Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNBC)   Federal Reserve: "We can supply the economy with $2.3 trillion to help during the pandemic lockdown". Let's see how they're doing so far...oops   (cnbc.com) divider line
    More: Asinine, Debt, Bond, Federal Reserve System, Central bank, Money supply, Financial market, recent Fed balance sheet data, Main Street Lending Program  
•       •       •

3294 clicks; posted to Business » and Politics » on 24 Jun 2020 at 6:53 PM (11 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



46 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-06-24 2:13:52 PM  
Is anyone sure the rest of that money hasn't been raided already?
 
2020-06-24 6:57:34 PM  
Everything is meaningless and eventually the universe will die. Why yes, I am a millennial with kids and student loans.
 
2020-06-24 6:57:53 PM  
Trump and GOP seen stuffing large bills into pockets
 
2020-06-24 6:58:10 PM  
However, the staock market is doing fantastic.
 
2020-06-24 7:00:29 PM  

Catlenfell: However, the staock market is doing fantastic.


Less so today...
 
2020-06-24 7:00:48 PM  
Trump already has all the money.
 
2020-06-24 7:07:01 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-06-24 7:11:34 PM  

twat_waffle: [Fark user image 425x555]


i.kym-cdn.comView Full Size
bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.comView Full Size
 
2020-06-24 7:13:59 PM  
Dam-it my stonks!
 
2020-06-24 7:16:15 PM  
"Here's a sheet of singles for you poor schmucks. We're keeping all the Benjamins."

i2.cdn.turner.comView Full Size
 
2020-06-24 7:18:12 PM  

max_rebo_groupie: Everything is meaningless and eventually the universe will die. Why yes, I am a millennial with kids and student loans.


I'm '75, end of gen-x, right there with you
 
2020-06-24 7:18:18 PM  

dryknife: "Here's a sheet of singles for you poor schmucks. We're keeping all the Benjamins."

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 780x439]


To be faaaaair...she needed the Benjamins for all that work she had done on her face. Plus the boobs. And lipo. And vaginal rejuvenation. Probably a butt hole bleaching or two.
 
2020-06-24 7:21:17 PM  
The executives got their retention bonuses, that's all that matters.
 
2020-06-24 7:22:49 PM  
Matt Levine's newsletter has been fairly enlightening on this matter.

The Federal Reserve doesn't really have any infrastructure set up for lending directly to small businesses or even large businesses. Evaluating loan applications takes a lot of expertise and man power.

The post 2008 Obama era regulations actually worked fairly well, so even though the Fed has tasked the bigger banks which do have that know how and man power with doing that portion of the work they've been more hamstrung because of regulations which are decent checks on them during regular times.

That's why you see local credit unions able to get money out quicker than larger players like BoA.

Then there's the fact that small businesses tend not to have a lot of experience dealing with loans like these.

The fact larger businesses like Shake Shack (I think) were shamed after taking money meant for smaller entities.

It's all very patchwork, and seems like kind of a stupid way of doing it all.

The Fed seems to have done about as well as they could have with the hand they were dealt.

Also, considering the corruption at the highest levels of our nation right now, we'd be shocked if it had all gone out anyways considering which Trump associates would probably have their hands in the pot.

It's all a mess, other countries seem to have tackled the issues so much better. But instead we have this highly politicized response which tasks the Fed with doing jobs it never does that are outside of its mandates because our highly dysfunctional and undemocratic Senate can't pass legislation and our highly partisan citizenry can't wear masks with out it being some deep state scheme to turn us all into gay muslims (nttawwt) or whatever.
 
2020-06-24 7:26:53 PM  
Of all the things in this world that make me angry--of which there are a great many--the one that angers me the most is that people suffer not for a lack of resources but for a lack of will to make these resources available to them.
 
2020-06-24 7:41:22 PM  

jollyrancher82: dryknife: "Here's a sheet of singles for you poor schmucks. We're keeping all the Benjamins."

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 780x439]

To be faaaaair...she needed the Benjamins for all that work she had done on her face. Plus the boobs. And lipo. And vaginal rejuvenation. Probably a butt hole bleaching or two.


How many buttholes does she have?
 
2020-06-24 7:42:31 PM  

rosekolodny: jollyrancher82: dryknife: "Here's a sheet of singles for you poor schmucks. We're keeping all the Benjamins."

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 780x439]

To be faaaaair...she needed the Benjamins for all that work she had done on her face. Plus the boobs. And lipo. And vaginal rejuvenation. Probably a butt hole bleaching or two.

How many buttholes does she have?


You mean including the one standing next to her?
 
2020-06-24 7:43:18 PM  

Do you even grift bro: Matt Levine's newsletter has been fairly enlightening on this matter.

The Federal Reserve doesn't really have any infrastructure set up for lending directly to small businesses or even large businesses. Evaluating loan applications takes a lot of expertise and man power.

The post 2008 Obama era regulations actually worked fairly well, so even though the Fed has tasked the bigger banks which do have that know how and man power with doing that portion of the work they've been more hamstrung because of regulations which are decent checks on them during regular times.

That's why you see local credit unions able to get money out quicker than larger players like BoA.

Then there's the fact that small businesses tend not to have a lot of experience dealing with loans like these.

The fact larger businesses like Shake Shack (I think) were shamed after taking money meant for smaller entities.

It's all very patchwork, and seems like kind of a stupid way of doing it all.

The Fed seems to have done about as well as they could have with the hand they were dealt.

Also, considering the corruption at the highest levels of our nation right now, we'd be shocked if it had all gone out anyways considering which Trump associates would probably have their hands in the pot.

It's all a mess, other countries seem to have tackled the issues so much better. But instead we have this highly politicized response which tasks the Fed with doing jobs it never does that are outside of its mandates because our highly dysfunctional and undemocratic Senate can't pass legislation and our highly partisan citizenry can't wear masks with out it being some deep state scheme to turn us all into gay muslims (nttawwt) or whatever.


Well, they could just split all of that money with us plebes. We have to spend it to, among other things, survive. Then the businesses get the money anyway and you get less riots*. Just spitballing.

*While I agree that the police need a good cleansing, and also agree with the bulk of the current protests... I think the number of protesters would be smaller if we weren't already pissed off about possibly dying penniless in the next few months.
 
2020-06-24 7:50:44 PM  

baron von doodle: Well, they could just split all of that money with us plebes. We have to spend it to, among other things, survive. Then the businesses get the money anyway and you get less riots*. Just spitballing.


It's not just about having all the money. It's about control. It's about making the peasants suffer just to scrape by, so they don't get any ideas about actually moving out of their social class.
 
2020-06-24 7:54:41 PM  

jollyrancher82: dryknife: "Here's a sheet of singles for you poor schmucks. We're keeping all the Benjamins."

[i2.cdn.turner.com image 780x439]

To be faaaaair...she needed the Benjamins for all that work she had done on her face. Plus the boobs. And lipo. And vaginal rejuvenation. Probably a butt hole bleaching or two.


Butthole installation, in her case.

She doesn't look like a person who has ever once admitted to having a bowel movement.
 
2020-06-24 8:03:02 PM  

Do you even grift bro: Also, considering the corruption at the highest levels of our nation right now, we'd be shocked if it had all gone out anyways considering which Trump associates would probably have their hands in the pot


I'm imagining a giant money trough with a bunch of pigs neck-deep in it, and whatever manages to slosh onto the floor is what we're told we're lucky to get.
 
2020-06-24 8:08:59 PM  
Currency debasement. Woo hoo!

I can hear the purchasing power of my financial accounts plummet to the center of the Earth.
 
2020-06-24 8:13:10 PM  

LordJiro: baron von doodle: Well, they could just split all of that money with us plebes. We have to spend it to, among other things, survive. Then the businesses get the money anyway and you get less riots*. Just spitballing.

It's not just about having all the money. It's about control. It's about making the peasants suffer just to scrape by, so they don't get any ideas about actually moving out of their social class.


Well, yes, that is the reality. I was pointing out a pie in the sky scenario where everyone gets some money. Not going to happen, but fairly simple to implement which the article claims is the main issue. Too many complications.
 
2020-06-24 8:26:40 PM  

max_rebo_groupie: Everything is meaningless and eventually the universe will die. Why yes, I am a millennial with kids and student loans.


Nobody cares
 
2020-06-24 8:30:19 PM  
This is a good thing.

You are not supposed to have more money in circulation than you have economic activity.
A sudden influx of cash into a system where everyone is sitting in at home would just destabilize currency.

They should have, instead of handing out money, just expanded social programs with Medicare for all, a universal basic income, and a raise to the minimum wage to give a boost to essential workers who work for peanuts.  And while we are at it, demand major green reforms in order for cash to be given out.  Paying people to put up solar panels will have a hell of a lot better long term impact on the economy than stonks.

This might shock you all, but this sort of global pandemic and economic collapse is where socialism shines.
 
2020-06-24 8:41:41 PM  
just divide that money 300 million ways. that would be a great stimulus
 
2020-06-24 8:55:43 PM  

Catlenfell: However, the staock market is doing fantastic.


Wait a minute. This money was available to buy stocks to shore up the market. The fact that we haven't bought a few trillion in stocks to re-inflate the market is a good thing.

I had expected that we had artificially inflated the market through aggressive buying.

On the flip side, this means that the current Fed has the reserved ability to buy stocks to give the market a bump in October to make certain people think that the Market is making a great Trump recovery. So I remain skeptical.
 
2020-06-24 9:10:10 PM  

chitownmike: max_rebo_groupie: Everything is meaningless and eventually the universe will die. Why yes, I am a millennial with kids and student loans.

Nobody cares


No shiat.
 
2020-06-24 9:10:52 PM  
The programs, particularly the Main Street lending initiative, are complicated. There also may be less of a need as the economy improves.

Holy shiat, what kind of crack is your tarot deck smoking, Nostradumbass? I think some of the most frequent chatter I've heard over the past two weeks has contained the phrases "insolvent", "bankruptcy", "if we're still here", "he got laid off", "forced to take early retirement", and "if it's still in business." Add in the whole debt situation that we've all been looking dead in the face for years now which is ballooning even more, and we're going to see prolonged farkage for years without meaningful action that we're still waiting on, not a few farking months.

This is my main gripe with CNBC. Their take on the economy is viewed through the lens of a deranged market instead of the actual economy.

/And their take on the market is...yeah, you already know that much.
 
2020-06-24 9:29:42 PM  
Just give it to the farking people. Last I heard there was somewhere in the neighborhood of 165 million households in America. If you gave that money directly to the people, that's nearly 14K PER FAMILY. Now, tell me this country wouldn't jump back to farking action like a rabbit on meth and Viagra with a sudden windfall of $14K. For some households that's nearly half a year's income!
 
2020-06-24 9:37:24 PM  

Rocketboy1313: This is a good thing.

You are not supposed to have more money in circulation than you have economic activity.
A sudden influx of cash into a system where everyone is sitting in at home would just destabilize currency.

They should have, instead of handing out money, just expanded social programs with Medicare for all, a universal basic income, and a raise to the minimum wage to give a boost to essential workers who work for peanuts.  And while we are at it, demand major green reforms in order for cash to be given out.  Paying people to put up solar panels will have a hell of a lot better long term impact on the economy than stonks.

This might shock you all, but this sort of global pandemic and economic collapse is where socialism shines.


Totally agree. That's why I advocated giving us schmucks money. We then spend it and businesses get money.
 
2020-06-24 9:40:43 PM  

Nullav: The programs, particularly the Main Street lending initiative, are complicated. There also may be less of a need as the economy improves.

Holy shiat, what kind of crack is your tarot deck smoking, Nostradumbass? I think some of the most frequent chatter I've heard over the past two weeks has contained the phrases "insolvent", "bankruptcy", "if we're still here", "he got laid off", "forced to take early retirement", and "if it's still in business." Add in the whole debt situation that we've all been looking dead in the face for years now which is ballooning even more, and we're going to see prolonged farkage for years without meaningful action that we're still waiting on, not a few farking months.

This is my main gripe with CNBC. Their take on the economy is viewed through the lens of a deranged market instead of the actual economy.

/And their take on the market is...yeah, you already know that much.


They are referring to "The Economy" (stock market) not the actual economy of people who work in the US. Important distinction.
 
2020-06-24 9:47:51 PM  
So wait. I thought we dumped $5T into the market to save the 1%'s portfolios. Did they not do that?

/ no, not gonna RTFA
 
2020-06-24 9:57:19 PM  

baron von doodle: They are referring to "The Economy" (stock market) not the actual economy of people who work in the US. Important distinction.


Yep, and it drives me up a tree every time they do it, not the least of which being because the only shred of economic reality the market observes now is that the Fed is buying up bonds left and right down to recentlly-downgraded junk, and that speculators own even more of the chart right now, pushing even definitely-going-bankrupt companies' tickers all over the place.

I'm not going to say the general uptrend is entirely unhinged because money is definitely still being shoveled into the dumpster fire faster than it can burn, but considering where earnings are right now, and where employment is and is going, I could get a better take on the economic outlook from a magic 8-ball than equities.
 
2020-06-24 10:20:14 PM  

wademh: Wait a minute. This money was available to buy stocks to shore up the market. The fact that we haven't bought a few trillion in stocks to re-inflate the market is a good thing.

I had expected that we had artificially inflated the market through aggressive buying.

On the flip side, this means that the current Fed has the reserved ability to buy stocks to give the market a bump in October to make certain people think that the Market is making a great Trump recovery. So I remain skeptical.


What is that even supposed to mean?

It's like saying, "Good thing Trump hasn't used his ability to declare himself God-Emporer, yet." As though that's actually something he can do.
 
2020-06-24 10:23:52 PM  

Nick Nostril: So wait. I thought we dumped $5T into the market to save the 1%'s portfolios. Did they not do that?


No, they didn't put one penny into the market.  That was a fever dream of the financially illiterate.
 
2020-06-24 11:37:37 PM  
My unemployment got f'd up and I haven't been paid anything. I'm out $4-5k right now of benefits.
 
2020-06-24 11:39:30 PM  

BMFPitt: wademh: Wait a minute. This money was available to buy stocks to shore up the market. The fact that we haven't bought a few trillion in stocks to re-inflate the market is a good thing.

I had expected that we had artificially inflated the market through aggressive buying.

On the flip side, this means that the current Fed has the reserved ability to buy stocks to give the market a bump in October to make certain people think that the Market is making a great Trump recovery. So I remain skeptical.

What is that even supposed to mean?

It's like saying, "Good thing Trump hasn't used his ability to declare himself God-Emporer, yet." As though that's actually something he can do.


No one has came forward yet.
 
2020-06-25 12:10:09 AM  

NoahFenze: My unemployment got f'd up and I haven't been paid anything. I'm out $4-5k right now of benefits.


Damn. I hope you're doing ok.
*hug*
 
2020-06-25 12:19:26 AM  
Maybe a collapse in demand can't be fixed by increasing supply.
 
2020-06-25 12:25:00 AM  

wademh: Catlenfell: However, the staock market is doing fantastic.

Wait a minute. This money was available to buy stocks to shore up the market. The fact that we haven't bought a few trillion in stocks to re-inflate the market is a good thing.

I had expected that we had artificially inflated the market through aggressive buying.

On the flip side, this means that the current Fed has the reserved ability to buy stocks to give the market a bump in October to make certain people think that the Market is making a great Trump recovery. So I remain skeptical.


If I remember correctly, the fed said they would move to buy even junk bonds if necessary.  The markets got super high off that fart, at which point Robinhood saved the stonks.
 
2020-06-25 4:36:12 AM  

BMFPitt: wademh: Wait a minute. This money was available to buy stocks to shore up the market. The fact that we haven't bought a few trillion in stocks to re-inflate the market is a good thing.

I had expected that we had artificially inflated the market through aggressive buying.

On the flip side, this means that the current Fed has the reserved ability to buy stocks to give the market a bump in October to make certain people think that the Market is making a great Trump recovery. So I remain skeptical.

What is that even supposed to mean?

It's like saying, "Good thing Trump hasn't used his ability to declare himself God-Emporer, yet." As though that's actually something he can do.


Your retort seems a non sequitur.
I'm saying that the Fed was empowered to loan itself vast amounts of money to buy up assets. For example, it was empowered to buy up stocks if it felt the market was artificially undervalued. Of course, the reality is that if you buy up a trillion dollars worth of shares, you create an artificial demand and prices rise. According to those who buy into Trump's view, that means "the economy" is doing well.

I was expressing some surprise that the Fed had not spent that much money yet to inflate the market in order to provide the illusion of a recovering "economy".

Then I commented on the possibility that they will use this remarkable power later in the year, near the election, and without revealing what they are doing, to artificially inflate the market (meaning drive up share prices) so that the Dow reaches some new records. This would presumably make the 401K crowd feel good and vote for Trump. Nice when you can buy an election as the President with government money.

That's what it means.
 
2020-06-25 7:29:50 AM  

wademh: I'm saying that the Fed was empowered to loan itself vast amounts of money to buy up assets.


It doesn't loan anything.  It just creates the money out of thin air.  That's the entire premise of it's existence.

For example, it was empowered to buy up stocks if it felt the market was artificially undervalued.

NO IT WASN'T!
 
2020-06-25 2:19:56 PM  

baron von doodle: Do you even grift bro: Matt Levine's newsletter has been fairly enlightening on this matter.

The Federal Reserve doesn't really have any infrastructure set up for lending directly to small businesses or even large businesses. Evaluating loan applications takes a lot of expertise and man power.

The post 2008 Obama era regulations actually worked fairly well, so even though the Fed has tasked the bigger banks which do have that know how and man power with doing that portion of the work they've been more hamstrung because of regulations which are decent checks on them during regular times.

That's why you see local credit unions able to get money out quicker than larger players like BoA.

Then there's the fact that small businesses tend not to have a lot of experience dealing with loans like these.

The fact larger businesses like Shake Shack (I think) were shamed after taking money meant for smaller entities.

It's all very patchwork, and seems like kind of a stupid way of doing it all.

The Fed seems to have done about as well as they could have with the hand they were dealt.

Also, considering the corruption at the highest levels of our nation right now, we'd be shocked if it had all gone out anyways considering which Trump associates would probably have their hands in the pot.

It's all a mess, other countries seem to have tackled the issues so much better. But instead we have this highly politicized response which tasks the Fed with doing jobs it never does that are outside of its mandates because our highly dysfunctional and undemocratic Senate can't pass legislation and our highly partisan citizenry can't wear masks with out it being some deep state scheme to turn us all into gay muslims (nttawwt) or whatever.

Well, they could just split all of that money with us plebes. We have to spend it to, among other things, survive. Then the businesses get the money anyway and you get less riots*. Just spitballing.

*While I agree that the police need a good cleansing, and also agree with the bulk of the current protests... I think the number of protesters would be smaller if we weren't already pissed off about possibly dying penniless in the next few months.


Sure, they could hand out 2.3tn dollars to us individuals. But congress would have to do it. No where in the Fed's mandate is "send checks to American citizens when times are tough".

That was the entire point of my post.

Congress won't act, the Fed's doing as well as they can with the tools they have, then everyone goes "why don't they just send me money", well maybe because drastically reimagining how the foundation of the world's reserve currency every time the economy crashes isn't really a great idea.

Congress should be the ones passing relief bills. The Fed should not unilaterally sending individuals checks.
 
2020-06-25 2:23:09 PM  

BMFPitt: wademh: I'm saying that the Fed was empowered to loan itself vast amounts of money to buy up assets.

It doesn't loan anything.  It just creates the money out of thin air.  That's the entire premise of it's existence.

For example, it was empowered to buy up stocks if it felt the market was artificially undervalued.

NO IT WASN'T!


Actually the money usually comes from United States Treasuries which are debts sold to the Federal Reserve in exchange for USD.

But welcome to the Fark business tab economics school where no actual details matter I suppose.
 
2020-06-25 2:39:32 PM  

Do you even grift bro: Actually the money usually comes from United States Treasuries which are debts sold to the Federal Reserve in exchange for USD.

But welcome to the Fark business tab economics school where no actual details matter I suppose.


Right.  But those USD aren't sitting in a vault somewhere.  They are created from nothing to buy the treasuries, and they return to nothing when repaid.
 
Displayed 46 of 46 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter




In Other Media
X
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.