Dedicated to Deposits: Deals, Data, and Discussion

U.S. Rep. Dennis Ross Questions Fed Chair Yellen on the Effects of Zero Interest Rates on Seniors

POSTED ON BY

For the first time as Fed Chair, Janet Yellen testified before Congress. She essentially repeated the lines from the last Fed meeting saying that the Fed will continue with its tapering at the current pace and that it will likely keep the zero interest rate policy "well past the time that the unemployment rate declines below 6-1/2 percent." As mentioned in this Business Insider article, Chairwoman Yellen failed to deliver a dovish surprise. In other words, it could have been worse for savers.

One Congressman did question Chairwoman Yellen about the effect of the Fed’s extreme monetary policy on seniors and others who depend on their savings for income. That Congressman was Representative Dennis Ross, a Republican who represents the 15th District in Florida. Below is a video of his questions and the Chairwoman’s replies.

As you can see in the video, Chairwoman Yellen’s replies were close to what we have heard from Bernanke. According to her, the low interest rates are the result of a weak economy, and once the economy recovers, higher interest rates will return. Below is a transcript of part of this exchange:

U.S. Representative Dennis Ross:

When your predecessor was here before, Chairman Bernanke, he talked about the effect on the seniors who have fixed incomes and aren’t concerned about home appreciation. They’re more concerned about CD rates, savings accounts because that’s their livelihoods, that’s their incomes. Can you comment at all as to any hope or suggestions for those seniors of mine back home that are on a fixed income that are dependent on not a zero interest rate but at least some return on their investment.to allow them to live an affordable life.

Fed Chair Janet Yellen:

So I know that this is a difficult situations for seniors in that position, and I would simply say that our objective is to get the economy moving and into a state of full recovery as rapidly as we can. And when we have accomplished that, rates of return will come back to more normal levels and we’ll see higher returns.

At least Chairwoman Yellen offered some sympathy to seniors and others who depend on interest, but just like Bernanke, she basically said the blame for zero interest rates is the weak economy that has been very slow to recover.


Related Posts

Comments
24 comments.


Comment #2 by Shorebreak posted on
Shorebreak
Yellen: "the blame for zero interest rates is the weak economy that has been very slow to recover."

Denial, denial and more denial.

19
Comment #3 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Bernanke part II

15
Comment #4 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Well sympathy doesn't put food on my table.

21
Comment #5 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Anyone who has studied economic recoveries since 1945 knows this is not a recovery. This is an agonizingly painful transfer of wealth in two directions...up and down. The productive middle class is transferring a lifetime of earned wealth through higher taxes, stagnant wages, higher medical costs, and a much higher daily cost of living than is officially reported. What the average person does not see, touch, taste or realize is that their meager savings earn such low interest rates they are LOSING money every year through increased costs (i.e. true inflation). Trillions are safely "parked" in accounts, money that is used by those at the top of the economic ladder for their personal advantage or, through taxation, transferred downwards (or laterally in some cases!). While bankers are flourishing, most savers are losing economic ground each and every day.

Yellen knows this full well but, like all but a few FED officials, will never admit it. They're still eating bad mortgage loans that enriched brokers, bankers and traders at the expense of unaware investors who bought worthless paper. The FED has a 4.1 trillion dollar balance sheet for a reason. Like a sponge, someone had to clean up the fiscal mess and this is how it's done in the modern world. Big shots **** up, get rich in the process and hand the average guy the bill.

Savers, by nature, are not stupid. Assume that American savers had online accounts holding their cash reserves and that they could easily move money to and from savings instruments. In other words, imagine if people had real time control of their money. In this world, PenFed would have attracted all the money they needed at 3% in a few nanoseconds. Imagine if Yellen had said something like, "Hey, wait a minute. Some savers are earning more than 3%, FDIC insured at a few credit unions, so don't tell me savers can't earn some interest on their money when FED funds are at .25% and inflation sits at 1.5%." Of course, she would never say this because your local bank agonizes over placing a non-zero digit in front of the decimal point on their latest CD offering.

30
Comment #35 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
One thing in particular puzzles me in your post: your last paragraph. Given our Constitution and the nature of contracts, how can the thousands of banks and credit unions in this country be forced into a situation to allow a customer to transfer savings funds from one bank or credit union to another bank or credit union just because a customer wants to have "control" over the funds and get a better deal elsewhere?  Contracts are contracts and wishing things were different doesn't make something different possible.

1
Comment #44 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Of course contracts should be enforced but that's not part of my equation. You can move your money from bank to bank but the process is often cumbersome and time consuming. A lot of money is "trapped" by local institutions due to nothing more than geography. I know several people who would have rushed down to a local PenFed branch for a 3% CD but, of course, there is no local PenFed branch. As a result, their money sits earning 0.25% interest while they ponder alternatives.

I had the time and inclination to set up a PenFed account online, procure a cashier's check at my local bank, overnight it to PenFed and then call to set up several CD's. Additional paperwork, required signatures etc. followed. In contrast, I can purchase a brokered CD on my Schwab account in seconds, assuming I have funds available. Technology rules (sort of).

Most financial products are not designed to maximize the interests of the investor/saver. They are designed to maximize profits for the banker, broker or so-called financial adviser at the expense of the retail investor. Technology can and often does level the playing field. Anyone remember the brokerage fees for 100 shares of stock circa 1982? Hint: It wasn't $6.95!         

3
Comment #79 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#44, There are, of course, really easy options to fund a cd/savings/checking accoiunt (in descending order): online or via phone, printing and sending an application/check by mail/fax, or by visiting a branch. The complaint in the last paragraph of #5 puzzled me because it simply seemed to seek the ability to opt out of an account whenever wanted, without penalties/terms of a bank or credit union that might apply. A depositor's "control" of this sort isn't going to happen, and shouldn't because of the status of contracts in this country. If someone in this country considers himself or herself "trapped" by geography with regard to banking matters, they are living a sheltered existence. Obviously, a depositor is free, and wise, to seek the maximum return possible for a deposit consistent with what applicable risks are acceptable to him or her. The reality of expecting a financial provider to cater to the depositor to the extent of "maximizing" the interest of the depositor escapes me.

1
Comment #80 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
I never suggested opting out of any agreement, unless of course one pays the agreed penalty. I know many people with large sums parked in local bank accounts. In a busy life, such funds often stay put waiting for local conditions to improve. The problem is that money is global, not local. My brokerage account, for example, allows me to "park" money that I can then use at will to purchase a wide range of financial instruments, including long-term CD's paying above average interest.

My comments and suggestions have nothing to do with contract law. I'm suggesting a more personal and fluid control of one's funds using existing technologies. There are other opinions about how YOUR money should be managed. One that may interest DA readers.
http://www.sharedprosperity.org/bp204/bp204.pdf

Interested in hubris...google Teresa Ghilarducci, the author. It's truly amazing stuff.

2
Comment #6 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
What do you expect when all economic numbers, all employment/unemployment numbers, GDP, interest rates and money supplies are manipulated and phony. It is a make believe economy, nothing is real and you want real interest rates on your savings, come on people, be realistic.

25
Comment #7 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
You people are to greedy,  ECB is seriously considering negative deposit rates and you want high CD rates. You are lucky FEDs and the banks are not charging you interest back on your money for FDIC protection. Get real and count your blessing on what ever you can get back on your money. The democrats ruined the economy and nothing can fix it unless we elect conservatives back in congress on all levels. Running deficits year after year and piling debt will bring back the depression and not the good times.

21
Comment #8 by paoli2 posted on
paoli2
#7  This is not a matter of savers being greedy.  WE did not make the bad decisions which tanked our economy but we are being punished for others bad decisions.  Like you wrote, we have to be grateful for what we can get.  We also have to do our part in making some changes in Washington.

20
Comment #10 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Good point #7 and very true. I agree, but how to relay this message to the people who never read or are engaged in the system, but blindly vote for the democrats without thinking of the consequences. I'm spreading the reality to the people in my building, but is like talking to the walls.

23
Comment #12 by Shorebreak posted on
Shorebreak
Both parties are to blame and beholden to their Wall Street handlers. Don't think the Republicans would be a pancacea either. Causing recessions is their game.

14
Comment #26 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
No democrat will ever admit to the truth, including you. Attacking the opponent to justify your own bad deeds is a slimy politics. Therefore, the democrats, lie, cheat and still, including you, not necessary in that order. If you defend the abusers of the nation (the democrats), you are becoming part of that mentality.

14
Comment #28 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
The Republicans are just as BAD.  28 Republicans voted to raise the debt ceiling along with all the Dumocrats.

4
Comment #31 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#28, if they didn't the USA would be in default and your SS will stop coming and your savings would become worthless. You are mixing apples with oranges, the republicans just protected you and you did not notice that. Typical democrat, denying the truth again.

12
Comment #71 by uncle posted on
uncle
"blindly vote for the democrats without thinking of the consequences" and that will become more aparent as the heathcare mess progresses.

1
Comment #15 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#7  I believe this recession started under Bush and Greenspan.  In fact, Greenspan predicted the mortgage mess.  Then the democrats tried to fix things by pooring in more paper.  Both parties are responsible!

12
Comment #19 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Most of the financial crisis (2007-2009) occurred under Bush and Bernanke, who Bush picked to succeed Greenspan.  However, neither Fed chief ever predicted a mortgage meltdown.  And the housing bust was driven by subprime mortgages, which were unregulated and not supported by the government.  In fact, according to Greenspan and Bernanke's laissez faire supply side ideology everyone always makes rational economic decisions and bubbles can't even happen!   Admittedly, Obama for some reason reappointed Bernanke and has now appointed another interest rate dove, Yellen.    One party instituted these policies but the other continued them, so in that sense both are responsible.

14
Comment #23 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#19 the democrats controlled the house and the senate since 2006, so you must be a democrat and a liar too.
The housing crisis was created by the democrats for removing the requirements to qualify for a loan. Even a dead person can get a loan at that time.
The democrats did the same mistake for welfare and food stamps, they unilaterally removed all of the requirements to qualify for them and nobody wants to work anymore. The democrats want unlimited debt ceiling...shell I go on.....
Defending the democrats is like defending the devil.

18
Comment #47 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Actually I have always been an independent and nothing stated in post #19 is a lie.  Bush was President and Bernanke was Fed chief (both Republicans) during most of the financial crisis (07-09).  Democrats were in the majority in Congress from 07-10, but any laws passed from 07-08 needed President Bush's agreement.  The timeline shows both parties played parts in causing the mortgage meltdown and the economic policies (low interest rates) in response.

Also the claims in the post above are not true, but I imagine they are due to being misinformed rather than lieing.  Subprime mortages (as opposed to traditional conforming mortgages) were unregulated, so Democrats coundn't have removed all rules since there never were any.  Luckily I have never had first hand experience with welfare or food stamps, but a quick look at my state's website shows numerous requirements (depending on the assistance), so it appears Democrats never removed all requirements.  The evidence simply doesn't show that all bad things in the world are the result of one political party.

1
Comment #58 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#47, being independent, to me, it means you can not make up your mind one way or the other and you are trying to find justification and excuse not to blame yourself if you candidates turn out to be villains.
You have no direction in life and ride the wave of gullibility and self narcissism.
Be man and decide which way you like this country to go and stick to it. I don't care whether you vote democrat or republican, just do your due diligence and follow your state of conciseness.

6
Comment #32 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#15, you are lying again, go back and check who was in power in 2006 and who controlled the senate and the house.

11
Comment #20 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
The economy was in BAD shape when Bush left office, so please don't try to blame this on Democrats.  Haven't you noticed that the Republicans are concerned only with the very wealthy, and they do NOT care about the rest of us.

8
Comment #21 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Would you care for some more KoolAid?

7
Comment #22 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#20, you are wrong, the democrats tool over congress in 2006 and the bad omen started, Please check the history before start blaming the Bush.

14
Comment #33 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#29, spread the lies, the democrats only know how to lie and twist the truth to serve their agenda, including you.

9
Comment #9 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
The Federal government's "books" ("information" re economic health) are indeed "cooked" (manipulated) to attempt to lull the public into a comfort zone where the public feels as optimistic as possible in a situation where numerous forces over decades have acted against the majority of citizens. These forces have continued REGARDLESS of the political party in power: major technological change (e.g., "automation" increased use of robots), risk-friendly "deregulation", economic "globalization" and economic "financializing" in place of manufacturing. Neither major party has made the move to introduce one thing that will improve this situation and and get Americans to save significantly more so that there can be some long-term permanent improvement in America's capital situation--something not accomplished by holding and trading in equities. The improvement is to wean individuals and entities from stocks and to increase investment in government and corporate bonds. This can be done over time by increasing capital gains taxes, taxes on dividends, lowering taxes on savings interest, etc.. The government simply has to start understanding--and acting on that understanding-- that long-term policy is wiser than short-term policy with its bubbles, crashes, more bubbles, etc., and acting accordingly with measures that are consistent with the understanding that equities aren't the way to build real long-term economic growth.   

13
Comment #11 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#9, Didi you hear Obama and the democrats talking of removing the debt ceiling and make it unlimited, if you did, now you know what the democrats stand for and don't tell me both parties are the same and to be blamed. One party in particular runs the country in the ground and Obama has a slash account with sky is the limit check book and rules as a dictator.

22
Comment #13 by Shorebreak posted on
Shorebreak
Don't be ridiculous.

11
Comment #59 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Shirebreak, Obama is destroying this country and you still are defending the democrats. The democrats no longer believe in the constitution and you still defend them. Obama became dictator and you still defending them.
What will it take to realize that you are supporting the destroyers of this country (internal enemy) that you went in war zone to defend the constitution and the flag you carried on military bases and gave pledge to defended forever.

5
Comment #17 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#9.. Read my post carefully. Where do I say both parties are the same? Nowhere. I said that certain forces have continued to have a negative effect on Americans regardless of what party is in power and that neither party has effectively tried to boost long-term growth by really trying to get Americans to save more and to discourage holding and trading in a stock-market-favored economy instead of a long-term-growth-favored economy. Both parties need to deal with the problem from fixed governmental spending that can result in a drag on stable, long-term growth but both parties simply aren't coming to grips with the forces I mentioned with some policies that can help. Good luck if you think cutting spending alone will do the job. It will not because America also needs stable, long-term growth and savings--not speculation--simply translates as the way to produce capital for stable, long-term growth. 

7
Comment #24 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#17, The democrats in Congress allow Obama to by pass the constitution and act on his own and rule as a dictator with presidential decrees and all of them are traitors for allowing it to happen.
The republicans, being in minority, have no other alternative but to try to stop it by opposing Obama.
Now you are telling us, both parties are to be blamed.
Being one-sided in your post makes you look biased and dishonest. You should point out the faults of the democrats as main reason for the disrespect of congress.

15
Comment #34 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#17. If you're wondering why there's no partisan take on the economic situation, I can clear that up: it's not applicable. Your post deals with Constitutional issues and congressional political issues--different issues from what I dealt with in my post. My post deals with the real failure of both parties to deal with SPECIFIC policies designed to deal with the LOW rate of savings of Americans in order to bring about strong capital formation with stable, long-term growth in lieu of bubbles, crashes, downturns and a weak employment situation.  

3
Comment #37 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Error correction: #24. (and not #17.) should have been what I typed to begin Comment #34: "If you're wondering...".

1
Comment #41 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#9, #17, #27, #34, you are trying to wiggle out again. The democrats are doing 10 times more damage to the economy than the republicans. Admit that and you are off the hook.

10
Comment #38 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
The current ultra-low interest rate envoronment - essentially manufactured by the Federal Reserve's manipulatiom of interest rates - will come back to haunt us later. How do we educate young people about the power of interest compounding when interest rates are close to zero? What we are really encouraging is a gembling environment, im which people are encouraged to engage in short-term speculation rather than long-term savings. The brokerage houses add fuel to the fire by offering new and improved methods of short-term buying and selling, both of which generate increasing commission revenue which even further enhanced as stock prices continiue to rise. Most elderly savers cannot afford to play the markets at a time of their lives when they are drawing down their portfolios to generate funds to live on. If stock prices dip significantly, even for only a year or  two, there is no way for them to make up losses, so they have no option but to invest in fixed income instrument yielding almost nothing and seldom even keeping up with inflation, forcing them to live on their principal, which only accelerates the diminution of their portfolios. Wealthier investors have options - they can diversify their portfolios and use one of several techniques to avoid having to draw down their principal, such as investment "buckets." It's sad to see how our leaders have thrown seniors under the bus - many of whom have served in oour armed forces and risked their lives for us,

4
Comment #14 by Ratesaver posted on
Ratesaver
Yellen will keep interest rates low to keep the stock market buzzing however that won't help savers like me.  I don't think the rates will ever go up... Russa is coming here... As I seen on TV the other day the commentator said 150 people have most of the money in russia.... I think if everyone complained to the fed things may chance... Good luck with that...

11
Comment #16 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Based on what I see daily I disagree with the theory that low interest rates increase consumer spending. When interest rates were normal seniors spent a lot of their interest income on grandkids, trips, dinners, hobbies, etc. Now their main "economic activity" is waiting for interest rates to rise! Yeah last year they could've made 30% in stocks, if they didn't lose 50% in gold or other assets which did not improve.

14
Comment #18 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Ross: "Ms Yellen, these zero percent interest rates are terrible for seniors!"
Yellen: "Which senior executives?"

13
Comment #25 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
I did read all of the posts and came to a conclusion that most of you are missing the obvious, that is, the world is flooded with money, every central banks print money from USA, Japan, EU, China and most undeveloped nations, including India.
All those money, at least 50% of them, wind up in USA in treasury bonds. The banks don't need the money from the consumers, because they can get it for almost free from the FEDs, the conglomerates have trillions in stashed money abroad and are not borrowing from the banks. The mortgage borrowers are few, most people and institutions buy with cash and the banks make very little profit on the spread.
Now, all of you geniuses out there, please explain who and how the banks can pay you big interest on your not needed money by the banks. On top of that, the banks are paying FDIC insurance on your money, that can not be put to good use anywhere.

14
Comment #27 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
You still don't get it, do you.  It is the FED'S POLICY that is the reason why the banks have no need for our money and to pay us a decent interest rate on our savings. It the Federal Reserve that is holding down the interest rates to an ARTIFICAILLY low level.

9
Comment #29 by paoli2 posted on
paoli2
#27  We know it's the FED's policy doing this but #25 may be pin pointing "why" the FED has this policy.  It thinks it has no other choice since the economy is so bad.  I have had my local bank blatantly tell me it doesn't need my CD deposits because it can get all the money it need at zero percent rates from the FED.  So I took everything away from them and put it in smaller banks and credit unions which still wanted the deposits.

6
Comment #42 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#27, if it was not for the FED, the USA whold have defaulted by now and the inflation rates would have been over 10% and your savings would have been desecrated.
I agree with #25, well said and well observed. Only the democrats deny the truth when there is a fact to prove it and putting the blame on the real saviors.

9
Comment #36 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Maybe the answer is bitcoins!

4
Comment #39 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
And just how will that wok?

3
Comment #43 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#36, you are out of your mind. Is that what the democrats do, abandon ship if there is a rat on board. Get to the problem and fix it, is the republicamn moto, we just need to give them a chance in November.

9
Comment #40 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
The Federal reserve's attempts at stimulation are directed not only at the economy in general. They are also an attempt to rescue the banks from their recent risky, speculative investment practices. By the Fed's forcing interest rates down to near nothing, fixed income savers are in effect being forced to bail out the banks. That wil surely encourage the banks to resume their wild investing behavior after the Fed has deemed them rescued from their past mistakes. As for Janet Yellin, she seems as willing as Bernanke to offer pie in the sky to fixed income investors - typically retirees who do not have time on their side and will probably never get to see the pie.

5
Comment #45 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Can't we all just get along?

2
Comment #46 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Oh, it's not so bad here.  Go to a bar and start talking "politics" and watch what happens. 

5
Comment #48 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
I can not understand most of you democrats posting and defending the democrats in congress. My question is WHY?
You all know what the democrats in congress stand for:
Free immigration, free giveaways, unlimited debt ceiling, centralized health care, lose monetary policy, deficits as far as you can see and than some, not interested to create jobs, not interested to compromise, giving the president dictatorial powers, by-passing the constitution, bigger taxes, destroying the middle class, lying left and right, accusing the opposition of being obstructionists just because they do not agree on what ever subject, letting non citizens voting, letting the illegal criminals live among us, letting the terrorist come here and receive permanent residency, refusing to collaborate with the republicans and the list will go on for few more pages.
But my point is why live with such democrats in congress. You all know, nothing good will come out of it, yet, most of you are fighting tooth and nail to defend them.
My question to all of you, again, is WHY?

8
Comment #49 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#48, perhaps you might want to broaden your choice of news sources.

1
Comment #53 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#49, maybe you should include the Obama disastrous foreign policy too for #48 lists of bad deeds to be complete. And where do you get your news, CNN, NBC, ABC,PBS...all are biased and are protecting the democrats by not telling you the real truth.
No wonder most of you vote like zombies for the democrats in every election, you must be  brain washed too.

6
Comment #56 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
You obviously watch Fox BS News channel, which seals itself off from the rest of the world and cradles its viewers in ignorance that is cloaked at 'truth'.

2
Comment #60 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#56, would you please tell us what ever happen to Barry Soetoro who came from Indonesia to study here on taxpayer dole and why that record is sealed and classified as secret file?
Why Barry Soetoro did not return back and became illegal alien after his visa expired?
Why the imposter Obama produced 3 different types of birth certificates just to calm the outrage of the people.
Would you please tell us why Obama acts on his own and is ignoring the constitution?
I have a list a mile long, but if you have knowledge of any of the above it would be appreciated by most of us who are curious to find your source of info.

4
Comment #50 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Perhaps the people here that are so steadfastly defending the Democrats in Congress are in the category that are benefiting the most.  Could it be?

5
Comment #61 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#50 Or are trolls sent by the democrats to continue with the lies and disinformation?

4
Comment #51 by Wise Man Sayeth (anonymous) posted on
Wise Man Sayeth
Janet Yellen is nothing more than another of the many Trojan horses placed into power at the urging of the NYC/London casino banking cartel. She may look like a benevolent grandmother, but the truth is she is bought and paid for. The answer, I think, for anyone looking beyond a year or two, is to buy gold or related metals, like platinum and silver. That is especially now that the government has succeeded in bashing the prices, as they are "on sale" right now.

The corrupt Fed will continue to attack the value of true money, especially now that the central bank is in its death throes. The manipulations are a desperate attempt to support the current paper money inflation system. But, I think the banksters are limited now to inducing wide fluctuation in the price, rather than longer term price reductions as achieved in the 1980s/90s. This is because they appear to have run out of gold.

The fact that the Fed has no gold left is proven, in spite of its protests to the contrary, by the fact that it was only able to deliver 5 tons of gold to Germany in an entire year! They've got 295 tons left to deliver to the Germans, and they simply don't have it. When the corrupt Fed collapses, taking with it the NYC and London based casino bankster corporate shells, under which they operate, the USA will face its biggest challenge.

With a Chinese yuan likely backed by a certain amount of gold, and the dollar still backed by nothing, the question of whether to drain the last remaining American gold, from the official US gold reserves at Ft. Knox and West Point is going to be a hot political issue. After all, nations have gone to war for much less reason than stealing each others gold.

Foreigners are going to be pushing very hard to force the USA to empty its remaining gold at Fort Knox, West Point and the Denver Mint, to replace the gold stolen by the NY Fed. The new administration to going to have the job of routing banksters out of their hiding places in the Caribbean and elsewhere, but that won't solve the problem of where to find the gold.

5
Comment #52 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
I think you nailed it. 

It's only a matter when, not if, the rest of the world recognizes that the U.S. is insolvent and totally bankrupt.  I may not live to see it, but it's coming.  And when it does, look out below.  The crash will make 1929 look the good times.

Gloom and doom?  Maybe.  Time will tell who is right.

5
Comment #54 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Stimulus is really "bailing out the banks" but no one, of course, can speak this truth. If the FED said, "we need another round of bank bailouts this month" there would be an uproar heard across the land. However, "quantitative easing" sounds like a lot (a lot is good) of easy (easing is so pacifying) medicine for the economy. How can a lot of easy not be good? I hear the FED saying "Banks love it, wall street loves it and you will too...because you haven't the faintest idea what we're doing." As they say in the movies, "follow the money". 

4
Comment #55 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Most of you are trying to put the blame on the republicans for the bad times, well, all of you are wrong, the democrats are the real bad people and that is a fact.
You can twist and turn and blame Bush and blame congress, (by the way the democrats refuse to negotiate with the republicans), but the truth is the democrats are running this country into the ground, together with the big kahuna, but you still live in denial and deflection of the downfall. The democrats created dictator, the democrats want to destroy this country, the democrats lie straight in your face, the democrats no longer believe in the constitution and you still defend them.
It is either something wrong with you or something wrong with the rest of us. Since we point out the faults of the democrats but you always are shrugging off the bad doings, it must be you, who elected those idiot in congress to serve your selfish needs.

9
Comment #65 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
I mostly agree.......But Republicans are almost as bad. I'm done with them. We need a new conservative party. I'm not voting for any more rino's....ie-Both Bushes,McCain,Romney, Dole......all losers.

4
Comment #67 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#65, that is what the democrats want you to think, they operate on divide and concur. It is a very bad time to go that route now.
If the democrats make the house democratic  and hold on to the senate on November, there will be no new party allowed to form in such scenario, Obama, with his dictatorial decrees will order IRS to go after anyone forming or thinking of forming new party.  They may even stop the future elections if it is not in their interest.
The democrats in congress are evil people and want to control this country from the top and make everyone else life miserable.

4
Comment #68 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
CAN WE PLEASE GET OFF THIS POLITICAL RANT AND KEEP THINGS ON TOPIC??? I COME HERE FOR FINANCIAL INFO--NOT POLITICAL RANTS.  Am I the only one?  Thank you.

8
Comment #69 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#68, you can just skip the postings and leave, there is no obligation to read any of it. This country is going to hell and you worry about your money not earning enough interest. I think it is selfish to make us follow your ignorance of the politicians who directly influence our savings. Because of them we are in this pitiful situation and the political rant goes hand in hand with the money.

4
Comment #70 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
#69 - we are just tired of hearing people like YOU bellyaching all the time and whining about how horrible everything is in your dismal view of the world.  Your bellyaching does nothing to improve anything.

2
Comment #72 by paoli2 posted on
paoli2
"Your bellyaching does nothing to improve anything."
#70  How true your words are.  Last night I was watching the news and they were discussing how destructive Obama's refusal to follow the Constitution is to our country in every way.  However the senators said even tho his actions are getting close to being "Impeachable", they needed the American people to get involved and contact their Senators and let them know they refuse to have a President who refuses to follow the Constitution.  The Senators were urging Americans to get involved and help them stop these bad actions. 
 I think instead of using DA to voice our anger or upset with what is going on, we should contact our Senators about this.  The posters on DA have already made up their mines where they stand on the issue so those who want to really help their country should use their time writing to their Senators and voicing how they feel to them. 

3
Comment #73 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Or, you could dust off one of your old Savers Petitions and give it another try.

1
Comment #74 by paoli2 posted on
paoli2
#73  You mean KEN'S old Savers Petition?  The one "you" probably ignored.  Why don't you leave me alone and write to your Senators?  All of my emails have already been sent! 

2
Comment #75 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
No, I mean YOUR old Savers Petition, you know, the one you still have hanging above your bed. Maybe you could just change the name to The Obama Must Be Stopped Petition, if that would make it easier for you.

1
Comment #77 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
As usual, you have resorted to name calling in another feeble attempt to distract attention from YOUR petition. You can try to run from it now, but it is easy to recall the days you were waving it and babbling as to why so few others supported your rather bizarre efforts. Nuff said. 

1
Comment #78 by paoli2 posted on
paoli2
#77 This isn't name calling.  I am saying what you are.  You purposely started this by bringing up the Savers Petition.  What was so "bizarre"  about asking DA members to sign it?  That is what one does if they have a Petition they are HELPING with.  Did you sign it?  I really doubt it.  If you weren't looking for trouble you would not have made that remark about something good that someone else was doing.  So do me a favor, lady, and don't comment about KEN's Savers Petition.  He might be reading these posts and not appreciate your comments. 

2
Comment #81 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Paoli2, the people who support democrats are usually lazy, users an losers. They want you to do the dirty deed so they can just enjoy the benefits of sitting on the couch and collecting the checks. If you get inolved in chit-chat with them, they are enjoying being mean and gloat when you get upset.
Solution, ignore them and make them write to themselves and that will shut them up.

4
Comment #82 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
Is U.S. Representative Dennis Ross the only one in Washington who has any concern about the ZIRP that has been effecting the Seniors?

3
Comment #83 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
ZIRP is a reactionary fiscal policy, not a long-term strategy. In effect, it's a bank bailout program.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-26/hoenig-says-fed-s-low-interest-rate-policy-subsidizes-wall-...
Excerpt...actually the first sentence of the article.
"The U.S. central bank’s policy of holding interest rates near zero is a subsidy for large banks and redistributes wealth from savers to debtors, said Thomas Hoenig, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City."   

6
Comment #84 by Anonymous posted on
Anonymous
"ZIRP is a reactionary fiscal policy, not a long-term strategy"

It certainly is becoming a long-term strategy and redistribution of wealth from savers to debtors.

6