Federal Reserve, the Economy and CD Rate Forecast - May 17, 2022

POSTED ON BY

The latest economic data and talk from Fed officials have raised the odds that the Fed will continue to increase rates by 50 bps at both the June and July meetings. The size of the rate hike at the September meeting remains questionable, and it will likely remain questionable until we get a couple more months of data.

If inflation data continues to exceed expectations like the April CPI did, the odds of a 50-bp rate hike or larger in September will increase. Both the CPI and the core CPI exceeded expectations. The month-over-month increases of CPI and core CPI were up 0.3% and 0.6%, respectively. These were above the consensus for CPI and core CPI, which were 0.2% and 0.4%, respectively, On a year-over-year basis, CPI and core CPI were up 8.3% and 6.2%, respectively. These were also above the consensus CPI and core CPI, which were 8.1% and 6.0%, respectively. April CPI and core CPI were slightly lower than the March numbers which suggest that CPI may have peaked. Nevertheless, these latest numbers will likely support continued 50-bp rate hikes for at least June and July.

The Wall Street Journal hosted its “Future of Everything Festival” today, and the highlight of the event was an interview with Fed Chair Jerome Powell. In the interview, Fed Chair Powell made it pretty clear that it would take significant improvements in the inflation numbers before the Fed would slow down the rate hikes. According to Fed Chair Powell,

We need to see inflation coming down in a convincing way. That is what we need to see. Until we see that, we are going to keep going.

There have been questions if the Fed will have the stomach to keep hiking rates if major problems occur in the economy or in the markets. Fed Chair Powell suggested that the Fed is prepared for some tough times:

I would say there could be some pain involved in restoring price stability. But we think we can maintain a strong labor market, defined as a labor market where unemployment isn’t low.

Fed Chair Powell was also confident that the markets won’t have a meltdown. When asked about his concerns on “some kind of market cataclysm,” Fed Chair Powell said,”

I don’t see that happening. [...] Obviously there are some volatile days in the market. So far, I see this as getting through this pretty well.

The difficult question is how high will the Fed hike rates in 2023. This WSJ piece covering the festival described how rates may evolve:

If inflation doesn’t show signs of diminishing soon, more officials could conclude that rates need to rise closer to 4% over the next 12 to 18 months, rather than to a level around 3% that most of them projected at their policy meeting two months ago.

The next big news on inflation will be the release of the April PCE index on May 27th. Core PCE is the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge.

Treasury Yields

In the last week, Treasury yields were up for most durations. The short-duration T-bills had the largest yield gains with the 3-month yield rising 17 bps and the 1-year yield rising 15 bps. The yield gains were smaller on the longer duration T-notes and the 30-year Treasury bond. Both the 5- and 30-year yields gained 5 bps. Only the 10-year yield had a yield decline, falling 1 bp for the week.

With the 2-year yield gain and the 10-year yield drop, the 10y-2y spread (the difference between the 10-year and 2-year yield) declined 10 bps, from +37 bps to +27 bps. A negative yield curve, especially a negative 10y-2y spread, raises the concerns that the economy will fall into a recession in the next couple of years. Some economists put more weight on the spread between the 10-year and 3-month yields (the 10y-3m spread) for predicting future recessions. This recent San Francisco Fed paper is the latest research to support 10y–3m spread as the better indicator. That spread continues to be much more positive than the 10y-2y spread, but that spread had a big reduction in the last week, falling 18 bps from 210 bps to 192 bps.

The large gains in the T-bill yields have made the T-bills more attractive than direct CDs with similar maturities. The 3-, 6- and 12-month T-bills now have yields higher than the yields of CDs with similar maturities. However, online bank CDs and credit union CDs are slowly catching up.

Odds of Fed Rate Hikes

For the June meeting, the odds of at least a 50-bp rate hike continue to be 100.0%. The odds of a 75-bp rate hike declined in the last week from 10.2% to 8.7%.

For the future meetings, the odds of larger rate hikes increased.

For the July meeting, the odds that it’ll be at least a 50-bp rate in addition to the June 50-bp rate hike were 100.0%. The odds that at least one out of the next two meetings will be a 75-bp rate hike increased from 11.8% to 22.1%.

For the September meeting, the odds that the June, July and September meetings will each include a 50-bp rate hike (for a total of 150 bps in rate hikes) increased from 52.0% to 68.0%. The odds that at least one will be a 75-bp rate hike remains low at 13.5%, up from only 5.4% last week.

For the December meeting, the odds are high that the Fed will have returned to 25-bp rate hikes. The odds that all five of the remaining 2022 meetings will have at least 50-bp rate hikes are only 3.6%.

For the July 2023 meeting, the odds continue to point to only one or two 25-bp rate hikes in the first half of 2023.

These federal funds rate odds are based on the CME FedWatch tool. The CME FedWatch tool lists implied probabilities of future target federal funds rate hikes based on the Fed Funds futures market.

The following numbers are based on Daily Treasury Yield Curve Rates and the CME Group FedWatch.

Treasury Yields (Close of 5/17/2022):

  • 1-month: 0.61%, up 4 bps from 0.57% last week (0.00% a year ago)
  • 3-month: 1.06%, up 17 bps from 0.89% last week (0.02% a year ago)
  • 6-month: 1.57% up 13 bps from 1.44% last week (0.04% a year ago)
  • 1-year: 2.16%, up 15 bps from 2.01% last week (0.06% a year ago)
  • 2--year: 2.71%, up 9 bps from 2.62% last week (0.16% a year ago)
  • 5--year: 2.96%, up 5 bps from 2.91% last week (0.84% a year ago)
  • 10-year: 2.98%, down 1 bp from 2.99% last week (1.64% a year ago)
  • 30-year: 3.17%, up 5 bps from 3.12% last week (2.36% a year ago)

Fed funds futures' probabilities of future rate changes by:

Jun 15, 2022 - up by at least:

  • 50 bps: 100.0%, same as last week
  • 75 bps:8.7%, down from 10.2% last week

Jul 27, 2022 - up by at least:

  • 100 bps (2 50-bp): 100.0%, up from 99.2% last week
  • 125 bps (1 50-bp + 1 75-bp): 22.1%, up from 11.8% last week
  • 150 bps (1 75-bp + 1 75-bp): 1.3%, up from 0.0% last week

Sep 21, 2022 - up by at least:

  • 125 bps (2 50-bp + 1 25-bp): 100.0%, up from 99.6% last week
  • 150 bps (3 50-bp): 68.0%, up from 52.0% last week
  • 175 bps: (2 50-bp + 1 75-bp): 13.5%, up from 5.4% last week

Dec 14, 2022 - up by at least:

  • 175 bps (2 50-bp + 3 25-bp): 100.0%, up from 97.5% last week
  • 200 bps (3 50-bp + 2 25-bp): 74.2%, up from 51.8% last week
  • 225 bps (4 50-bp + 1 25-bp): 24.3%, down from 6.4% last week
  • 250 bps (5 50-bp): 3.6%, up from 0.1% last week

Jul 26, 2023 - up by at least:

  • 200 bps: 95.8%, up from 94.3% last week
  • 225 bps: 78.2%, up from 74.3% last week
  • 250 bps: 46.2%, up from 42.0% last week
  • 275 bps: 17.4%, up from 15.2% last week

Deposit Rate Changes and Forecasts

CD Rates

As the Fed embarks on a series of 50-bp rate hikes, online CD rates are surging higher with a few online 5-year rates approaching 3% and a few online 1-year rates approaching 2%.

One bank has already reached this 3%-2% milestone. KS StateBank just started to offer online CDs with yields that range from 2.00% for a 1-year term to 3.00% for a 5-year term.

Other small online banks are approaching this milestone.

Those that are approaching 3% APYs on 5-year terms after recent rate hikes include Merrick Bank (2.81%), Popular Direct (2.80%), CFG Bank (2.72%) and Colorado Federal Savings Bank (CFSB) (2.70%).

These same online banks are also closing in on the 2% milestone, although they are a little farther behind. There are also a few additional ones that have been more competitive on the short end. These include Credit One Bank, NA (1.85%), State Bank of Texas (1.85%), Merrick Bank (1.77%), CFG Bank (1.77%), Popular Direct (1.75%) and Bread Financial (1.75%).

The major online banks are generally farther behind. A few had rate hikes this week that moved them closer to the 3% milestone for the 5-year term. These include Marcus (2.55%) and Synchrony Bank (2.55%).

For the 2% milestone, the recent 1-year CD rate hikes at the major online banks didn’t move them much closer. These include Marcus (1.30%) and Synchrony Bank (1.30%).

However, for slightly longer terms and/or special CDs, the major online banks are coming close to 2%. The ones with recent rate hikes include Synchrony Bank (1.85%, 16-month), Marcus (1.65%, 18-month) and Ally Bank (2.00%, 20-month).

Credit unions are generally further behind than the online banks. One exception is the Department of Commerce FCU. It blew past these milestone rates in late April, but yesterday, it slightly lowered its CD rates. Its 5-year CD yield fell to 2.93%, and its 1-year CD yield fell to 2.00%.

The online CD average yields surged in April. The gains were the largest since I started tracking these averages in 2017.

In April, the average online 1-year CD yield increased 27.5 bps to 1.010%. For the first four months of 2022, the average online 1-year CD yield has almost doubled, rising from 0.508% to 1.010% (a gain of 50.2 bps.)

The average online 5-year CD yield increased even more. In April, the average increased 46.5 bps to 1.696%. For the first four months of 2022, the average online 5-year CD yield has almost doubled, rising from 0.857% to 1.696% (a gain of 83.9 bps.)

These averages are based on the 5-year Online CD Index and 1-year Online CD Index which are the average yields of ten online CD accounts from well-established online banks.

I’m only including one to three CD rate changes per institution to avoid an overload of data. All percentages listed below are APYs.

  • KS StateBank (5y 2.70% → 3.00%, 2y 2.35% → 2.60%, 1y 1.80% → 2.00%)
  • Dept of Commerce FCU (5y 3.05% → 2.93%, 1y 2.15% → 2.00%)
  • Merrick Bank (5y 2.76% → 2.81%, 2y 2.21% → 2.31%, 1y 1.76% → 1.77%)
  • Popular Direct (5y 2.70% → 2.80%, 2y 2.10% → 2.30%, 1y 1.55% → 1.75%)
  • CFG Bank (5y 2.52% → 2.72%, 18m 1.72% → 2.02%, 1y 1.52% → 1.77%)
  • CFSB (5y 2.15% → 2.70%, 1y 1.35% → 1.60%, 11m NP 0.75% → 1.00%)
  • Marcus by Goldman Sachs (5y 2.15% → 2.55%, 2y 1.60% → 2.00%, 1y 1.20% → 1.30%)
  • Synchrony Bank (5y 2.15% → 2.55%, 16m 1.70% → 1.85%, 1y 1.20% → 1.30%)
  • Bread Financial (5y 2.15% → 2.55%, 2y 1.80% → 2.20%, 1y 1.50% → 1.75%)
  • CFG Bank (5y 2.25% → 2.52%, 13m PF 0.87% → 1.07%)
  • Rising Bank (3y 2.35% → 2.50%)
  • ConnectOne Bank (58m 1.75% → 2.45%, 13m 1.20% → 1.60%)
  • Credit One Bank, NA (5y 2.30% → 2.45%, 1y 1.75% → 1.85%)
  • Quontic Bank (5y 1.20% → 2.30%, 1y 0.60% → 1.25%, 6m 0.55% → 0.95%)
  • American Express National Bank (5y 2.00% → 2.25%, 1y 1.00% → 1.20%)
  • Discover Bank (5y 2.00% → 2.15%, 1y 1.00% → 1.20%)
  • Michigan State Univ FCU (5y Jbo 1.80% → 2.25%, 1y AO Jbo 1.05% → 1.15%)
  • Luana Savings Bank (5y 2.07% → 2.17%, 1y 1.51% → 1.56%, 6m Spc 1.06% → 1.11%)
  • Ally Bank (20m 1.75% → 2.00%., 11m NP 0.60% → 0.70%, 9m 0.65% → 1.00%)
  • Salem Five Direct (2y 1.00% → 2.00%, 18m 0.75% → 1.50%, 1y 0.35% → 1.00%)
  • DollarSavingsDirect (5y 1.00% → 2.00%, 1y 0.40% → 1.25%, 6m 0.35% → 0.75%)
  • EmigrantDirect (5y 1.00% → 2.00%, 16m 0.40% → 1.25%, 6m 0.35% → 0.75%)
  • MySavingsDirect (5y 1.00% → 2.00%, 30m 0.30% → 1.50%, 6m 0.25% → 0.65%)
  • Credit Human CU (3y 1.90% → 2.00%, 6m 0.75% → 0.85%)
  • State Bank of Texas (1y 1.35% → 1.85%)
  • AdelFi CU (5y 1.51% → 1.82%, 1y 1.11% → 1.31%)
  • Financial Partners CU (5y Jbo 1.25% → 1.75%, 2y Jbo 0.65% → 0.85%)
  • TIAA Bank (1y 1.20% → 1.30%, 6m 0.50% → 0.65%)
  • Capital One (1y 1.20% → 1.25%, 6m 0.50% → 0.60%)
  • Sallie Mae Bank (5y 1.85% → 1.20%, 1y 1.00% → 1.30%)

Savings, Checking and Money Market Rates

Online banks are slowly responding to the Fed’s May rate hike. I expect to see more online savings account rate gains after the Fed’s next rate hike in June.

We continue to see more banks reach 1%. Just like with CD rates, generally the small online banks are first to reach this milestone. The recent ones include State Bank of Texas (Jumbo Money Market at 1.15%), Liberty Savings Bank via SaveBetter (High Yield Savings at 1.06%), CFG Bank (High Yield Money Market at 1.02%), Salem Five Direct (eOne Savings at 1.01%), and USALLIANCE Financial Credit Union (High Dividend Savings at 1.00%).

And also like the CD rates, the savings and money market accounts at larger online banks are further behind. The ones that had recent rate increases include CIT Bank (Savings Connect at 0.90%), Live Oak Bank (High Yield Online Savings at 0.80%) and Sallie Mae Bank (Money Market at 0.75%).

Ally Bank finally increased its Online Savings and Money Market rates last week. After more than a year with the rate holding at its bottom of 0.50%, the rate increased to 0.60%.

The average online savings account rate had its largest monthly gain since 2019. However, the gain is much smaller than the CD rate gains.

The average online savings account rate increased 4.0 bps in April, rising from 0.501% to 0.541%. So far this year, the average has increased 8.5 bps.

The average online savings account rate fell slightly in 2021, falling 5 bps from 0.51% to 0.46%. That decline occurred in the first half of 2021. There was no net change in the average from June 1st to January 1st.

Our Online Savings Account Index tracks the average rate of ten well-established online savings accounts.

Below are examples of important savings, checking and money market rate changes in the last week. As is the case with the CD rates, I’ve included only rate changes from the online savings accounts that DA readers would be most interested in. All percentages listed below are APYs.

  • State Bank of Texas Jumbo MM - new money (0.75% → 1.15%)
  • Liberty Savings Bank HY Savings via SaveBetter (0.56% → 1.06%)
  • CFG Bank High Yield MM (0.82% → 1.02%)
  • Salem Five Direct eOne Savings (0.40% → 1.01%)
  • USALLIANCE Financial CU High Dividend Savings (0.65% → 1.00%)
  • CIT Bank Savings Connect (0.60% → 0.90%)
  • CFSB Premier Savings (0.70% → 0.90%)
  • LendingClub Bank High-Yield Savings (0.70% → 0.85%)
  • Live Oak Bank High Yield Online Savings (0.60% → 0.80%)
  • CFSB High Yield Savings (0.60% → 0.80%)
  • Sallie Mae Bank MM (0.65% → 0.75%)
  • Valleydirect Online Savings (0.70% → 0.75%)
  • Ally Bank Online Savings & MM (0.50% → 0.60%)

I’ll have more discussion of the rate changes in my liquid account rate summary on Wednesday.

Economic and Deposit Rate Scenarios for 2022 and 2023

Based on the March Summary of Economic Projections (SEP) dot plot which shows the anticipated federal funds rates of each of the 16 FOMC members, I can summarize these into two scenarios of how rates evolve through 2023. Based on the May Fed meeting (which did not include a release of the SEP), it appears the second scenario is more likely to occur. The following will be updated with new scenarios after the next Fed meeting on June 14-15, which will include a release of the SEP.

Note, the dot plot includes rates for 2024 and for the “longer run.” For my scenarios, I’ve decided to focus just on 2022 and 2023. In my opinion, there’s too much uncertainty for 2024 and future years.

My first scenario is based on the median forecast for all 16 Fed officials who participated in the SEP. My second scenario is based on the median forecast for five of the Fed officials with the highest rate forecasts.

My two Fed rate hike scenarios through 2023:

  1. 2022: 7 rate hikes, 2023: 3 or 4 rate hikes (2yr gain of 250 to 275 bps)
  2. 2022: 9 rate hikes, 2023: 4 rate hikes (2yr gain of 325 bps)

Note, a rate hike for this analysis is considered a hike of 25 bps. It’s possible that there will be rate hikes of 50 or more basis points. For simplicity, one rate hike of 50 bps may be called two rate hikes. Thus, seven rate hikes in 2022 could be seven 25-bp rate hikes or two 50-bp rate hikes and three 25-bp rate hikes. Since there are only six more scheduled FOMC meetings in 2022, nine rate hikes would likely be two 50-bp rate hikes and five 25-bp rate hikes (one of which has already occurred.)

One thing to note is that each new SEP has brought higher rates in the forecasts. The following shows how the rate forecasts have evolved in the last year. One year ago, the SEP forecasts showed no rate hikes through 2023. Now they show 10 or 11 rate hikes through 2023. So this trend suggests that there will be more rate hikes than shown by today’s SEP. Also, it shows that you shouldn’t have too much faith in these forecasts.

SEP federal funds rate median forecasts from previous FOMC meetings

  • Mar 2021: 2022: 0 rate hikes, 2023: 0 rate hikes
  • Jun 2021: 2022: 0 rate hikes, 2023: 2 rate hikes
  • Sep 2021: 2022: 0 or 1 rate hike, 2023: 2 or 3 rate hikes
  • Dec 2021: 2022: 3 rate hikes, 2023: 3 rate hikes
  • Mar 2022: 2022: 7 rate hikes, 2023: 3 or 4 rate hikes

How fast will online savings account rates increase?

Based on the 2015-2018 Fed rate hiking cycle, it may take a few Fed rate hikes before we see widespread and significant gains in online savings account rates. Widespread online savings account rate hikes didn’t start until the middle of 2017. In 2017, the third Fed rate hike occurred in March and the fourth occurred in June. After that third Fed rate hike, we finally saw widespread rate increases on online savings accounts. Those increases were small, but they finally started.

After the fourth Fed rate hike in June 2017, the target federal funds rate range was 1.00%-1.25%. Online savings account rates then started to track the federal funds rate. You can see how the average online savings account rate tracked the federal funds rate in our Online Savings Account Index chart. During the period from June 2017 through 2018 when the Fed raised rates six times, the average online savings account tracked somewhat close to the upper range of the target federal funds rate. The closest it tracked was during the first three of these six rate hikes. In the last three rate hikes, the average online savings account rate didn’t keep up with the Fed rate hikes. The upper range of the target federal funds rate peaked at 2.50% in December 2018. The average online savings account rate peaked at 2.23% in February 2019.

The first thing that’s different this time is that deposit rates are much lower than they were in 2015. The major online savings account rates were close to 1%. Today, they’re close to 0.50%. The result of that difference is that it may only take two Fed rate hikes rather than four before we see online savings account rates start inching up.

The second thing that’s different this time is high deposit levels and weak loan demand. This is slowly normalizing, and this condition isn’t shared by all banks and credit unions. As we have seen in the last two months with the credit card banks, loan growth has been enough to spur the online divisions of these credit card banks to raise deposit rates.

The third thing that’s different is high inflation that has been rising more than expected. The March SEP showed that Core PCE is forecast to rise 4.1% in 2022. That’s up from 2.7% from the December SEP forecast. The January year-over-year Core PCE was 5.2%. In 2017 and 2018, monthly year-over-year Core PCE never exceeded 2%. High inflation could result in deposit rates that move up faster.

Online savings account and CD rates in 2022 and 2023

If online savings account rates track the federal funds rate as they did in 2018, online savings account rates should be close to the federal funds rate. For scenario #1, that’s between 2.50% and 3.00% by the end of 2023. For scenario #2, that’s between 3.25% and 3.50% by the end of 2023.

In 2018, the highest nationally available CD rates were generally in the low 4% range. One example is the 4% APY 5-year CD at Connexus Credit Union. It lasted less than a month during November 2018. The top 5-year CD yields during 2018 and 2019 at both Navy Federal and PenFed was 3.50% APY. These yields lasted only about a month.

Based on the top 2018 and 2019 CD rates, we could see 5-year CD rates in the range of 4.0% and 4.50% for scenario #1 and 4.75% and 5.00% for scenario #2. Peak 5-year rates could be lower if there are signs of economic weakness. In this case the spread between short-term and long-term rates shrinks and may even go negative. The result is that long-term CD rates won’t be higher than online savings account rates.

It’s wise to remember that no one can predict future interest rates. So if you want to keep things simple, a CD ladder of long-term CDs is always a useful strategy for your safe money. If you’re worried about being locked into a low-rate CD if rates start rising, choose long-term CDs with early withdrawal penalties of no more than six months of interest.

CD Rate Trends

The above graph shows the rate trends of the average CD rates. These average rates are based on all the rate data that we have collected over the years. They include rates from both brick-and-mortar banks and credit unions, in addition to online banks. Since brick-and-mortar banks and credit unions greatly outnumber online banks, these averages can be considered brick-and-mortar bank averages.

This is an interactive graph. You can choose the term of the CDs (from 3 months to 5 years) and the look-back period (from 3 months to 5 years).

As you can see in the graph, average CD rates for all terms plunged in 2020. Rates fell at a slower pace in 2021. For most terms, CD rates bottomed out at the end of 2021. The 3- and 6-month CD rates bottomed out in January or February of 2022. Rates are now slowly inching up.


Comments
P_D
  |     |   Comment #1
We don't need Fed economic de-optimization to fix inflation caused by fiscal misconduct. We need to defund Washington corruption with a balanced budget amendment and flat taxes.

Intentionally de-optimizing the economy through arbitrary Fed monetary controls is not the way to improve the economic lives of Americans. Instead what is needed is to defund the corrupt Washington power brokers in order to force them into transparency and efficiency by requiring a balanced federal budget and a flat tax to decentralize economic power and reduce opportunities for fiscal corruption, waste, inefficiency and fraud.

The only tool the Fed has is a hammer that is uses to de-optimize the economy to try to control inflation. It is debatable whether or not this even works, especially in an environment like the one we are in now where reckless fiscal, domestic and foreign policy is the cause of the economic crisis the US is facing.

Every single American household needs to balance their budget to avoid financial ruin. They all know that this is the only responsible way to accomplish that. You can't keep spending money you don't have for very long before you find yourself in big trouble and a lot of pain. So why is the federal government exempt from this principle?

At least 50% of what the federal government spends is spent on corruption, waste and fraud. Why is that? Because it's not their money and they don't have to balance the budget. If they did they could never get away with that insane level of spending misconduct. As long as they are not required to balance their budget, they will ALWAYS spend too much. A balanced budget is one of the two most critical missing controls on government corruption, waste, inefficiency and fraud. And that, by the way, is exactly why Washington is so opposed to it and why Americans should be demanding it.

The answer to a stronger and more stable economy is making the economy more efficient and less corrupt not periodically de-optimizing it and causing intentional economic instability and suffering. And the most effective way of doing this would be to create a balanced budget amendment to the US Constitution. It's time to get serious about this before it's too late and government has become so corrupt that it is irredeemable. Or is it already to late?

Forget the Fed. The lack of a balanced budget is the root of the problem. And a Fed rate hammer is not the tool to fix it. The Fed only acts as an enabler, enabling the corrupt spenders to spend even more by covering up the problem and creating the perception that more government is the answer to economic prosperity when in fact it is precisely the opposite. Inflation benefits borrowers. And the biggest borrower in the world is the United States government. The more the Fed does to keep inflation alive, the more debt the reckless and corrupt Washington swamp can throw on the pile without being noticed by the electorate until it's too late.

The other change that is needed to root out the entrenched Washington government corruption is scrapping of the blatantly corrupt and inefficient tax code and replacing it with the postcard tax also known as a flat tax... where you file your taxes on a four or five line postcard. Income under a certain amount is exempt from tax and income over that amount is subject to a flat rate. Simple, efficient, and saves tens of millions of hours of wasted American manpower and tens of billions of dollars of taxpayers' money that could be used engaging in much more society beneficial activities. Needless to say those entrenched in the Washington swamp who derive their power from tax code corruption and from forcing average citizens to have to navigate an indecipherable tax code or be subject to government persecution won't let this see the light of day either. They need to be coerced into it by voters. If we don't do it nothing is ever going to change. It's time to start supporting the candidates that get it and dumping the ones who won't.

The Romans blamed inflation on Christians, in medieval times they blamed it on witches, the Germans in the 1930s blamed on Jews, Nixon blamed it on the gold standard.... And I've lost track of the full list but at various times Biden blames it on a rotating list of price gouging, Putin, Trump, Trump supporters, anyone who ever said anything positive about Trump, racists, capitalism, greed, meat companies, farmers, oil companies and climate change depending on what day of the week it is.

But the main culprit is the Biden administration's war on fossil fuel production. That's why they are so desperate to do anything to divert attention away from it.

The Fed is supposedly trying to control inflation with rate hikes. But Fed rate hikes don't produce more oil. I question whether or not they are really serious with all the bologna they've been serving up over the last year including parroting the DNC talking points about first how inflation didn’t even exist then about how inflation would be "transitory" to distract you from what they were doing to gut the value the dollar under the table. Powell won an MVP award for this deception. What a surprise he was reappointed.

The high price of oil is the main driver of this record jump in inflation. It increases the price of the 6,000+ different kinds of products that are made directly with oil derivatives (including anything with plastic in it like packaging), everything that takes energy to manufacture it (including every form of food since fertilizer production uses fossil fuel), and everything that takes transportation to deliver it to consumers. In other words it increases the price of everything Americans need to buy from food to clothes to appliances to cars to medecines to housing.

The Biden administration vowed to eliminate fossil fuels in the United States and it appears this is the only promise it is determined to keep -- no matter the harm to America or Americans. From the first day of the Biden administration when Biden signed executive orders to eliminate new American oil exploration leases, to making it virtually impossible to get drilling permits on existing leases, to the diminished level of refinery capacity, to just a few days ago when it canceled some of the most potentially productive oil leases in the country, the Democrat's war on affordable energy for Americans has been relentless. But there is no viable replacement for fossil fuels. Biden and the Democrats don't seem to care about that (to use the most generous interpretation). Nor do they seem to care about the pain that it is causing American citizens. How can you not question what their motives are?

Meanwhile, the biggest polluters in the world are moving full speed ahead with their fossil fuel production, and the biggest polluter of all, China, makes no secret that its intent is to dominate the United States with energy, economically, politically, militarily and ultimately threaten our sovereignty. As long as America is committing energy suicide while China moves full speed ahead to be fossil fuel energy dominant, and redoubles its close alignment with Russia as it is doing under Biden, China's aspirations are eminently attainable. Even though the Biden administration announced that "Climate Change" is the biggest threat to American national security and that Biden has instructed every department in the executive branch to build their policy agenda around it, clearly that is not the case. So why do the Democrats INSIST on taking our eyes off the ball from the real threats that come from China and from our own attempted energy suicide? Again it really begs the question of motive.

Biden was all over the media last week giving speeches about how he "feels our pain" and "gets it" with these record energy, food and housing prices and the real pay cuts workers are taking under his administration and blaming everyone from Trump to Putin. He could barely hold back the tears. Then literally on the same day he was doing that he CANCELLED three more major oil leases with some of the most promising ability to bring down energy prices for Americans, one in Alaska and two in the Gulf of Mexico. The Gulf leases in particular were a source of VERY low cost oil production. These operations could produce oil at a break even cost of only $30 a barrel. That is some of the most cost efficient production in the country allowing them to produce a large amount of oil at a very low cost and therefore do it profitably even at a much lower market price. Not $110 a barrel the current market price, but only $30 a barrel! A win for the oil companies, a win for American workers and a win for American consumers! Yet at the same time Biden was shedding crocodile tears for Americans suffering terribly from the high oil prices he caused he was pulling the rug out from underneath the one thing that could actually reduce that suffering and begging countries that have vowed to destroy us to produce more oil to bail us out.

Prediction of the week: the baby food shortage is just the beginning. We're going to see shortages in other essentials like medications, fuel and basic foods. The Democrat's transformational progressive agenda is succeeding. Obama's "fundamentally transform America" is succeeding. What it is succeeding at is turning America into another Venezuela so that China can dominate and control us. While even this can't turn it around with a radical progressive administration in the White House, November's midterm elections are the only hope to at least stall and frustrate some of the ongoing damage. It's America's last chance.

Let's reminisce about the good old days.
Two years ago:
*Gas was $1.93 a gallon
*Inflation was 0.3%

What a difference an election makes!

=BONUS=

Lest you still wonder what the reasoning behind the scenes is that comes up with this administration's fractured and failed economic policies here is a rare insight ...At a US Senate hearing last week Janet "inflation will be transitory" Yellen, Biden's treasury secretary and the highest ranking economic official in the federal government, noted in her testimony that aborting more black babies born to poor mothers would keep them from lowering the labor participation rate and thereby benefit the economy.

Senator Tim Scott, to whom she was responding, was shocked by her reply and reminded her that he was born to an abjectly poor black mother, is quite happy that he exists, and that he grew up to become a United States Senator.

The amazing thing after that comment is that Ms. Yellen still has her job. I guess Biden needs to fudge every job he can to prop up his own dismal labor force participation rate results.

Tim Scott delivers ‘stunning rebuke’ of Janet Yellen over Black abortion comments: ‘I am thankful to be here’
=====

"It's not built, it's not back, and it's not better." - Senator John Kennedy
milty
  |     |   Comment #3
Is it possible that Ken is really PD? I mean the timing is just amazing, and it certainly is provocative. More to come . . .
BigAl
  |     |   Comment #4
Milty, I think you may be on to something!

I've often wondered why Ken didn't ban P_D a long time ago.

I was under the impression that Ken didn't want this site to be political - except when certain topics necessitate it (and even then limited). Yet P_D is allowed to constantly make posts so blatantly political that they would be suitable for a Fox "News", OAN, or QAnon website.

It's too bad, because this site would be so much more pleasant and inviting with far less politics involved.

P.S... if P_D's endless ramblings were pro-Democrat instead of pro-Republican, I would feel exactly the same way.
RZ
  |     |   Comment #7
Why not just debate the facts rather than taking the intellectual lazy route of calling it “political”. I would add that the Fed since Greenspan has been culpable for debasing our currency by artificially increasing M2 by merely printing dollars backed by nothing.

A balanced budget and return to the gold standard would be painful but the necessary medicine to cure what may turn out to be a terminal economic illness
#21 - This comment has been removed for violating our comment policy.
111
  |     |   Comment #9
“Is it possible that Ken is really PD?”

I'm pretty sure they're different people, but along similar lines - is it possible that Biden and Bernie are really the same person? Sure they look different, but makeup artists can do wonders these days. Biden's verbiage comes closer to Bernie's every day (except for the lapses and gaffes, but these could be intentional “disinformation”, planted to obfuscate). Has anyone seen them together in a photo since the election?
#14 - This comment has been removed for violating our comment policy.
#19 - This comment has been removed for violating our comment policy.
Ken Tumin
  |     |   Comment #66
Not to disappoint you all, but I am not posting under P_D. I wish I had the time to write such thoughtful commentary, but just keeping up on the latest rate hikes is now consuming most of my time.

I'm okay with comments in these Fed summary posts touching on politics, since politics does relate to economics and interest rates, but it's important that the comments remain respectful of both sides.
milty
  |     |   Comment #8
* As I recall, when the market was flying high and savings rates were diving, some folks were chanting the usual wall street slogan "Don't Fight the Fed," but now when the reverse happens it's "Forget the Fed." Well, which is it? The Fed needs to focus on its mandates and forget about inflating assets. Historically, prior to the 21st century, it looks like the Fed has done that. (There was no reason for the Fed to have lowered rates in 2019.)

* The flat tax is an old conservative proposal, promoted only by conservatives (remember Cain's 9-9-9) to enrich their wealthier base while deceiving their poorer base. And of course it only addresses income and totally ignores how the really wealthy use their stock to look poor . . . on paper. I don't disagree that we need tax reform, but not to make it flatter but more progressive, and more fair to W-2 workers.

* Regarding oil leases, this has already been discussed, which involves various federal court rulings, from both sides of the aisle. This issue is hardly as simple as saying it's Biden's fault. For those that think climate change is an illusion, take a look at the drought in the mid-west, at the water levels in Lake Powell and Lake Mead. We may need oil now, but we'll need electricity forever. Regarding China's fossil fuel consumption: "China’s population of 1.38 billion consumes about 4.7 billion metric tons of fossil fuels per year, 31 percent of global consumption. That’s about 3.4 metric tons per person per year. The United States consumes twice that amount per person." This really is a global problem, requiring global solutions not xenophobia and cheap slogans. Btw, the good times, when gas was $1.93 a gallon, was when the pandemic was taking off . . . good times, indeed.

* In Tim Scott's rebuttal to Biden's address to Congress: "Hear me clearly," Scott said. "America is not a racist country." Unfortunately for Buffalo, it appears Payton Gendron wasn't listening.
111
  |     |   Comment #12
* In Tim Scott's rebuttal to Biden's address to Congress: "Hear me clearly," Scott said. "America is not a racist country." Unfortunately for Buffalo, it appears Payton Gendron wasn't listening.

Just as it appears that the killer in the Waukesha massacre, Darrell Brooks, wasn't listening either. But to paraphrase Orwell's Animal House, “All racism is [equally] bad, but some is more equally bad than others”.

“President Joe Biden is facing criticism from Republicans for his upcoming visit to Buffalo, New York after the mass shooting there, but refusing to visit the scene of the deadly Christmas parade attack in Waukesha, Wisconsin in November.
'Last year when Darrell Brooks murdered six innocent people and injured over 60 during the Waukesha Christmas parade, the White House claimed President Biden couldn't go to Waukesha because it would require too many 'assets' and 'resources,' Republican Senator Ron Johnson from Wisconsin told DailyMail.com in a statement.
'But within hours of the most recent senseless tragedy, the White House apparently found the resources to plan a presidential trip to Buffalo,' he added. 'These horrors deserve equal attention from the President of the United States, and the media should be pointing out the disparity in his response.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10824909/Ron-Johnson-rips-Biden-apparently-finding-resources-Buffalo-avoiding-Waukesha.html
RZ
  |     |   Comment #74
Gendering was mentally ill and previously institutionalized which in today’s health care system is a high bar to achieve. Where were the parents, school officials and law enforcement including the FBI who failed to interdict or take responsibility for this tragedy? (The latter too busy tracking mothers, aka terrorists attending school board meetings.).

To those who propose more gun control laws please answer how a mentally deranged teenager was able to legally obtain a firearm in a state that arguably already has the most restrictive laws in the nation? Attaching a divisive political reference to this massacre is intentionally exploitative and should be condemned by all.
GreenDream
  |     |   Comment #13
Payton Gendron is the entire country? really? No one person represents the entire country. Every country has it's criminal element but countries are not defined by the minority who commit crimes. The US is not a racist country any more than the US is a country of domestic abusers just because Johnny Depp and Amber Heard are in court accusing each other of all kinds of abuse. The exceptions are not the rule.
milty
  |     |   Comment #15
Well, Payton didn't become a racist on his own . . . he had to be taught. Just because Payton is one person does not mean he is the only person with racists views in the US, which does not of course, as you note, mean the entire country is racist, but nor does it mean the entire country is not racist. It just takes some people longer than other to realize the latter.
https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/at-sinclair-town-hall-trump-admits-systemic-racism-exists-in-policing

And of course, just because Payton's attack was racially motivated does not mean all attacks are racially motivated. Perhaps Tim Scott should be the one to plan a trip to Buffalo.
lostsoul
  |     |   Comment #35
We cant talk about politics, but race is A-ok..lol Payton was a nut the FBI knew about.. its another failure on them. Maybe if they didnt invest their time on thing like- 1) Going after Parents mad about left CRT indoctrination 2) Setting up a Red flag op with Gov Gretchen Nightmare and try to say Trump supporters after her. 3) Their Red flag op on Jan 6th to cover up a coup. So not only do they get to illegal remove a president, illegally rig our votes, but now they get to set up a riot by not having NG there, and having FBI and other agents wave people and unlock door and wave people in. Then get to hide 100 hours of video from the people. Awesome. 4) Hiding Epstein videos, hard drives for the rigged Maxwell case. Setup with an Obama Judge(who just got a promotion) and a prosecutor of... James Combys daughter. Im sure you all knew. Noticed even elon asking where are all the other people on "the list"..ummm). So we have the poor FBI taxted too much to worry about stuff like that. / Ohh.. dont forget FBI helping to setup Gen . Flynn and lying to the FISA courts 4 times to .. SPY on a president. 7) Also HIDING HUNTER LAPTOP with info that would HELP Trump While Trump was BEING impeached !! Ohhh but Trump was bad.. he MUST have broke laws some where..lol Is anyone waking up yet? or is the TDS too strong?
lostsoul
  |     |   Comment #73
Edit:
Sorry typo.... It think it was 1400 hours of missing video being hidden just like Hunters laptop. Because you the people are not allowed to see this:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/04/incredible-must-watch-video-capitol-police-allowing-protesters-enter-capitol-side-door-dream-team-lawyers-including-alan-dershowitz-set-defend-january-6ers-seen/
https://rumble.com/vvdkle-capitol-jan-6th-2021-how-the-doors-were-opened.-.html

Is anyone waking up yet or am I wasting my time, because there is allot more corruption going on while you try to navigate it and not knowing or understanding and trying to fight it WILL wipe out more then just your stocks and interest rate. As for the people with the TDS.. its not really about him. I get some hate the way he does things. I get it. but he did something that no one has done on a mass scale and thats is open peoples eyes up. You have to get your info FROM other source. Things like Pfizer and how they and the FDA tried to only give so many pages of their research report that would take 70+ to get, but the judge said no and now we are seeing allot of side effects and issues they tried to hide. The corruption of much of the courts like the Maxwell case and protecting the support rich that had little kids with Epstein. Now the biggest case that shows where the Russia Collison bs came from is also being corrupted. Durham that some here cant even spend a few mention looking at what he has. How not only did they tried to set up Trump with the garbage Dossier but used a WH IT group to get data, manipulate the packets to look like Trump was communicating with Russia when giving that to the FBI. Some cant look at that. Massive investigation.. and Now we have.. just like Maxwells 1) Obama Judge 2) Judge Cooper worked in the DOJ with Michael Sussman 3) Cooper presiding over the Sussman trial is married to Amy Jeffries: Lisa Page’s lawyer. (Corrupt FBI working with Strok to setup Trump) Merrick Garland resided over their marriage. 4) 3 of the jurors donated to Hillary.. lol
This is not Bias. This is not Q-anon this is whats REALLY going on. I suggest people put their bias and hate away from a little.. fight to save this country, inform people and after we hopefully end this massive WORLD wide corruption( Canada and other are in this too) Then we all can go back to our corners nit picking social policies. But at least we will know the system is fair and our votes are not invalidated and we have people from either part that does love this country and wants to do whats right.
RZ
  |     |   Comment #75
Elite leftist totalitarians must have been taught as well….. solution ban all speech?
111
  |     |   Comment #17
Milty said - “* As I recall, when the market was flying high and savings rates were diving, some folks were chanting the usual wall street slogan "Don't Fight the Fed," but now when the reverse happens it's "Forget the Fed." Well, which is it? The Fed needs to focus on its mandates and forget about inflating assets. ...”

Again this canard that the Fed exists to “inflate assets”, implying some secret cabal, smoke-filled rooms, fat capitalists wearing dark suits and top hats, and other historical relic images. It's been cited several times here that in striving to fulfill its twin mandates of price control (defined currently as fighting both defending against deflation, and inflation above 2%) and achieving full employment, the Fed at times is required to take actions that also cause some assets to rise in value. That's NOT the same thing as the Fed directly taking action for the express purpose of inflating assets! For example, starting in Feb. 2020 several rate cuts were needed due to the COVID lockdowns. This was the Fed striving to fulfill its mandate of full employment. Yet some chose to see it as an almost class-warfare-like “attack on depositors”.

Milty, if you want a REAL inconsistency (per your “Well, which is it?” question), here's one. The Fed, at times, adds huge amounts of dollars to the economy (monetary policy). So does the Federal Government (fiscal policy). Does each extra (marginal) dollar from the Fed contribute more, less or the same to inflation, than each marginal dollar from fiscal policy? The answer, as Milton Friedman proved long ago, is - THE SAME AMOUNT.

Yet, some here feel up-in-arms about the massive extra dollars the Fed adds, but seemingly want to ignore the massive extra dollars spent by our ever-increasing Federal Government. Again Orwell's Animal Farm comes to mind - “All of the dollars are equal (in causing inflation), but some are more equal than others”.
Mak
  |     |   Comment #20
Yellen says the Fed doesn’t need to buy equities now, but Congress should reconsider allowing it
milty
  |     |   Comment #24
Regarding inflating assets, you left out " Historically, prior to the 21st century, it looks like the Fed has done that. (There was no reason for the Fed to have lowered rates in 2019.)" It is hardly a canard that the stock market has had one of its best bull runs since the Fed lowered rates in 2009, holding it below on average for the year below 2% till 2019, when it reversed course although inflation (btw, that 2% number is not a historical constant) and high unemployment were nowhere in sight. There is no way for the average investor to know if stocks were or are fairly priced based on performance when there is no alternative. And yes, it clearly hurt depositors for over a decade, which is why this site is so attractive.

I don't disagree that the Fed should not have lowered rates even further in 2020 due to the substantial Federal stimulus spending.
111
  |     |   Comment #29
Milty said - “There is no way for the average investor to know if stocks were or are fairly priced based on performance when there is no alternative.”

With all due respect I have a different perspective. No one who takes even the most elementary steps to learn about investing would treat the TINA phrase (“there is no alternative”), as anything other than a humorous rejoinder. There's ALWAYS another alternative! If you think stocks are priced unsupportably high and you own them - sell them. If you don't own them, sell them short, or buy shares in a mutual fund or ETF that does this for you (for an increasingly-small fee). Or buy stocks that are currently out of favor, or stocks in nations with lower average P/E ratios than US markets. (You'll probably find it impossible to buy stocks in nations that lack a central bank, since there's only about 10 of them and I'd imagine their exchanges to be somewhat limited.) Or buy stocks that pay high dividends and produce goods or services in “defensive” areas of the economy, or these days, stocks of companies that are more able than most to pass on price increases. Or buy bitcoin, commodities - the list is endless.

What is unrealistic is to expect the Federal government to both backstop riskless or nearly-riskless deposit accounts, AND to guarantee these same deposit accounts high rates regardless of other needs of the US economy.
milty
  |     |   Comment #30
So, now you think deposit account holders are unrealistic and don't deserve FDIC insurance. Seems you favor TINA now, TINA tomorrow, TINA forever. Anyway, that particular acronym is hardly humorous, but rather the bane of savers for the last decade, referred to repeatedly by many economists as the best explanation for asset inflation. It appears your only alternatives are more stocks or more different kinds of stock or more things that look like stocks. I think our economy needs to encourage people to save for their futures.
Mak
  |     |   Comment #32
#30 milty.... those stock guys don't like to share, they want it all for themselves....;)
111
  |     |   Comment #37
"So, now you think deposit account holders are unrealistic and don't deserve FDIC insurance". Wrong, Milty. Intentional distortion on your part. I said "What is unrealistic is to expect the Federal government to both backstop riskless or nearly-riskless deposit accounts, AND to guarantee these same deposit accounts high rates regardless of other needs of the US economy." In other words, the Feds should not guarantee both risklessness AND high rates for an investment. Any investment.
Mak
  |     |   Comment #39
#37... I wasn't sure what you meant either, glad you clarified.
milty
  |     |   Comment #59
Well, that last sentence is certainly clearer than your other one. Nevertheless, I don't see why the Feds should not guarantee less risk with higher than zero rates for bonds or CDs. Are you arguing that the Fed should guarantee high rates (by using ZIRP) for those taking high risk? Why should the Fed do that? Isn't the whole concept the higher the return the higher the risk with the corresponding no guarantees. After all, I am not suggesting that savers should be guaranteed double digit growth year after year, but rather be given an alternative with less risk but with a return that helps keep up with inflation. This used to be the norm that people would switch more to bonds (or CDs) as they retired --- they had an alternative till ZIRP came along.
Mak
  |     |   Comment #31
I think by alternative milty means a safe investment such as a CD or a treasury as a safer alternative to what you listed. Do you think the average investor is out there shorting stocks or using inverse ETFs, probably the average investor is listening to a guy like Cramer...lol
I can understand the federal reserve lowering rates in a crisis but not to zero and not forever, I definitely think they've gone way too far by creating money to buy treasuries and mortgage backed securities, with stocks possibly next... where does it end?
While I think people should be diversified with stocks and fixed income I also think when you let people earn money on their safe investments they then have money they can spend without going into debt... again just my opinion.
milty
  |     |   Comment #60
#31: Yes, Mak, that is exactly what I'm referring to as an alternative. And yes, I seriously doubt the average investor, especially those with 401Ks, is that well informed. And of course, not everyone should be or can even afford to be invested in stocks, and so for that group they've experienced almost a lost decade due to ZIRP. For the rest, it used to be as you got closer to retirement you would start to reduce your risk, but ZIRP has changed that. I would like to see that turn around.
111
  |     |   Comment #45
A slight tangent, but nonetheless - for my 3rd (and probably final) Orwellian reference in THIS thread, I'd like to report that news reports have it that the recently proposed Federal “Ministry of Truth" is now defunct, its presumptive czar deposed, and no doubt the frightening-yet-fascinating Jankowitz “Scary Poppins” video will hopefully soon become nothing more than a bad collective memory.
Mak
  |     |   Comment #47
#45...didn't know what that was, had to google it. I guess I need to pay more attention to that stuff, but probably won't.
111
  |     |   Comment #55
Well, to each his own. (lol!)
milty
  |     |   Comment #61
#45: I think that is incorrect-- the disinformation governance board (formed to counter ministries of truth such as Fox News, Breitbart, OAN, etc.) as a department inside DHS has been paused to address death threats.
lostsoul
  |     |   Comment #76
Yeah, they were the ones to lie about 4 years of Russian collusion. Those were the networks that had Adam shift on and the other one that slept with a Chinese spy fang fang saying WE HAVE 100% proof Trump is a Russian agent.. and you guys fed on that for 4 years(some still do). Fox and others talked about Hunters laptop while your news groups covered it up. Tons of e-mails and text of Hunter and family COLLUDING with Russia, China and ohh Ukraine, tons of pics and video of him and underaged kids. So much ****ing things the FBI and local PD sis nothing about. While we dump billions of our tax money to help build Illegal bio-labs your fact checkers and your news stations lied about until the US gov had to come out and say it because they are "worried" what the Russian would find. People were not allowed to learn of those connection while its killing many people right now, sinking our Economy and now not only did we help build those labs but looks like we spent millions on destroying them also. But your news wont talk about that. They also covered up Ukraine's Nazi group.. Many acted like this last battle to just left. They couldn't report they Ukrainian kick butt military surrendered to Russians.lol I posted so much Facts for those sources that are FACTs. Videos and proof you cant deny.. yet you still do? We are all suffering because people are not waking up and learning the truth and because as sad as it is.. there are people.. American people that are clearly ok with Tossing the constitution, our rights and laws and basically have a full on dictatorship. Thats what hurts me the most. I get people being uninformed and hesitant because they have been fed state propaganda by so many controlled sources.. but its hurts to know the few that do see it and are ok with it. It is about the same as standing there while your republican neighbor is getting mugged. This is WHY They pushed AT&T to remove OAN. They is WHY they pushed FB, Twitter and others to ban. This is why you and some others dont want to talk about it and block it from this Political forum. Im not asking you to like trump. This goes way beyond him. He was the flare in the night that we do have a NWO highly funded operation going on. While many of you sleep you have no idea that on may 22 they are trying to create a treaty giving globalist governing bodies power over the 190+ countries of WHO. There is nothing financial wise more important then whats going on political wise. The reason is because we are Finally at the point of maybe no return. You guys are trying to run around compartment of a sinking ship and not going to where the hole is. We AND our families are on the line. IF I can spend tons of time giving you guys this you can spend the few minutes verifying it yourselves. And no dont go to the fake fact checkers. lol Even in court FB had to admit their fact checker were. opinions. (Btw: Im sure you all know he gave 400+ million to bribe gov officials in many states. In WI one of the counties were ran by a guy from NY who came in with his group paid by that money..lol while.. it was not on CNN.. shocking.
milty
  |     |   Comment #79
FYI: If you need to know how to ask for a favor . . . though, see Tucker:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/19/look-time-tucker-carlson-asked-hunter-biden-favor/

As FSF said to EH, "Let me tell you about the very rich. They are different from you and me."
lostsoul
  |     |   Comment #82
So I dump tons of hard facts that are corrupt and illegal destroying this country and you bring up .... Trucker and Hunter were friends?..lol I already explained allot of the GOP is working with the Dems and the corruption hurting us all. That sounds like a NON-Bias thing many would agree too. If they lived next together and he didnt know what was on his laptop he might have an excuse, but ether way their relationship is irrelevant to the 50 things I posted.. Again, it looks like a coup, national fraud, take over of a government, abuse of laws and waste of tax money doesn't interest some.. but others might like to know and see. IF anyone has question or want more let me know. There are things going on the media block and cover up, but yes.. things are bad.. Not easy waking up Nov 4th 2020 and after a year and a half see every branch of government fail. To SEE full court cases showing fraud and issues and then the judge after a year tosses it. To See Govs', SoS, AG's and even some DA's in these states have evidence and do nothing. The AZ AG is sitting on a ton of Audited info that would set this country on fire. I have seen some of the videos that auditor made to him. Thats why people and Trump have been lighting him up. AZ was one of the few places to allow their big county to be really looked at. Not the fake hand counts that include every type of fraud. Thats why they tried to bribe him, then tried to kill him. So what if he proved they manipulated the count from start. That they certified the election while there were still 100K ballots not counted because they went way past the election. Of course it couldnt be time needed to back fill the predetermined count. Runbeck the company accidently made an extra 1.5 million ballots.. things like that happen. Just like them ordering the mail order machines on a mass scale before any lock downs and changes to mail in ballots. And Zero need to ask why the USPS that normally takes pics of mail at sorting centers only keep them for 30 days and tossed it.. then 6 month later put their rules back to hold them longer. Here is why they cant have someone like him and his technology look at anymore states..      https://intruthnews.com/jovan-pulitzer-releases-video-describing-300000-14th-amendment-violations-in... 
          I would love to hear your input after watching this. How far do you think the economy would drop if everyone learned we have a NWO puppet in office. That most of the policies hurting this country is on purpose. It must be more interesting then old Tucker and Hunter conversations.
#18 - This comment has been removed for violating our comment policy.
kcfield
  |     |   Comment #38
P_D: I am not sure if I got all of that, as I am getting a bit "tome deaf" in my early old age, but your post did make we wonder if there will be a Steve Forbes type of candidate in 2024 that would once again propose a flat tax. Considering that many states have "flat taxes" extending that level of fairness and simplicity at the Federal level would not be much of a stretch.
P_D
  |     |   Comment #41
Hi kc…
Early in my career I was working in the publishing industry and had the pleasure of working with Steve Forbes on several occasions. As probably the most prominent promoter of the flat tax, and perhaps the most knowledgeable expert in the subject he did indeed have an influence on me. Of all of the potential alternatives to the current tax system, I find the flat tax to be one of the best if not the best. There are others that have their pros as well, and any of them is far preferable to what we have now, but the flat tax is not only fairer, but simpler, more efficient, and perhaps most important not riddled with opportunities for corruption and government abuse of power like the income tax system we currently have. And that, unfortunately, is why I don’t think it will every become law. By the way, he is still actively promoting the flat tax to this day.
Choice
  |     |   Comment #43
A flat tax…Pennys on/for each stock trade …balances the budget in nothing flat!  SEC "tax" is flat to cover its "services."  Must be merely the amount, not the principle.  Go figure...some flat taxes are nice, others....PS. The discussion is on tax revenue…don’t deflect...no constitutional issue!
P_D
  |     |   Comment #44
I think discouraging investment in equites with a trading tax is a terrible idea. It puts a ball and chain on American competitiveness, market and innovative leadership. I think it is one of the worst tax system proposals in a vast field of horrific ideas.

Balancing the budget can happen overnight if we eliminate the spending we are already doing for waste, fraud and corruption and rein in entitlement programs to make them more efficient, and targeted.

We need less taxes not more. Americans are already overtaxed.
milty
  |     |   Comment #62
#44: the sales tax is similar to a trading tax. If we have to accept the sales tax why not a trading tax? I think it's a great idea to reduce frivolous trading, and certainly paid by those who can most afford it. I suppose no one likes paying taxes, but as Oliver Wendell Holmes said, "Taxes are what we pay for civilized society . . ."
P_D
  |     |   Comment #68
Which is why I don't like the idea of a national sales tax either.
111
  |     |   Comment #46
Sure, Choice, but why not be fair - let's also put a fee on all fixed income investments as well! And maybe on each and every interest payment (monthly, quarterly, otherwise) generated from every fixed income deposit?

Aside from the obvious Constitutional issues (which of course will take years and $millions to decide) - why not "be fair'? Whatever that really means?
P_D
  |     |   Comment #48
There were only two tax brackets when the income tax system was initiated in 1916: 1% and 7%. Almost no one had to pay more than 1%.

Tax rate creep is an issue with any new tax and something that has to be protected against in the text of the law.
Choice
  |     |   Comment #51
92% tax rate in WWII… commerce clause and existing tax on services by various agencies.  Why unconstitutional?  B/c one doesn’t like it or?PS. On editing…wait for an hour to respond when the the time period for editing expires…no 77years there!
111
  |     |   Comment #52
Last time I checked we're 77 years past WW2... Just sayin'.
111
  |     |   Comment #54
Choice - With all due respect, I did not ask you about the "editing" issue. I asked the management of this website. It would seem to me that they are the ones who control this scenario - not you.
milty
  |     |   Comment #80
The first federal income tax was enacted in 1861 but was later rescinded. After that came the 16th amendment to create an income tax, ratified in 1913. I suppose I could live with a 1% tax rate . . . as long as the bracket starts at $67K. ;-)
milty
  |     |   Comment #63
#46: are you suggesting we also add fees for every dividend payment as well as any capital gains on a quarterly basis?
111
  |     |   Comment #49
Choice said, “PS. The discussion is on tax revenue…don’t deflect...no constitutional issue!”

Sorry, Choice. Please provide your citations PROVING that your proposal(s) would not require a Constitutional change. (Your simple “claim” that this is true does not nearly suffice.)
111
  |     |   Comment #50
To follow up on #46 - if FDIC / NCUA insurance is in fact a real benefit to depositors (and I don't think there's a one of us who doesn't think that it is), then surely economics teaches us that this real benefit is worth something, no? Are not all real benefits “worth something” in an economic sense? The question then becomes, what it's worth and who (or what) is the ultimate backstop behind that benefit/promise?

Sure, FIs pay something towards the maintenance of FDIC / NCUA, and the bailouts of those unfortunate FIs who do require such bailouts. But in a serious crisis, like 2008/2009, the ultimate bailout backstop is the US taxpayer. Always has been; always will be.

So.... if we're going to shift some of the “paying of the freight” for stock transactions to those who initiate the transactions - then what logical (or legal) premise allows us to NOT do so for those who initiate a fixed income transaction?

After all, arguably US taxpayers are much more on the hook to backstop an FDIC (or NCUA) transaction then for a stock transaction. This is true because by law, the SIPC coverage for stock transactions does not provide any type of guarantee that the transactor will get their principal back (always has been; always will be). It merely provides a kind of guarantee that the brokerage form has not committed fraud.
111
  |     |   Comment #53
Question for the management of DA.com - Ken - Why is it that Choice (and perhaps others here, I don't know for certain) somehow is afforded the privilege of editing his posts (AFTER he initially posts them, of course - that being the point of the verb "editing") - and many others, including me, are not?

I've seen this happen at least twice this evening, and at times in the past.

No offence, but I'd like to know why this is true.

Thanks for your great website.
P_D
  |     |   Comment #56
111
Several people including me have commented on the loss of the ability to edit posts since that ability was lost some time ago.

A week or two ago I inquired about it to Ken and he replied that he would look into it. I am not aware of any response yet, but still hope he can follow-up.

Keep in mind it may not be intentional but rather a technical glitch that some people are able to edit and others not... depending on their browser for example.

I have noticed that a few rare times I was able to edit even though I usually cannot. Often, if I tried to edit again, even after it initially worked, I cannot.

So something technical is going on and I am not sure it is intentional. I used to be able to edit all my posts for one hour I believe without limit. Some months ago that changed as others have also reported.
111
  |     |   Comment #57
Thanks much, PD. This clarifies things quite a bit.

What is so annoying about this is the following - a DA.com user posts something, then you post a response to that (either in favor of OR challenging what that person posted - whether it is “pro” or “con” is not the point, and in any case apparently does not matter in terms of the editing capability afforded you at DA.com). Then, AFTER you post your response, you see that the other user's “earlier” post has (miraculously?) been changed - often (as in at least 2 cases this evening, and several others in the past), in a way that takes into account information in the LATER post that you have made! You ask yourself - how is that possible? Can everyone edit their posts, or are only “some, special” users allowed to “Turn Back Time” (for those of a certain age, remember the famous MTV video/song with Cher on the battleship Missouri? If not, then I guess I'm getting too old.)

But then when you try to do the same (edit your most recent post) - the DA.com system prevents you from doing so! This evening, I couldn't edit my posts even 5 minutes after initially making them. In fact I'm not sure I've EVER been able to edit them! Very confusing, frustrating, and inconsistent.

Here's the sad thing, to be frank - no other website that I know of can beat DA.com's technical abilities of automated capture of deposit account rates and related information. Hands down. There have been times when DA.com's data on FIs has been more accurate that that of the FI itself even when I've phoned the FI customer service reps. (and, I've commented to that effect on DA.com).

But unfortunately, many other websites can beat DA.com's consistency in providing comment editing capabilities to its users.
GreenDream
  |     |   Comment #58
Yes, the poorly-functional edit is a problem/annoyance. A work-around that seems to work for me the few times I've tried it (and thanks to whomever it was that first suggested this elsewhere on this forum):

when you get to the edit window, make your changed then select your entire message and cut it out of the window and then past it back in. Then edit should "take" when you push the button (sometimes I need to type an extra character, like a space, after the pasted text before the edit will work).
Choice
  |     |   Comment #70
111…The Final Countdown
Ken Tumin
  |     |   Comment #65
Sorry about the edit problems. We are in the process of implementing a change that will extend the period when comments can be edited from one hour after the comment is published to one week.

There also appears to be a bug that sometimes prevents DA users from being able to edit their comments during the one-hour edit window. Once we extend the edit window, we plan to focus on this bug.
P_D
  |     |   Comment #67
Thank you for the update Ken!
Choice
  |     |   Comment #69
Ken, I suggest you revisit the notion of a longer edit function and ramifications.

PS. “Navy FCU's financials and health grade are not accurate due to a data issue. Resolution soon.”
Ltssharon
  |     |   Comment #2
Thank you very much, again. i look forward to each of your reports. They are so useful.
kcfield
  |     |   Comment #5
The Fed doves became hawks in this way: by confessing the elephant named inflation was there to stay. 
Shelby
  |     |   Comment #6
Posts should be limited to a few short paragraphs...number of words.How someone.. (and I am not naming names) can go on and on and devote MANY paragraphs to one post is beyond me. Waiting for the 4/5% 5 year cd's later in the year. we are already seeing 3% plus 5 year cd's!
#22 - This comment has been removed for violating our comment policy.
lostsoul
  |     |   Comment #77
Ummm if its too long or your not interested in reading it.. then maybe... skip it?
Im sure PD(maybe me.lol) is not taking up so much space Ken has to by new server space..haha
Mak
  |     |   Comment #10
Powell recently announced rate hikes and a reduction of bond holdings to fight rampant inflation, growing at an 8.3% annual pace. But some critics, including Bernanke, say he waited too long to tighten policy.
Still, Bernanke acknowledged the whole situation is "complicated, adding that he understands why Powell decided to wait.
"One of the reasons was that they wanted not to shock the market," he said. "Jay Powell was on my board during the Taper Tantrum in 2013, which was a very unpleasant experience. He wanted to avoid that kind of thing by giving people as much warning as possible. And so that gradualism was one of several reasons why the Fed didn't respond more quickly to the inflationary pressure in the middle of 2021."
FirstNation
  |     |   Comment #23
The stock market it up 4 fold since the Great Recession and they have to worry about shocking it?
Where's that in the legislation that created the FED?
The FED needs some normal people on it.
Not just those who have huge stock holdings and a vested interest in it.
Mak
  |     |   Comment #11
Powell says the Fed will not hesitate to keep raising rates until inflation comes down...
They've been hesitating for over 6 months already but they sure talk a mean game....lol
111
  |     |   Comment #27
That's because they've got a "mean" needle to thread. Veer too much to the other side, and you may create a recession...
Mak
  |     |   Comment #28
They created their difficult situation, they were too loose for too long.... I don't see the reason for rates to ever be at zero but that's just my opinion.
FirstNation
  |     |   Comment #71
If it takes a recession to get inflation under control, then so be it.
Remember Volcker?
w00d00w
  |     |   Comment #16
it appears that Treasuries have the yield advantage (not considering potential state tax exempt benefit) over brokered CDs up to about 18 months duration. yields nearly identical at 18 months, and advantage to CDs beyond that
gregk
  |     |   Comment #25
My own “sweet spot” for peaking deposit &Treasury rates will be January thru March 2024, when the preponderance of my existing CD’s mature. Locking in 5 to 7 year 5% CD’s then just as everything looks on the road to settling down would be a gift from the Fed in partial recompense for the battering they’ve subject me to through the 2000’s.

Anyone like my chances?
Ltssharon
  |     |   Comment #26
ah, that would be nice. I locked in cd's in march and april 2019 at 3.64 percent for 5 year add on cds. Therefore I am in the same boat. But I sure don't know the chances of your sweet spot. I will need at some point to get back in to a 5 year ladder, to make life simple, but the advice these days has been to be in less than a 2 year ladder. Personally if 5 percent came prior to then, I might consider taking an early withdrawal penalty and getting into that 5 year ladder.
milty
  |     |   Comment #64
Given the market's decline and numerous economic pundits posting alarms, I am concerned that 2024 can't get here soon enough worrying that the Fed will reverse its reversal before. And so, I've started inquiring about EWP on some of my CDs.
Mak
  |     |   Comment #34
I am not expecting 5% 5 year CDs, if it happens, great, but not counting on it. My CD ladder was once 7 years it is now crammed into 2 years so I will take the CDs as I have funds available,... I have funds now getting .75% so I bought the 3.15% 3 year to start filling out my ladder.
Have some more funds available right now but holding off to see if the 10 year can get above 3.25%, if it can I will probably hold off a little and wait but until then I'm not going to sit on cash and wait for a rate that might not happen so I will just ladder in, have some more CDs maturing in August and November so hopefully inflation stays around for a while...;)
I would also like to add some to my stock portfolio for the long but not yet, maybe a trade here or there but that's about it.
Robb
  |     |   Comment #40
Mak agree with your overall take on rates. If the market were to crash out I have little doubt inflation would fall some giving the Fed some cover to edge back off the pedal. So looking to put some liquidity to work during the next few months and leg in as CD’s mature over the next 9 months. Connexus CU came out with a 5 year at 3.21% this week about the best rate I’ve seen this cycle so far. I suspect we see 3.5-4% in the 2nd half.
Mak
  |     |   Comment #42
If the 10 year yield can get above 3.25% then I think 3.5% to 4% in the second half is likely but if the 10 year stays under 3.25% I don't see how you get a 5 year that high unless it's an outlier. If the 10 year yield can close decisively above 3.25% I think it is very possible for it to go quite a bit higher....still have to see what happens to the long term rates if the fed actually lets its bond portfolio roll off as they mature, like they keep telling us they will.

As far as the stock market goes, I was looking for down a max of 20% to 25% for most of the year with a rally halfway back, this last rally was almost 7% so I'm just watching now, if it drops more than 25% I'll have to rethink..... my worry is further out so depending on inflation and what exactly the fed does I was thinking 20% to 25% this year and maybe another 20% first half of next year but way too early for me to decide. I do however think that the market can be bought under 4000 spx , might be some pain before but I think it will recover that number ... like I said, too early for me my crystal ball ....;)
FirstNation
  |     |   Comment #72
Yet another buying opportunity in the stock market today.
decades
  |     |   Comment #81
Averaging down ?????...always a good way to blow up an account...it can go down a lot more from here....no thanks
Mak
  |     |   Comment #78
If the federal reserve can manage to get rates up so that people that want to put some money in CDs or bonds can get a decent return and at the same time not cause a recession or a crash in the stock market, I will take back all the nasty thoughts and negative things I have said about them all these years, but if not, I'm doubling down...;)
Federal Reserve, the Economy and CD Rate Forecast - May 10, 2022

At last week’s FOMC meeting, the Fed announced its first 50-bp rate hike since 2000. At the post-meeting press conference, Fed Chair Powell also indicated that this will likely be the start of a series of 50-bp rate hikes with two more occuring in June and July. Fed Chair Powell dismissed the possibility of a 75-bp rate hike by saying that the “75 basis point increase is not something the committee is actively considering.” The rate hike decision in September will likely be based heavily on how inflation and...

Continue Reading
Federal Reserve, the Economy and CD Rate Forecast - May 3, 2022

The FOMC meeting will conclude on Wednesday with the statement scheduled for release at 2:00pm ET. Fed Chair Powell’s press briefing is scheduled for 2:30pm ET. Signs are very strong that the Fed will announce its first 50-bp rate hike since 2000. The Fed is also expected to announce the start of its balance sheet runoff.

Expectations are high that the May 50-bp rate hike will be followed by additional 50-bp rate hikes at several future meetings. In fact, expectations have risen that there will be a 75-bp rate hike at...

Continue Reading
Federal Reserve, the Economy and CD Rate Forecast - April 26, 2022

The next FOMC meeting (May 3-4) is only one week away, and it’s looking to be almost a sure thing that the Fed will announce its first 50-bp rate hike since 2000. In a speech last Thursday, Fed Chair Powell gave strong signals that 50-bp rate hikes will likely be needed for the next few meetings (via the WSJ):

There are even some signs that a 75-bp rate hike may soon be on the table. The Regional Fed President, James Bullard, discussed this possibility (via the WSJ):

James Bullard was the only...

Continue Reading
Federal Reserve, the Economy and CD Rate Forecast - April 19, 2022

The next FOMC meeting (May 3-4) is only two weeks away, and it looks very likely that the Fed will announce its first 50-bp rate hike since 2000. In fact, the odds that the Fed will hike 50 bps at the next three or more FOMC meetings have continued to increase.

In speeches and interviews, Fed officials have suggested that the Fed needs to front-load the rate hikes to quickly return to a neutral policy. Those moves would likely entail a series of 50-bp rate hikes for next two to four...

Continue Reading
Federal Reserve, the Economy and CD Rate Forecast - April 12, 2022

The odds continue to increase that the Fed will hike 50 bps at both of its next two FOMC meetings (May 3-4 and June 14-15).

Today’s inflation report, the March CPI, should keep the Fed on track for a 50-bp rate hike at its May meeting. Headline CPI for March had its largest year-over-year increase (8.5%) since 1981. The month-over-month increase was 1.2%, which was inline with the consensus.

March Core CPI, which excludes food and energy, was actually below consensus. Core CPI increased 6.5% (year-over-year) and 0.3% (month-over-month). The consensus was...

Continue Reading

More Past Offers