigrants, war heroes and the disabled but also to the daily batch of comments that exhibit a gross lack of discretion.
Even now I recognize that I have become desensitized to the fact that my president's tweets possess as much acuity as those of my former middle school peers.
Ultimately, Trump has paved the road for an age of anti-intellectualism: where eloquence is made synonymous with corruption and bullying is mistaken for candor.
I have seen those on the right who would previously have spurned this movement now defend it with vehement spirit.
I do not know if this is merely the consequence of the two-party system or evidence of some larger deficiency in our society, but it has surely set a precedent of ignorance that devastates America as a people, as a polity, as a nation, and as an idea.
Abigail Meyer of Clifton Park is a graduate student studying linguistics at the University of Edinburgh, Scotland.
https://www.timesunion.com/opinion/arti ... 215049.php
Re: POLITICS
MARKETWATCH
"Fed should buy stocks if there is another steep recession, former IMF economist says"
By Greg Robb
Published: Sept 10, 2018 10:38 a.m. ET
The Federal Reserve buying stocks?
How about financing the federal deficit?
Or buying goods?
These were some of the suggestions for combating the next severe recession given to the central bank by former IMF chief economist Olivier Blanchard at the Boston Fed’s monetary policy conference over the weekend.
There is a general sense the Fed has to re-think its approach to combating recessions given the low-interest-rate environment that is persisting.
The problem facing the central bank is easy to describe.
The Fed’s benchmark short-term fed funds rate is now around 2.875%.
That’s not so much room to cut rates in a downturn considering in a typical post World War II recession, the Fed slashed rates by 5-6 percentage points to turn the economy around after a recession.
Blanchard said the Fed probably has enough tools to handle a run-of-the-mill recession.
But if it is another severe recession like the financial crisis, Blanchard urged the central bank to resort to previously unheard of policies.
In an interview with MarketWatch, Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren said he was not convinced there would be political support for “unusual monetary policy” such as the types Blanchard was describing.
Minutes of the Fed’s last meeting in late July show the central bankers had an extensive discussion of their policy tools.
“We definitely have tools."
"The question is whether we have the sharpest tool in the shed and whether we’re going to be able to deploy them,” Rosengren said.
Some people say the Fed cannot purchase more assets given that its balance sheet is over $4 trillion.
Rosengren said he would be a “strong advocate” of the Fed resuming asset purchases, a policy termed quantitative easing, if the economic downturn was so severe that rates were cut to zero.
“I do think that people are underestimating the resistance that that would entail,” he said.
Even that would require firm leadership from the Fed, he said.
In his speech at the Fed conference, Blanchard said the size of the balance sheet is not a constraint.
“Yes they are scary."
"But that doesn’t mean it cannot be done."
"If we need it, we could clearly double it and nothing terrible would happen,” he said.
At the moment, the Fed can only buy Treasurys and mortgage-related assets.
The best policy would be for the Fed to buy assets with high premiums like stocks, he said.
“This could do the trick and could work even better than buying long bonds,” he said.
If things got really bad, monetary financing of the deficit is something that could work to increase demand, Blanchard said.
“We have this notion that it is only OK for the central bank to buy assets and not goods."
"But that’s a restriction we imposed on ourselves,” he said.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/fed-t ... ewer_click
"Fed should buy stocks if there is another steep recession, former IMF economist says"
By Greg Robb
Published: Sept 10, 2018 10:38 a.m. ET
The Federal Reserve buying stocks?
How about financing the federal deficit?
Or buying goods?
These were some of the suggestions for combating the next severe recession given to the central bank by former IMF chief economist Olivier Blanchard at the Boston Fed’s monetary policy conference over the weekend.
There is a general sense the Fed has to re-think its approach to combating recessions given the low-interest-rate environment that is persisting.
The problem facing the central bank is easy to describe.
The Fed’s benchmark short-term fed funds rate is now around 2.875%.
That’s not so much room to cut rates in a downturn considering in a typical post World War II recession, the Fed slashed rates by 5-6 percentage points to turn the economy around after a recession.
Blanchard said the Fed probably has enough tools to handle a run-of-the-mill recession.
But if it is another severe recession like the financial crisis, Blanchard urged the central bank to resort to previously unheard of policies.
In an interview with MarketWatch, Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren said he was not convinced there would be political support for “unusual monetary policy” such as the types Blanchard was describing.
Minutes of the Fed’s last meeting in late July show the central bankers had an extensive discussion of their policy tools.
“We definitely have tools."
"The question is whether we have the sharpest tool in the shed and whether we’re going to be able to deploy them,” Rosengren said.
Some people say the Fed cannot purchase more assets given that its balance sheet is over $4 trillion.
Rosengren said he would be a “strong advocate” of the Fed resuming asset purchases, a policy termed quantitative easing, if the economic downturn was so severe that rates were cut to zero.
“I do think that people are underestimating the resistance that that would entail,” he said.
Even that would require firm leadership from the Fed, he said.
In his speech at the Fed conference, Blanchard said the size of the balance sheet is not a constraint.
“Yes they are scary."
"But that doesn’t mean it cannot be done."
"If we need it, we could clearly double it and nothing terrible would happen,” he said.
At the moment, the Fed can only buy Treasurys and mortgage-related assets.
The best policy would be for the Fed to buy assets with high premiums like stocks, he said.
“This could do the trick and could work even better than buying long bonds,” he said.
If things got really bad, monetary financing of the deficit is something that could work to increase demand, Blanchard said.
“We have this notion that it is only OK for the central bank to buy assets and not goods."
"But that’s a restriction we imposed on ourselves,” he said.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/fed-t ... ewer_click
Re: POLITICS
YOUNG ANDY DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG BECAUSE YOUNG ANDY NEVER DOES ANYTHING WRONG ...
"Cuomo: Crystal Run could have 'admitted to a crime' - Governor says contact to Rep. Maloney's campaign would be akin to confessing violation"
By Chris Bragg, Albany, New York Times Union
Updated 4:56 pm EDT, Tuesday, September 4, 2018
ALBANY — Gov. Andrew Cuomo's campaign has generally refused to answer questions about an ongoing federal investigation into Crystal Run Healthcare, which has given $400,000 in campaign donations to the governor and received an extraordinary $25.4 million in state grants.
In a meeting with the Times Union editorial board on Tuesday, Cuomo did answer a question his campaign has evaded for weeks: Crystal Run officials, the governor said, have not approached him about any potential legal problems with their donations.
By contrast, U.S. Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney — currently running for the Democratic nomination for state attorney general — has publicly stated that Crystal Run approached him about irregularities with more than $35,000 in donations its made to the congressman.
"Well, then," Cuomo said of Crystal Run's disclosure to Maloney, "they admitted to a crime."
"Which is sort of incredible for me to believe as a former prosecutor and an attorney general," Cuomo said.
"Why somebody would call up and say to a congressman, 'I committed a felony.'"
"'Just thought you should know.'"
"Especially since nobody's been charged."
"I mean, who would make that phone call?"
Maloney's decision to turn over Crystal Run's legally problematic donations to the U.S. Treasury has put Cuomo – who has refused calls to return any portion of his own Crystal Run donations – in the position of having to rationalize that stance.
On Tuesday, Cuomo theorized that Maloney's statements about Crystal Run admitting legal troubles were not accurate.
"How much do you want to bet," he said, "the Crystal Run people never called Maloney and said that?"
In response to Cuomo's comments, Maloney's office on Tuesday provided the Times Union with a letter from a Crystal Run attorney that disclosed issues with the company's donations but insisted they were inadvertent.
No one from Crystal Run has been charged with any wrongdoing.
Following a series of Times Union articles last year, the Manhattan U.S. Attorney's office and FBI are investigating Crystal Run over its manner of giving to Cuomo.
The investigation has also brought allegations of pay-to-play behavior from the governor's electoral challengers this year: The company in 2016 landed $25.4 million in state grants for projects it was already building without taxpayer subsidies.
Cuomo maintains the prodigious campaign giving of Crystal Run and other donors – totaling $49 million for his current reelection bid – has never impacted state policy decisions.
The ongoing criminal investigation of Crystal Run is examining whether its officials were reimbursed by company bonuses for a flurry of $25,000 donations they made to Cuomo's campaign in 2013.
If that occurred, it would be a potential violation of state election law.
On Tuesday, Maloney's office provided more information about how it came to return the Crystal Run-connected donations.
The Orange County-based company this spring asked Maloney to give back some of its officials' past campaign donations to the congressman.
In response, Maloney's office asked for more information.
In April 2018, an outside counsel for Crystal Run, David Frulla of the firm Kelley Drye, wrote a letter to an attorney for Maloney.
"Upon review, Kelley Drye determined it was appropriate to request the enumerated refunds, but have no reason to believe that Maloney for Congress was privy to any of the information or actions that caused the refund request," Frulla said in the letter.
"Crystal Run has made a sua sponte" – or voluntary – "submission to the Federal Election Commission regarding this matter."
"Further, we requested the refunds because our review found that (Crystal Run), and its officers, partners, and employees, did not fully or accurately understand campaign finance law and regulations applicable to partnerships," the lawyer wrote.
"Any resulting failure to comply with the applicable law or regulations was, accordingly, inadvertent."
Maloney's office has also said that Crystal Run acknowledged the donations were "incorrectly attributed" in campaign filings.
A Crystal Run spokesman did not respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.
Cuomo, meanwhile, has declined to heed calls from his political opponents, actress and Democratic primary opponent Cythnia Nixon and Republican Marc Molinaro, that he also return Crystal Run's money.
The governor stated again on Tuesday that he would return the company's money if legal wrongdoing was found.
"The Crystal Run situation is this," Cuomo said.
"Two years ago, I don't know which office started an investigation on a doctor as a 'straw donor.'"
" Our contribution form, on our website, says 'Do not do straw donors.'"
"That was two years ago," Cuomo said, noting he had heard little since.
"As soon as there is a finding that somebody did something wrong, I will return the contributions."
Over a two-day period in October 2013, Crystal Run officials, doctors or their spouses gave Cuomo 10 donations of $25,000 apiece.
The donations came during a Cuomo fundraiser, though the governor's campaign has repeatedly refused to discuss its location and details such as whether it was an exclusive Crystal Run event.
Of the 10 Crystal Run donors to Cuomo, seven had not made a donation in a New York election in at least a decade.
On Tuesday, Cuomo stated for the first time that Crystal Run officials threw a fundraiser for him in 2013.
He also said it was not unusual for so many people, who had not given in New York elections before, to give him the 10 identical $25,000 checks.
"If you do a fundraiser for me, you're going to go to your neighbors and your friends and say, 'Do me a favor — Andrew Cuomo's a good guy, he's a friend of mine, come over and contribute,'" Cuomo said.
"Yeah, so the company did a fundraiser."
Cuomo also addressed the fact that Crystal Run was granted $25.4 million in 2016 by the state Department of Health to build two health care facilities — in Monroe, Orange County, and West Nyack, Rockland County — that it was already constructing without taxpayer subsidies.
Cuomo said the agency's decisions in handing out $1.2 billion in health care capital funds grants statewide had been made by civil service employees.
"It's done on objective criteria, pursuant to a 2014 law."
"And that's how the program works," Cuomo said.
"I haven't gotten into it well enough."
"But there is no suggestion that they got the grant from Health because of the contribution.
"The only suggestion is this guy was a straw donor," Cuomo said of the investigation.
"That was two years ago."
The Times Union first wrote about the Crystal Run donations to Cuomo in February 2017, about 18 months ago.
On Tuesday, the Times Union reported that for the two projects, Crystal Run had attempted to get taxpayer reimbursement of the $25 million in grants for a number questionable expenses, from artwork and "mood music" systems to plastic flowers for a lobby.
While the Cuomo administration has not repaid the company for those purchases, it did reimburse Crystal Run — one of New York's fastest-growing private medical firms — for $6 million, including $1.2 million in corporate office furniture.
"Not another a dime of taxpayer money should go from the Cuomo administration to Crystal Run while the FBI and Orange County are investigating this," said Molinaro, the Dutchess County executive, in a statement responding to the story.
"And, Gov. Cuomo: You won't have enough money in your campaign arsenal in November to explain away the dirty $400,000 you're holding."
"Mark my words: New Yorkers have had enough."
Cuomo campaign spokeswoman Abbey Collins responded that "Trump mini-me Marc Molinaro should look in the mirror."
"He's taking a page from Trump's playbook by taking contributions from business with local contracts, doling out tax breaks in return, and handing out favors to his friends and family."
At the Times Union, Cuomo said Maloney had only returned the more than $35,000 because he is currently running in the heated Democratic primary for state attorney general, the state's top law enforcement job.
"I think it was just a political decision," Cuomo said.
"It was a PR decision."
"There's been no charge," Cuomo added.
"And also, straw donor cases are also sort of an open-and-shut case."
"It's 'Dr. Smith, you gave $25,000 to Sean Patrick Maloney.'"
"'Did the company reimburse you?'"
"That's it."
"And, 'Is there a check that goes to you for the $25,000?'"
"This has been two years!"
"If they have that case, that's the case," he said.
https://www.timesunion.com/news/article ... ion_Capcon
"Cuomo: Crystal Run could have 'admitted to a crime' - Governor says contact to Rep. Maloney's campaign would be akin to confessing violation"
By Chris Bragg, Albany, New York Times Union
Updated 4:56 pm EDT, Tuesday, September 4, 2018
ALBANY — Gov. Andrew Cuomo's campaign has generally refused to answer questions about an ongoing federal investigation into Crystal Run Healthcare, which has given $400,000 in campaign donations to the governor and received an extraordinary $25.4 million in state grants.
In a meeting with the Times Union editorial board on Tuesday, Cuomo did answer a question his campaign has evaded for weeks: Crystal Run officials, the governor said, have not approached him about any potential legal problems with their donations.
By contrast, U.S. Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney — currently running for the Democratic nomination for state attorney general — has publicly stated that Crystal Run approached him about irregularities with more than $35,000 in donations its made to the congressman.
"Well, then," Cuomo said of Crystal Run's disclosure to Maloney, "they admitted to a crime."
"Which is sort of incredible for me to believe as a former prosecutor and an attorney general," Cuomo said.
"Why somebody would call up and say to a congressman, 'I committed a felony.'"
"'Just thought you should know.'"
"Especially since nobody's been charged."
"I mean, who would make that phone call?"
Maloney's decision to turn over Crystal Run's legally problematic donations to the U.S. Treasury has put Cuomo – who has refused calls to return any portion of his own Crystal Run donations – in the position of having to rationalize that stance.
On Tuesday, Cuomo theorized that Maloney's statements about Crystal Run admitting legal troubles were not accurate.
"How much do you want to bet," he said, "the Crystal Run people never called Maloney and said that?"
In response to Cuomo's comments, Maloney's office on Tuesday provided the Times Union with a letter from a Crystal Run attorney that disclosed issues with the company's donations but insisted they were inadvertent.
No one from Crystal Run has been charged with any wrongdoing.
Following a series of Times Union articles last year, the Manhattan U.S. Attorney's office and FBI are investigating Crystal Run over its manner of giving to Cuomo.
The investigation has also brought allegations of pay-to-play behavior from the governor's electoral challengers this year: The company in 2016 landed $25.4 million in state grants for projects it was already building without taxpayer subsidies.
Cuomo maintains the prodigious campaign giving of Crystal Run and other donors – totaling $49 million for his current reelection bid – has never impacted state policy decisions.
The ongoing criminal investigation of Crystal Run is examining whether its officials were reimbursed by company bonuses for a flurry of $25,000 donations they made to Cuomo's campaign in 2013.
If that occurred, it would be a potential violation of state election law.
On Tuesday, Maloney's office provided more information about how it came to return the Crystal Run-connected donations.
The Orange County-based company this spring asked Maloney to give back some of its officials' past campaign donations to the congressman.
In response, Maloney's office asked for more information.
In April 2018, an outside counsel for Crystal Run, David Frulla of the firm Kelley Drye, wrote a letter to an attorney for Maloney.
"Upon review, Kelley Drye determined it was appropriate to request the enumerated refunds, but have no reason to believe that Maloney for Congress was privy to any of the information or actions that caused the refund request," Frulla said in the letter.
"Crystal Run has made a sua sponte" – or voluntary – "submission to the Federal Election Commission regarding this matter."
"Further, we requested the refunds because our review found that (Crystal Run), and its officers, partners, and employees, did not fully or accurately understand campaign finance law and regulations applicable to partnerships," the lawyer wrote.
"Any resulting failure to comply with the applicable law or regulations was, accordingly, inadvertent."
Maloney's office has also said that Crystal Run acknowledged the donations were "incorrectly attributed" in campaign filings.
A Crystal Run spokesman did not respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.
Cuomo, meanwhile, has declined to heed calls from his political opponents, actress and Democratic primary opponent Cythnia Nixon and Republican Marc Molinaro, that he also return Crystal Run's money.
The governor stated again on Tuesday that he would return the company's money if legal wrongdoing was found.
"The Crystal Run situation is this," Cuomo said.
"Two years ago, I don't know which office started an investigation on a doctor as a 'straw donor.'"
" Our contribution form, on our website, says 'Do not do straw donors.'"
"That was two years ago," Cuomo said, noting he had heard little since.
"As soon as there is a finding that somebody did something wrong, I will return the contributions."
Over a two-day period in October 2013, Crystal Run officials, doctors or their spouses gave Cuomo 10 donations of $25,000 apiece.
The donations came during a Cuomo fundraiser, though the governor's campaign has repeatedly refused to discuss its location and details such as whether it was an exclusive Crystal Run event.
Of the 10 Crystal Run donors to Cuomo, seven had not made a donation in a New York election in at least a decade.
On Tuesday, Cuomo stated for the first time that Crystal Run officials threw a fundraiser for him in 2013.
He also said it was not unusual for so many people, who had not given in New York elections before, to give him the 10 identical $25,000 checks.
"If you do a fundraiser for me, you're going to go to your neighbors and your friends and say, 'Do me a favor — Andrew Cuomo's a good guy, he's a friend of mine, come over and contribute,'" Cuomo said.
"Yeah, so the company did a fundraiser."
Cuomo also addressed the fact that Crystal Run was granted $25.4 million in 2016 by the state Department of Health to build two health care facilities — in Monroe, Orange County, and West Nyack, Rockland County — that it was already constructing without taxpayer subsidies.
Cuomo said the agency's decisions in handing out $1.2 billion in health care capital funds grants statewide had been made by civil service employees.
"It's done on objective criteria, pursuant to a 2014 law."
"And that's how the program works," Cuomo said.
"I haven't gotten into it well enough."
"But there is no suggestion that they got the grant from Health because of the contribution.
"The only suggestion is this guy was a straw donor," Cuomo said of the investigation.
"That was two years ago."
The Times Union first wrote about the Crystal Run donations to Cuomo in February 2017, about 18 months ago.
On Tuesday, the Times Union reported that for the two projects, Crystal Run had attempted to get taxpayer reimbursement of the $25 million in grants for a number questionable expenses, from artwork and "mood music" systems to plastic flowers for a lobby.
While the Cuomo administration has not repaid the company for those purchases, it did reimburse Crystal Run — one of New York's fastest-growing private medical firms — for $6 million, including $1.2 million in corporate office furniture.
"Not another a dime of taxpayer money should go from the Cuomo administration to Crystal Run while the FBI and Orange County are investigating this," said Molinaro, the Dutchess County executive, in a statement responding to the story.
"And, Gov. Cuomo: You won't have enough money in your campaign arsenal in November to explain away the dirty $400,000 you're holding."
"Mark my words: New Yorkers have had enough."
Cuomo campaign spokeswoman Abbey Collins responded that "Trump mini-me Marc Molinaro should look in the mirror."
"He's taking a page from Trump's playbook by taking contributions from business with local contracts, doling out tax breaks in return, and handing out favors to his friends and family."
At the Times Union, Cuomo said Maloney had only returned the more than $35,000 because he is currently running in the heated Democratic primary for state attorney general, the state's top law enforcement job.
"I think it was just a political decision," Cuomo said.
"It was a PR decision."
"There's been no charge," Cuomo added.
"And also, straw donor cases are also sort of an open-and-shut case."
"It's 'Dr. Smith, you gave $25,000 to Sean Patrick Maloney.'"
"'Did the company reimburse you?'"
"That's it."
"And, 'Is there a check that goes to you for the $25,000?'"
"This has been two years!"
"If they have that case, that's the case," he said.
https://www.timesunion.com/news/article ... ion_Capcon
Re: POLITICS
MARKETWATCH
"U.S. budget deficit widens to fifth-highest ever, CBO reports"
By Steve Goldstein
Published: Sept 11, 2018 10:36 a.m. ET
The numbers:
The U.S. budget deficit in August was $211 billion, nearly double the gap during the year-ago month, the Congressional Budget Office estimated late Monday.
Adjusted for shifts in the timing of payments that otherwise would have occurred on a weekend of holiday, the deficit would have grown by 19%.
The Treasury Department will report final official numbers on Thursday, and they are usually very similar to the CBO’s.
What happened:
Excluding timing shifts, outlays grew 8%, as the net interest on public debt jumped 25%, defense spending jumped 10%, outlays for Social Security grew 5%, and outlays for Medicare benefits rose 7%.
There also was an Agriculture Department downward adjustment made in the year-ago August.
One boost to government finances was an increase in spectrum payments to the Federal Communications Commission.
Receipts fell by 3%, with corporate taxes dropping by $5 billion, while revenue from income and payroll taxes rose marginally.
The big picture:
The budget deficit is widening in a big way.
In the first 11 months of the fiscal year, the deficit was $895 billion, which is $222 billion more than the previous year.
Outlays have climbed 7% while revenue rose 1%.
Corporate taxes have plummeted by 30% this fiscal year, both because of the lower rate as well as the expanded ability to immediately deduct the full value of equipment purchases.
Individual income and payroll taxes have climbed 4%, as increasing wages — mostly, due to more people having jobs — offset a lower withholding rate.
Spending on Social Security and Medicare have climbed 4% as more baby boomers retire, outlays on net interest on the debt have jumped 19% in part due to a higher rate of inflation triggering more payments to inflation-protected securities holders, and defense spending has jumped 6%.
Kevin Hassett, the White House chief economic adviser, was careful in a briefing with reporters on Monday to say the corporate tax cuts — but not the whole package — would pay for themselves with higher growth.
“I think that the notion that the corporate tax side has about paid for itself is clearly in the data,” he said.
“On the individual side, there was about a trillion-dollar cost."
"About $700 billion of that was a refundable child credit that got expanded at the last minute to get the votes they needed to pass it.”
(The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates the modification to the child tax credit to cost $573 billion over a decade, and that the individual side cost $1.13 trillion in total.)
Other administration officials have made more sweeping claims that the entire tax cut would pay for itself, including Treasury Sec. Steven Mnuchin and former National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn.
Market reaction:
There’s little evidence the worsening fiscal picture is scaring the bond market too dramatically.
The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury has climbed about a half percentage point this year but still remains below 3%.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-bu ... 2018-09-11
"U.S. budget deficit widens to fifth-highest ever, CBO reports"
By Steve Goldstein
Published: Sept 11, 2018 10:36 a.m. ET
The numbers:
The U.S. budget deficit in August was $211 billion, nearly double the gap during the year-ago month, the Congressional Budget Office estimated late Monday.
Adjusted for shifts in the timing of payments that otherwise would have occurred on a weekend of holiday, the deficit would have grown by 19%.
The Treasury Department will report final official numbers on Thursday, and they are usually very similar to the CBO’s.
What happened:
Excluding timing shifts, outlays grew 8%, as the net interest on public debt jumped 25%, defense spending jumped 10%, outlays for Social Security grew 5%, and outlays for Medicare benefits rose 7%.
There also was an Agriculture Department downward adjustment made in the year-ago August.
One boost to government finances was an increase in spectrum payments to the Federal Communications Commission.
Receipts fell by 3%, with corporate taxes dropping by $5 billion, while revenue from income and payroll taxes rose marginally.
The big picture:
The budget deficit is widening in a big way.
In the first 11 months of the fiscal year, the deficit was $895 billion, which is $222 billion more than the previous year.
Outlays have climbed 7% while revenue rose 1%.
Corporate taxes have plummeted by 30% this fiscal year, both because of the lower rate as well as the expanded ability to immediately deduct the full value of equipment purchases.
Individual income and payroll taxes have climbed 4%, as increasing wages — mostly, due to more people having jobs — offset a lower withholding rate.
Spending on Social Security and Medicare have climbed 4% as more baby boomers retire, outlays on net interest on the debt have jumped 19% in part due to a higher rate of inflation triggering more payments to inflation-protected securities holders, and defense spending has jumped 6%.
Kevin Hassett, the White House chief economic adviser, was careful in a briefing with reporters on Monday to say the corporate tax cuts — but not the whole package — would pay for themselves with higher growth.
“I think that the notion that the corporate tax side has about paid for itself is clearly in the data,” he said.
“On the individual side, there was about a trillion-dollar cost."
"About $700 billion of that was a refundable child credit that got expanded at the last minute to get the votes they needed to pass it.”
(The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates the modification to the child tax credit to cost $573 billion over a decade, and that the individual side cost $1.13 trillion in total.)
Other administration officials have made more sweeping claims that the entire tax cut would pay for itself, including Treasury Sec. Steven Mnuchin and former National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn.
Market reaction:
There’s little evidence the worsening fiscal picture is scaring the bond market too dramatically.
The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury has climbed about a half percentage point this year but still remains below 3%.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-bu ... 2018-09-11
Re: POLITICS
MARKETWATCH
"Government has less power now to thwart next financial crisis, says former Fed official"
By Greg Robb
Published: Sept 11, 2018 3:08 p.m. ET
A former top Federal Reserve official who played a key role in the response to the financial crisis sounded pessimistic about whether regulators would be able to defuse the next crisis if it occurs in the nonbank sector.
“The political economy is much worse today than before the last crisis” in terms of what regulators can do, William Dudley said Tuesday at a conference at the Brookings Institute.
Dudley, the former president of the New York Fed, wants the central bank to have the power to lend to a systemic nonbank with the requirement that the firm be subject to regulation.
Not only is this power not in place, “it is not even seriously debated,” Dudley said.
Dudley was the head the New York Fed’s markets division during the crisis.
In the wake of the 2007-2009 financial crisis, Congress has limited the Fed’s ability to lend to a single firm that is in trouble.
Dudley was gloomy that the Dodd Frank super-regulator, the Financial Stability Oversight Council, would identify systemic problems and adjust the federal safety net in time to mitigate any damage from a failure.
“I am very skeptical about whether this will actually ever be used” and it is likely to “always be late,” Dudley said.
Regulators have to keep up with financial markets and are likely are going to fail again and again, he said.
“But that is the challenge,” he said.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/gover ... ewer_click
"Government has less power now to thwart next financial crisis, says former Fed official"
By Greg Robb
Published: Sept 11, 2018 3:08 p.m. ET
A former top Federal Reserve official who played a key role in the response to the financial crisis sounded pessimistic about whether regulators would be able to defuse the next crisis if it occurs in the nonbank sector.
“The political economy is much worse today than before the last crisis” in terms of what regulators can do, William Dudley said Tuesday at a conference at the Brookings Institute.
Dudley, the former president of the New York Fed, wants the central bank to have the power to lend to a systemic nonbank with the requirement that the firm be subject to regulation.
Not only is this power not in place, “it is not even seriously debated,” Dudley said.
Dudley was the head the New York Fed’s markets division during the crisis.
In the wake of the 2007-2009 financial crisis, Congress has limited the Fed’s ability to lend to a single firm that is in trouble.
Dudley was gloomy that the Dodd Frank super-regulator, the Financial Stability Oversight Council, would identify systemic problems and adjust the federal safety net in time to mitigate any damage from a failure.
“I am very skeptical about whether this will actually ever be used” and it is likely to “always be late,” Dudley said.
Regulators have to keep up with financial markets and are likely are going to fail again and again, he said.
“But that is the challenge,” he said.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/gover ... ewer_click
Re: POLITICS
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
"Trump to OK sanctions against foreigners who interfere in U.S. elections"
By Dustin Volz and Courtney McBride
Published: Sept 11, 2018 6:07 p.m. ET
President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order as soon as Wednesday that would authorize sanctions against foreigners who attempt to interfere in American elections, according to three people familiar with the matter.
The sanctions authority would be the latest effort by the Trump administration to address to concerns raised by U.S. intelligence agencies that Russia is seeking to interfere in the 2018 U.S. elections after doing so two years ago.
The order was described by a U.S. official familiar with its drafting as “another tool in the tool kit” to deter election interference by foreign adversaries.
“This is not a single solution, but it makes a clear statement by the president that this sort of activity will not be tolerated and will be punished,” the official said.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump ... ewer_click
"Trump to OK sanctions against foreigners who interfere in U.S. elections"
By Dustin Volz and Courtney McBride
Published: Sept 11, 2018 6:07 p.m. ET
President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order as soon as Wednesday that would authorize sanctions against foreigners who attempt to interfere in American elections, according to three people familiar with the matter.
The sanctions authority would be the latest effort by the Trump administration to address to concerns raised by U.S. intelligence agencies that Russia is seeking to interfere in the 2018 U.S. elections after doing so two years ago.
The order was described by a U.S. official familiar with its drafting as “another tool in the tool kit” to deter election interference by foreign adversaries.
“This is not a single solution, but it makes a clear statement by the president that this sort of activity will not be tolerated and will be punished,” the official said.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump ... ewer_click