Dedicated to Deposits: Deals, Data, and Discussion
About Ken Tumin About Ken Tumin - Founder and Editor

Ken Tumin founded the Bank Deals Blog in 2005 and has been passionately covering the best deposit deals ever since. He is frequently referenced by The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and other publications as a top expert, but he is first and foremost a fellow deal seeker and member of the wonderful community of savers that frequents DepositAccounts.

Featured Savings Rates

Popular Posts

Featured Accounts

Fed Holds Steady, No Change to Late-2014 Zero Rate Pledge

POSTED ON BY

As was expected, the Fed held steady on Tuesday. No policy changes were announced in Tuesday's FOMC statement. The late-2014 commitment for zero rates continues with the same sentence that economic conditions "are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate at least through late 2014." The FOMC statement acknowledged that the "economy has been expanding moderately". However, it provided several reasons to justify its zero rate policies and to keep alive the possibility of more stimulus like QE3 later this year:

Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability. The Committee expects moderate economic growth over coming quarters and consequently anticipates that the unemployment rate will decline gradually toward levels that the Committee judges to be consistent with its dual mandate. Strains in global financial markets have eased, though they continue to pose significant downside risks to the economic outlook. The recent increase in oil and gasoline prices will push up inflation temporarily, but the Committee anticipates that subsequently inflation will run at or below the rate that it judges most consistent with its dual mandate.

As in January, the only dissent in the FOMC vote was Jeffrey M. Lacker "who does not anticipate that economic conditions are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate through late 2014."

How Can We Prevent the Fed Pledging Zero Rates Until 2016? 2018?

I worry that the Fed will keep extending its zero rate commitment. It started at mid-2013 in the August FOMC statement. That was extended to late-2014 in January even when there was positive economic news. If the growth in the economy or employment has any setbacks, how quick will the Fed extend out this to 2016? or 2018? Because of factors independent of monetary policy, unemployment may remain high for a decade or more. With a dual mandate, the Fed may feel that it is required to keep rates near zero as long as unemployment remains high. Ending the Fed's dual mandate could reduce this extreme commitment to zero rates. That's why I like the Sound Dollar Act, a bill that was introduced last week by Congressman Kevin Brady. You can read about this bill at Kevin Brady's House webpage.

After the last Fed meeting, I had discussed some possible petitions. As I described in this forum thread, an online petition to show support of this bill seems to make the most sense. I have not yet created any petition. Unless anyone has a better idea for a petition, I'll get an online petition started soon to support this bill. So please leave a comment if you have a petition idea or if you like the idea of an online petition supporting Kevin Brady's bill.



Related Posts

Comments
71 Comments.
Comment #1 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Anything that would stop this zero interest rate policy would be great.

17
Comment #3 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
.

.

.

Dear Ken Tumin,

 

I like the dual mandate that we (the people) gave to the FEDs, and I appreciate their efforts thru all these years to try to work hard towards achieving such (sort of) conflicting mandates.

I do not believe the time to change the mandate is now.  Perhaps the time to change the mandate is when the unemployment is not as high as it is today. Perhaps when the unemplyment will get back to around 6% it will be prudent to act, not before.

I believe the bill by Mr Brady will not in the best interest of those millions of us who are unemployed/under-enployed. 

 

Yours Truly,

Anonumous

 

4
Comment #12 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#3 and #9 who are the same, talk about being clueless.

6
Comment #4 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
In spite of Ben, the rate on the 10-year UST note has increased about .25 of a point during the last few days. The present yield is around 2.25 and it was below 2.00 just a few days ago. An upward trend has to start sometime, so why not now. In all probability, when rates do finally decide to go up, they will go up.... regardless of what Ben says or does. Keep hope alive.

4
Comment #5 by NoBama (anonymous) posted on
NoBama
Unless Ben buys all the T-Note bonds that they auction...gotta love helicopter Ben! (sic)

2
Comment #6 by Shorebreak posted on
Shorebreak
With the re-election of President Obama looking somewhat likely (60.8% chance by Intrade) I forsee Bernanke holding rates at their present level at least all the way to the end of Obama's second term in 2016. Even if unemployment drops to the 6% level it's not enough for Bernanke to start tightening. After all, the loose money is propelling the equity markets higher and Bernanke desires a new asset bubble.

5
Comment #7 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Please start a petition. We need to stop this insanity of Ben.

8
Comment #8 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
 

to #2,

I agree we need a change fast, Obama has to go, but the religion right has hijacked the Republican party..That path is a dead end for me.I feel like I should just stay home.

Straightening out the economy should be the #1 priority, not this loosing social, religious, agenda the republicans are on.

I do not believe the republicans will straighten out this economy any more than the democrates will, sorry #2 poster.

 

12
Comment #10 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
The only republican who would end the fed is Ron Paul.

 The online petition sounds like a good idea.

7
Comment #11 by Apache posted on
Apache
Well, I have made my feelings about the online Petition TOO WELL known but incase anyone was on vacation.  "I" AM for the on-line Petition.

BTW, to the poster who thinks saying rude things about our dear BEN should be against the site rules, I think saying anything NICE about him should be against the rules!  

As for the fact that the Repubs are no better than the Dems, if a snake bites me, I am not going to give it a second chance!  I'll take my chances with another type snake first!  What a choice we have to make with this election and with the world in such a mess!

7
Comment #13 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
I think a firmly worded petition stating our position is a wonderful idea. 

 

2
Comment #14 by Shorebreak posted on
Shorebreak
It appears the Treasury market had a resounding responce to the Federal Reserve today.

2
Comment #15 by Bozo posted on
Bozo
Shorebreak, the bond vigilantes have finally awakened. The 30 year nudged above 3.4 today, and I suspect we'll see CD rates on the longish end follow after a bit. I re-balanced in February and plunked the new cash into, well, cash. I'm not a real big fan of bond funds at this time. I was somewhat indifferent a month ago, but it looks like the bond bubble may be coming undone (finally). I suppose we'll be seeing better rates in the months to come. The canary in the coal mine will be PenFed.

4
Comment #16 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/little-extra-inflation-backfire-volcker-202313504.html

 

Ben could learn a thing or two from this link. His crystal ball senario of late 2014 or so sounds like he'g got it all figured out, but, in reality, I think that he is as clueless as it gets. Instead of his usual econ textbooks, he might want to browse some decent history books.  Sorry if links are not allowed here but this was worth posting.  

3
Comment #17 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
.

.

.

Dear Bozo,

 

Yes, it looks like bonds across the board took a hit today.  T Notes/Bills/Bonds, Muni Bonds, Corp Bonds and even Junk Bonds.  Even Dollar appreciated against likes of Brazilian Real, and South African Rand.

 

Indeed it is likely that Bond Bubble is bursting.  But I'm afraid that if FEDs were to keep buying, then bonds may go right back up, and the yields right back down. 

Canary?  Nah ... Bellweather is more like it.

 

I'm inclined to do a little of of EDV, BZF, and SZR ...

 

Yours Truly,


Anonumous

3
Comment #18 by lou posted on
lou
I favor this petition. The Fed cannot lower unemployment; it is not an appropriate function of monetary policy. Hubert Humphrey came up with this idea in the 1970's to put pressure on the Fed to lower interest rates. Almost every historian will tell you that monetary policy was a disaster during that decade. We were experiencing double digit inflation and the Fed kept interest rates at an artificial low level way too long. Finally, Volcker took control of the Fed in 1979 and totally disregarded the employment mandate. He significantly raised interest rates even though unemployment was increasing. The Fed should be only concerned with inflation and maintaing a sound currency.

Ken, I noticed that a petition was delivered to Congress today signed by over 120,000 college students. The students are upset that interest rates for subsidized Stafford Loans are about to double. I wonder how they were able to get 120,000 people to sign this petition. This was in the news all day and it definitely got the attention of many members of Congress. Can we find out how they did it? With those type of numbers, we may actually have a chance to get something done.

3
Comment #19 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Ben Bernanke appears to be the most powerful person in the country, more powerful than the President, and more powerful than the members of Congress.  Both the President and the Congress are taking cover under what Bernanke is doing.  What he is doing must be to their liking.   It's legalized theft from savers, with the profits going to the big banks, the borrowers and the U.S. Treasury.  Yet they can say it's  not their fault, the Fed Chairman is responsible, and yet they do not hold him responsible.   Savers do not have any group powerful enough to stand up and fight for the rights of savers.   We are being cheated, and stolen from.  Savers need a lobby organization to fight for them.   I doubt at this point if any signed petitions will get us any place!

 

 

5
Comment #20 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Supposedly, the savers DO have a 'lobby orginazation to fight for them'. It's called AARP and, as far as I know, it's not workin' out to well. Maybe a petition should be directed to them.

4
Comment #21 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
I guess it's OK with us to let the College students have cheap money.  The savers will subsidize it as we have been doing for everyone else.  We need to get our act together and get this petition signed and sent to Congress.

1
Comment #22 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
.

.

.

Dear Anonymous - #19,

 

>> Savers do not have any group powerful enough to stand up and fight for the rights of savers.

 
What are these rights?   So far as I know, savers have no rights, and nor should they have any.
 
In our capitalist society, especially when less government and lesser regulation is advocated by the republicans, it is doubtful that any "right" can/will be enshirned in any act let along alone any law!  But is democracy you (savers) have the right to lobby, so it will be interesting to know what "savers rights" are you going to lobby for?  Are you by any chance hinting at more regulation, thereby more government to enforce the regulation?


Yours Truly,

Anonumous

 

 

2
Comment #23 by Apache posted on
Apache
Lou:  It's not impossible to get 120,000 students or any specific group to sign one of these Petitions if it is featured on one of these internet sites and word goes out to people where to find it.  The White House has a special page where one can type out a Petition and open it up for signatures to anyone who wants to sign it.  The problem is being able to let concern people know "where" to find it. 

I have an idea.  I am a long time member of AARP and wrote to their CEO about getting AARP involved with this Savers problem.  I got my AARP Feb/March Magazine in the mail yesterday and was happy to see on their front cover they have "The War on Savers, How to Fight Back page 50" which is a very good article about Savers problems.  They even mention this  site Deposits.com and Ken in the article.  I am sure it was just a coincidence that the article turned up after I wrote to them because they probably had many other members hounding them for help.  What matters here is that we could be open to getting a LOT of signatures from AARP members if Ken would let AARP know "he" has a Petition needing signatures and where people can find it if they want to sign it. 

Ken:  I think the door has been opened for us to use AARP and I do hope you will take advantage of using it.  Thanks!

3
Comment #24 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
To the commenter who referred to my use of the of word "rights."   The word was used in a general way, and not some specific ones as you thought I meant.   The biggest problem we savers have is "fixed markets" as opposed to "free markets".   The fixed markets are as they are thanks to Ben Bernanke and the Federal Reserve.  

My comment was not meant to be politicial, either direction.   I simply see savers as pedistrians in the street and vehicles given the green light to run right over them, the green light being given by Bernanke.

Nothing will be accomplished if readers insist on standing up for their so-called "political side."

3
Comment #25 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Why put all the work on Ken? If #23 has an 'in' with AARP, them maybe HE should be the one tp get the AARP ball rolling. He obviously has a vast experience in petitions, letter of protest writings, stump speaking, etc, so this would give him a chance to actually put the rubber to the road, as in action in lieu of constant talking. Ken has enough to do without someone piling more on him.

1
Comment #56 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#25, great idea, but maybe _you_ could let AARP know that you are not just a 'disgruntled retiree', instead of leaving it all up to Ken to convince them? Might not hurt for you to try your idea yourself?

2
Comment #26 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
.

.

.

Anonymous - #24,

 

>> The biggest problem we savers have is "fixed markets" as opposed to "free markets".  

>> The fixed markets are as they are thanks to Ben Bernanke and the Federal Reserve. 

 

No.  The free markets are the hallmark of our democracy. They are around (almost) since the founding of our republic.  The FED came into existence much later, and the Chairman Dr Bernanke was apponted to head the FED even later than that.  Therefore if you want to thank someone for the "free markets / fixed markets" then I guess you better thank our founding fathers for creating our reprentative society which created the congress, which in turn created the FED, Treasury etc.

Next addressing the "Fixed Markets".  If you believe that what we have are fixed markets, then I must point out the "right" you have of non-participation.  Noone forces you to use the "savings" accounts that you do not like, noone forces you to buy the "CD" you don't like, and for that matter no one forces you to use any products which you believe are the result of the "fixed markets".  Do you believe otherwise?

 

Yours Truly,

Anonumous

 

 

 

Yours Truly,

Anonumous

 

2
Comment #27 by Apache posted on
Apache
#25:  Let's get one thing straight!  I have NEVER put MY problems on anyone else's back!  However, since I am a member of this group, I feel I should adhere to what Ken Tumin wants to do.  "HE" has made it clear "many" times that "he" was going to put together a Petition for us.  I had already written my own but decided it would work out better being a Petition from THIS group.  Ken is already known to AARP as being the one who runs this group.   

If Ken does not want to do a Petition, all he had to do was say it.  Read his past posts to us.  He has made it clear "HE" will do this.  He just wants to know that he can depend upon our cooperation which I have made mine clear.  No one is trying to PILE anything upon Ken.  Frankly, I don't think he is the type of person who does anything he doesn't want to do!  Now get off my back and let me do what I have to do.

BTW,  I just finished writing a letter to the President of AARP and since you do not seem to appreciate my efforts, I won't bother to share what I wrote.  So, have I made it clear to you that "I" don't wait upon others to do "my" job?  I don't call myself "Apache" without good reason! 

4
Comment #28 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Ahh, just as I suspected....another case of 'all hat and no cattle'.

3
Comment #29 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
I have my doubts that there will be any petition from this website.  It's been all talk for about 2 months on various posts.  I just mailed a letter to my Congress Representative and will follow-up with a phone call to his local office in a few weeks.

4
Comment #32 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
I ma not worried. They will be forced to raise rates to combat inflation. It is inevitable low rates drive inflation, drive up insurance premiums, lower insurance coverages, increase food costs, gas costs, and makes the USA look weak in the eyes of the world and outside investors. yes they will be low, but by 2016 or so they will be back up

3
Comment #33 by Shorebreak posted on
Shorebreak
I called my congressional representative's office and asked if he supports the continued low rate policy of Ben Bernake's Federal Reserve? His aide answered yes, the congressman does. He is up for re-election in my district so I told the aide that he has lost my vote regardless how he stands on other issues. By the way, he is a Republican.

8
Comment #35 by flunked the 6th grade (anonymous) posted on
flunked the 6th grade
i am not that smart,can someone explain why the treasury yields are going up?is it because no one is buying the treasuries,instead buying stocks?therefore they the govt has to raise the yield to attract buyers?which in effect raises interest rates?

1
Comment #37 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#35 - For now, maybe rates have increased because of the 'perception' of what the current economic policy could cause, i.e., primarily inflation. Probably, most would agree that inflation will increase at some point, it's a matter of when and how much. In the meantime,more and more thought is being given to such a senario, thus UST rates have increased ever so slightly. Will the mini-trend continue....who knows. To some extent, the wall streeters and speculators are in their usual process of talking one way, then another, since they make their money whether we are buying or selling. Good luck.  

3
Comment #36 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
.

.

.

Dear Shorebreak,

I'm glad to see that your congressional representative supports the FOMC's policy. The policy that of course is entrusted currently to the Chairman appointed by a fellow Republican.

I'm pleased to learn that your congressional representativeis a Republican, most of whom are for "Free Markets", "Less Government" and "Less Regulations".

Let us know if your Republican congressional representative gets relected despite the loss of your vote! 

 

Yours Truly,

Anonumous

2
Comment #38 by Bozo posted on
Bozo
Does anyone have a link to the proposed legislation? I guess I'm old-fashioned, but before I take a position on something, I like to read it. I went to Brady's home-page (the link Ken provided), but all I found was a synopsis.

The devil's in the details, as many are just now learning with Dodd-Frank.

Stated another way, there might be parts of the Sound Dollar Act which I might favor, there might be parts I might not. Dissecting proposed legislation is often difficult, even for policy wonks (which I most assuredly am not).

3
Comment #39 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
37 is right about the brokers wheelin dealin.Lookin out the windshield i see the operation twist goin on for however long it takes to keep ARMS low for the sake of saving the housing problem because with bad housing means bad for the banks,untill this sector heals we are ****ed for a few more years.

2
Comment #40 by Bozo posted on
Bozo
Anon # 39, believe it or not, the mortgage market turned this week. Not surprising, I guess, since both the 10-year and the 30-year jumped up. Contrarian that I am, I think this will actually be good (no, GREAT) for the housing market. First and foremost, it will get all the lazy folks "waiting" to buy off their collective duffs. The most important factor these days, believe it or not, is those ubiquitous "cash call" commercials touting 30-year mortgage rates. Guess what? They went from 3.875 to 3.99. That gets the couch potatos' attention. Second, in many areas of the country, real estate prices for re-sales and new homes are (gasp) firming or (double gasp) increasing. Third, despite what all the nay-sayers predicted, more folks are actually working, and all those twenty-somethings living in their parents' basements might actually be about to get married and join the living (read:buy houses). Maybe the Fed's "dual mandate" isn't such a bad idea (hint to Ken).

3
Comment #44 by Just Wonderin' (anonymous) posted on
Just Wonderin'
If the Treasury Yields are trending up, as are rates in general, why are bank and CU CD rates still trending down?  They are definitely lower than they were a month ago.  Short and long-term.

2
Comment #45 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Can someone answer this?Who raises the treasuries rates,if ben and the fed have the power to keep interest rates low,then what person raises the treasurie rate,who is the guy that changes it from say 2.67 to 3,12,it doesnt change by itself so who is responsable?

1
Comment #46 by Apache posted on
Apache
#45:  From what I understand it depends upon how much treasuries are being purchased and if yields go up, prices go down.  If yelds go down, prices go up.  It happens automatically according to what is going on in the Treasury market.  Kind of like certain events can cause our CD rates to change up or down.  Unfortunately, these days "down" seems to be the direction for CDs.

 

 

1
Comment #47 by throttleplate (anonymous) posted on
throttleplate
thanks #46,so it seems that ben can controll the .025 loans to banks from the fed and can conduct operation twist and QE but after that he just has to hope it keeps rates low for his liking as he has no physical controll over the treasurie rate yield which will find its own level after all world economics are factored in.

1
Comment #48 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
.

.

.

Dear Anonymous - #45,

>> Can someone answer this?Who raises the treasuries rates,if ben and the fed have the power to

>> keep interest rates low,then what person raises the treasurie rate,who is the guy that changes it

>> from say 2.67 to 3,12,it doesnt change by itself so who is responsable?

 

A long, and perhaps at times tangatial, answer follows:

Treasuries ( T Bill / Notes / Bonds ) are traded on the open bond markets, and they are products that are made by US Treasury.  Each of the treasury represents the debt that the US Federal Government  is taking on behalf of the US Tax-Payers.  Every trader - retail/institutional - has access to the these.  The collective action of such traders decide at what price they are willing to buy/sell the treasuries. When the collective action results into lower and lower prices, the yields tend to go higher and higher (and vice-versa). 

 

In the bond market even FOMC is a participant.  They can and do purchase the treasuries.  They also have the power to decide various rates at the instututional level.  ( No, FOMC cannot decide what would be the mortage, car loan, credit card rate. )  In addition they have power to "create" money and lend it to big instututes.

So overall collective action of traders - retail/institutional (including even other nations who buy our Treasuries) and the action (or even the stance) of FOMC affects the rate that different Treasuries pay.

 

Yours Truly,

Anonumous

2
Comment #49 by throttleplate (anonymous) posted on
throttleplate
thanks #48,i have learned alot about how interest rates work on this site,thanks to everyone involved.

1
Comment #50 by lou posted on
lou
"Maybe the Fed's "dual mandate" isn't such a bad idea (hint to Ken)."

If you want to take the shortsighted view, you could say the Fed money printing is stimulating the economy now; however, let's talk in a few years and see what the effects of these policies are then. You could have boasted that the low interest rates in the early 2000's caused a boom in real estate, many people did, but in hindsight we now understand it very differently.

3
Comment #51 by Bozo posted on
Bozo
Lou, I would just caution you (and others) about the law of unintended consequences. Putting a noose around the neck of the Federal Reserve might make the posse feel good, but the impact might be, well, "not good." For example, ask yourself why the "Sound Dollar" bill has not come up for a hearing. Is it perhaps that the RNC is petrified about another withering sound bite "Republicans hate maximum employment".

Just a thought.

2
Comment #52 by Bozo posted on
Bozo
Note to Ken. Well, I'm on page 4 of 27 of the "Sound Dollar" thingee. I have yet to compare the existing Federal Reserve Act to the proposed legislation, but I think it might have a few, shall we say, "problems."

The most egregious problem, right off the top, is optics.

See my comment above.

1
Comment #53 by lou posted on
lou
Bozo, you might be right about why Congress won't take up the Brady Bill, but now we're talking politics - not what may be in the best interest of good fiscal and monetary policy.

I don't think it is so far-fetched to remove the unemployment mandate from the Fed's purview. I don't see how it would put a noose around their neck. As I said before, they never had this mandate until Hubert Humphrey proposed it in the 1970's to force the Fed to lower rates. This was precisely the wrong policy and probably worsened the inflationary problems during that decade. No other central bank in the world has this mandate. In fact, having this mandate actually tightens the noose because they have less flexibility to control inflation and the preserve the vaue of the dollar, the only real function of monetary policy. Employment policy or fiscal policy is a function of the executive and legislative branches; it was never meant to be delegated to the country's central bank.

3
Comment #54 by Bozo posted on
Bozo
Lou, I think we are in agreement. But, in a nutshell, the issue is politics and optics. Nobody wants to be tarred with the "Richey Rich" or "1%" or "Goldman Sachs" label. I suppose we can agree that few (if any) will actually "read" the proposed "Sound Dollar Act". Hey, if it sounds good? Let's get on to our fund-raising. The point is, most folks sign petitions (whether they be from the NRA, AARP, or the Girl Scouts) without a clue what they are supporting.

Which is why most (if not all) petitions are circular-filed.

But, if you folks want to circulate a petition, go for it. Remember to include a "chicken in every pot". Google it.

2
Comment #55 by Apache posted on
Apache
Bozo:  If a Petition can get them to raise interest rates, I think we can all have a "chicken in every pot".

My concern is that a Petition by itself is not going to do the job unless Ken can get some publicity for it and why we are doing it.   This is where I think AARP can come in if he asks for their help.  We are the type of people who AARP looks for as members (now or in the future) so that might get them to help if Ken lets them know we are not just a few disgruntled retirees.  One way or the other, I do hope we find out soon what we can expect with this Petition and if it is going to be a reality.

3
Comment #57 by Apache posted on
Apache
Anony #56:  What part of "Ken seems to want to do this himself?" do you not understand?  THIS is Ken's forum and when AARP's magazine article interviewed "Ken" they also referred to "his" forum.  HE, imo, would have more of a chance to get their help than I who am just a longtime member of AARP.  I DID send the President an email about the Saver's Petition but all I got back was a reply asking me to get involved with their Social Security/Medicare Petition and fill out their survey.  I am not their favorite member because I replied with a not very nice email telling them they were acting like my senators in Washington by avoiding "my" real issue I needed addressed and sending me a reply which had nothing to do with it.   AARP can be a help but they are not, imo, going to get involved unless someone like Ken approaches them.  I know what I can do but I don't waste my time on things others can do better.  Frankly I am sick of hearing about this Petition when it seems to be going nowheres so I will try to concern myself with other issues now.   

 

3
Comment #58 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
BAM, # 57, you may have just solved your own problem...."try to concern myself with other issues now". Just one more thing though. I hope that you don't let your shorts get in a wad over those 'other issues' as much as you have this one or I have a feeling that you will be in for a rough time. Take care, be patient and good luck. 

2
Comment #59 by Apache posted on
Apache
#58:  No one gets anything done by worrying about their shorts.  Whatever I am involved in, I hope I will always take seriously.  I am just sorry too many others don't.  Have a good day. 

1
Comment #60 by R.G. (anonymous) posted on
R.G.
I am a young saver and a worker, with a modest mortgage, small student loans, CDs, savings bonds, stocks and treasuries.  I use this site to find the best CD and savings account deals that are available under current interest rate environments, whatever they are.  I don't really care for the political activity on this site, because I think that people use the information on this site for different purposes.  I don't want to silence anyone on this forum, I just don't care for the recent political focus, and would rather that Ken continue to concentrate mostly on factual reporting of current and future interest rates and banking trends, as he usually does very well.

Speaking of politics, though: I support the dual mandate, because most people in the country including myself have dual/multiple interests.  I would like a decent economy, as well as decent interest rates, for both my saving and my borrowing.  I think the retired folks on this site tend to assume that their interests are the most important, and that everyone should be a saver.  That is not the case, and we need balanced monetary policy to benefit the most people in the nation as a whole.  The more people who are working and creating, the better off our nation will be--saviings are a secondary goal, in my opinion.

1
Comment #61 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
To #60,

Don't you believe the savers provide the funds for your loans?  As for the politics, if you don't like them, just skip them, no reason why is necessary.  Just face the facts, politics are a way of life in this country.  There are even courses in College about politics.

3
Comment #63 by lou posted on
lou
For those people who are satisfied with the present policies of gargantuan deficits, enormous public debts and printing money as fast as the printing presses can run, I am sure you will be rudely awakened when your dollars are not worth the paper they are written on and our economy implodes, Greece style, under the weight of the unwise actions of our govt and the Fed Reserve are pursuing today. If you think the economy is tough today, get ready to experience real austerity when the rest of the world refuses to invest in our treasuries. Who is going to pay for your SS, Medicare, unemployment insurance, food stamps, free public education, welfare, Obamacare, etc. It won't be the savers, because their savings will have been depleted because of the zero interest rate policies of our central bank. And don't count on the stock market to bail you out because ultimately it has to reflect the underlying fundamentals of our economy.

3
Comment #64 by Apache posted on
Apache
Lou:  You don't intimidate easily, do you?  Good for you!  I agree with everything in your post except I noticed you didn't mention China.  I once told the bank manager of my bank that he would be wise to start learning Chinese the way things are going in our country.  I can't repeat in this forum what he said to me but it just showed "he" has no clue of what is going on.  What I don't understand is how many posters want to learn from this Ken and this group about CDs and think it has nothing to do with politics.  If the politicians had not allowed our economy to be destroyed we could all be selecting any bank we want and get great interest rates.  I wouldn't have to drive over 50 miles to find that "one" bank which may still be paying over 2% for a 5 year CD!  No matter what we decide to invest in, somehow what is happening in Washington will have a great impact on whether we can make money on it or go broke! 

Maybe Ken should rename this group Deposits/Politics.com!  Have a great evening folks.  I have another CD maturing in the near future and I have to find out how far I have to drive to find "that" bank still paying over 2% for my 5 year CD!  See!  I can multitask.  I posted about politics but still managed to keep it about CDs!

5
Comment #65 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Or, maybe even Deposits/Politics/Looneyvilleposters.com?

3
Comment #66 by Apache posted on
Apache
#65:  Good Morning!  Just wanted to state that Ken can't change this to "Deposits/Politics/Looneyvilleposters.com".  It's already taken.   It's the one "you" are posting on!   Get a life!

2
Comment #67 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
It appears that the "Petition" is a dead issue?  Too bad.

3
Comment #69 by Apache posted on
Apache
#67 & #68  Is it really "too bad"?  Can't have a Petition without a leader and followers.  Did you both take the time to let Ken know you wanted one?  Too bad is right.  This is just typical why nothing gets done in Washington and our country is going to Hell.  Too bad! 

2
Comment #68 by jjy (anonymous) posted on
jjy
agree...

1
Comment #70 by ohreally posted on
ohreally
Apache, you are being baited. 

1
Comment #71 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
No, Ken should not rename this site "Deposits/Politics.com".

Maybe some posters should stick to comments about DEPOSIT RATES and take their soap box to another site along with their political comments.  This has been a great site and has helped many of us to get great deposit rates for years.  No need to change it now just because you may be frustrated with the current rates.  It's not Ken's fault.

2
Comment #72 by Apache posted on
Apache
Thanks Oh Really.  I keep forgetting some of these people are not as serious about certain concerns as I am and I keep sinking into the quicksand. 

However, why does #71 seem to think we are blaming Ken for low interest rates?  There is nothing posted that I read which indicates this.  I do wish he/she would look up the definition of facetious.  I was being "FACETIOUS" concerning renaming this site "Deposits/Politics.com".  Am I the only one on here with a sense of humor??    Get a grip #71.   Try to have a nice evening folks.  I'm going to watch the news and cheer up.

4
Comment #77 by Apache posted on
Apache
I just wanted to share that I got a reply from my Senator Rand Paul concerning the Federal Reserve and the Sound Dollar Act.  Wow!  He shared some info that really was awesome about the Federal Reserve and why we need the Sound Dollar Act.  I think this is what Ken wanted to base his Petition on and after reading Sen. Paul's letter I do hope we take the time to get involved with this serious problem. 

2
Comment #78 by lou posted on
lou
Apache, can you post Rand Paul's letter to the comment area, so we can all see it.

 

1
Comment #79 by Apache posted on
Apache
Lou:  I don't know how to scan but I will see if I can copy it and paste it.  I would like to share it with you.

2