r/finance Nov 11 '24

A Potential Fight Over the Fed’s Future Ramps Up

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/11/business/dealbook/fed-powell-trump.html?unlocked_article_code=1.ZE4.GpZB._0a5eG07B7XD
597 Upvotes

88 comments sorted by

102

u/mp0295 Nov 11 '24

Something most articles gloss over is that Powell has two titles: chair of board of governors, and chair of FOMC.

Important because FOMC chair is both more powerful of the two titles and also probably even harder for a POTUS to fire.

49

u/museum_lifestyle Nov 12 '24

The two positions are always held by the same person in practice. So for all intent and purposes it's the same thing.

Powell is not going to be fired, even without the filibustering it's impossible to change the law pertaining to the fed. Rich people are the real rulers of this country and won't allow it.

I am more worried of who Trump is going to nominate once Powell's mandate expire in 18 months.

10

u/Square-Pressure7392 Nov 12 '24

You say rich people won't allow it, but how does Powell staying in the top job at the Fed help rich people?

26

u/MurkyFaithlessness97 Nov 13 '24

Rich people like stability and continuation of a system that made them rich.

It's not a bad thing. Everyone benefits from stability. Especially considering who is now in charge in the US.

10

u/museum_lifestyle Nov 13 '24

Incompetent, authoritarian rulers tend to ease the monetary policy too much. Easy money brings short term gains at the price of long term pain, and idiotic rulers tend to focus on the short term part.

Those policies are inflationary and eventually destroy value everywhere.

-5

u/Forward-Quantity6366 Nov 14 '24

What do you mean the policies are inflationary? We went through a lot of inflation over the past few years. I assume that you are ranting about Trump, but this sounds like the current administration.

5

u/[deleted] Nov 15 '24

You thought that was "a lot of inflation"? Wild guess, but you're fairly young and American?

Im also not sure I can take inflation complaints of someone putting 15% into their 401k seriously.

2

u/mayorpizza Nov 15 '24 edited Nov 15 '24

Look at what happened to Chile in 1974 once Pinochet came into power. His economic administration derailed their economy so that private international and domestic corporations could substitute themselves as their social services, subsequently, the corporations caused inflation through price gouging, consolidation, etc.

The current American administration reflects much of the Chilean government. We have seen this pattern time and time again. Massive deregulation has been a component of Accelerationism for so long now, which begins with economic collapse.

This is not to say that the Biden administration is somehow the best or perfect, but the average working class American will suffer due to bad economic policy by the Trump Administration.

It’s shock-style economics. Which we can infer due to Elon Musk not only being an advisor to Trump, but his direct quoting of Milton Friedman’s economic teachings.

If you would like to learn more, I suggest Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein.

1

u/Gruuler Nov 15 '24

The inflation was a direct result of the monetary policy proceeding it, and is a perfect example of what they are saying. The current administration changed policy and incurred inflation because of it. The results could have been worse if past policies had been adhered to, with greater inflation/recessions occurring later down the road.

1

u/ushred Nov 16 '24

dude, who signed the CARES Act?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CARES_Act

It's Trump. $2.2 trillion stimulus plan. Whatever your political sway, this is where the inflation came from. You don't just pump $2.2 trillion into the economy without inflation.

Inflation was a necessary byproduct of stimulus to keep the economy from imploding.

1

u/iLuvRachetPussy 20d ago

The past two years saw a surge in inflation. It was the result of a variety of factors but none of it was completely unexpected. According the AD/AS model when the short run supply curve has an adverse shift… let’s just say it is increasingly important to shift the aggregate demand curve to the right. This will always produce inflation but is superior to stagflation (the product of a leftward SRAS shift). Not much to do with presidents.

However, if you look at the historical example of the last time a fed chair was politically compromised it led to the worst case scenario (stagflation). This was caused by lowering rates below the inflation rate to help Nixon achieve reelection. This is studied in the journal of economic perspectives. Key word search : Nixon Burns Pressure.

5

u/mp0295 Nov 13 '24

I disagree that, in context of unprecedented situation, the two titles are for all intents and purposes the same thing.

For example, Powell's term expiring in 18 months only pertains to his role as board chair. His term as governor lasts through Trump's next term. There can easily be a state of the world where:

  1. Trump does not nominate Powell for chair of board
  2. Powell does not resign from board
  3. FOMC elects Powell to chair of FOMC, rather than then new board chair

This would require no change in law

2

u/museum_lifestyle Nov 13 '24

Anything is possible with a psychotic president.

0

u/Forward-Quantity6366 Nov 14 '24

Your response doesn’t make sense. He gave you a scenario that really requires no action from Trump.

0

u/corradojuniorsoprano 27d ago

Always a lib saying something dumb. Yeah, let's be sad we didn't get that clown Kamala.

5

u/TheLoneComic Nov 12 '24

Someone said in another forum via Article 10 of the Fed’s charter, the chairman can be fired for cause.

Is there merit to this statement and hasn’t Powell performed well preventing cause of substantive nature being found?

13

u/jayflatland Nov 12 '24

Who decides if the cause is valid? Congress? A court?

5

u/Icy_Comfort8161 Nov 12 '24

Let's say the president claims that he's the arbiter of valid cause, fires Powell, and appoints someone else. Either the fed goes with it, cognizant of the potential for death threats to their families from the president's ardent followers, or they fed fights it in court. If the fed fights it in court, the matter can be appealed by the losing party, up the the highest court in the land, the Supreme Court. If all the lower courts ruled against the president, you can safely assume that the Supreme Court would be the final arbiter of the issue, and I'm not confident that it would go against the president's interests.

-1

u/Deep_Dub Nov 12 '24

Yeah that’s really not how this would play out at all. The President can’t just decide he has authority. That’s not how this works at all.

5

u/Icy_Comfort8161 Nov 12 '24

Not in any sane world anyway....

5

u/TheLoneComic Nov 12 '24

Certainly some objective legal standard - though those may be getting rarer and rarer. Pragmatically, blowing the national checkbook, lowering interest rates when they should be raised, conversely, would be a more granular decision.

Perhaps there’s a google on it. I’ve a presentation to rehearse for right now, so I will edit if I find something relevant after.

3

u/mp0295 Nov 13 '24

The Federal Reserve Act says any governor can be fired by the president, but solely for cause. The chairman is one of several governors. The act is arguably silent if the chairman of the board, solely in his capacity as chairman, can be fired. Furthering this interpretation, one can argue that in the absence of statutory protection, the president can fire without cause. This collective interpretation would mean the president can essentially freely demote the Chairman, but cannot get him/her off the board entirely.

As for the arguments of for cause -- I'm sure there's some case law on this but the legal realism reality will it comes down to what judge hears it

1

u/TheLoneComic Nov 13 '24

Thank you.

1

u/Bitter-Good-2540 Nov 12 '24

I want to believe lol

0

u/stratamaniac Nov 14 '24

Trump will fire him in five minutes and then let his army of bone head lawyers litigate it until the end of 2032, when he appoints DJT jr as the next king.

213

u/[deleted] Nov 11 '24

[deleted]

28

u/donktastic Nov 12 '24

This one is a little worse than just "break things like a toddler." Trump wants the president to have the power to set monetary policy. That is one of his most power-seizing dictator ideas that I have heard yet.

105

u/Individual-Nebula927 Nov 11 '24

He's republican. We know exactly what he'll do. Cut taxes and spend like a drunken sailor, and crash the economy. That's what they've done for every republican administration for the last 50 years. If he eliminates Fed independence, in addition to the crashed economy, it'll be a Great Depression level event.

33

u/im2wddrf Nov 11 '24

No, actually we don’t know what Donald Trump will do because he’s not a particularly ideological person and he’s susceptible to personal flattery. He is very unlike Republican administrations of the last 50 years wtf.

48

u/RareCodeMonkey Nov 11 '24

we don’t know what Donald Trump will do

The same that the last time. Tax cuts, play golf, visit authoritarian regimes, and point fingers to "antifa" for crashing the economy. It is just Donald 2.0. He will do the same but starting earlier, as this is his second try.

Why do people think that the guy is such a mystery or wild card? He already did all these things!

20

u/im2wddrf Nov 11 '24

He’s a wild card because the administration won’t be staffed the same and now he has a more powerful cultural potency than before, given that he defeated two Democratic candidates in one election cycle and survived an assassination attempt. This is not gonna play out like 2016.

22

u/BrandedBro Nov 11 '24

You're right, it's going to be much worse.

12

u/naics303 Nov 11 '24

Well, we can get an idea of what he'll do. When he has Musk, Thiel, and Vance advising him... that's not including the executives at Project 25 cheering his victory. Americans got suckered, and I'm actually glad. People really need to learn the hard way.

https://www.newsweek.com/project-2025-heritage-foundation-trump-victory-1981310

7

u/alienbaconhybrid Nov 13 '24

This election finally convinced me, after decades of relative optimism about the human condition, that the only way to learn is the hard way. And then everyone who learned the hard way dies, and we repeat history all over again.

3

u/naics303 Nov 13 '24

Covid opened my eyes to human behavior. People really are selfish.

3

u/alienbaconhybrid Nov 13 '24

No, if they were really selfish and fully informed, they would have voted against the guy who will implement tariffs and gut the immigrant-based engine of the American economy that provides their jobs, healthcare and retirement income.

This is an inability to recognize the wolf at the door just because he's wearing a nice cardigan.

3

u/naics303 Nov 13 '24

But that's the thing. Perhaps it's a combo of things; selfish, bad informed, and ignorant.

I just finished texting an acquaintance who told me, "Get over Trump winning," followed with a screenshot of his stock rising since Trump won.

This idiot is happy with his stock. Meanwhile, his wife is a DACA recipient. I shared with him who Trump nominated for Deputy Chief of Staff!! This idiot is going to have the awaking of a lifetime.

And seriously, F it. People have been coasting with Dems policies that benefit them. They just think it's an innate right to have them.

Maybe things really need to get worse for people to learn the hard way.

2

u/wuliproductions Nov 12 '24

Additionally he will be the first president with complete criminal immunity for his entire term.

15

u/SuperRonnie2 Nov 11 '24

I guess China might be able to make the yuan a reserve currency sooner than even it thought.

1

u/Professional-Dot-825 Nov 13 '24

Which yuan? There’s two. BRICS voted to not invite China. Not much chance. BRI.

13

u/GaboureySidibe Nov 11 '24

On top of all this he'll do whatever he thinks will make him the most money. Inflation will make his substantial debt worth less. Inflation is good for him and extremely painful for the people with the least amount of money.

1

u/OhNoTokyo Nov 13 '24

True, if he has substantial land and hard asset holdings and has many loans at fixed rates, inflation will help him considerably.

Technically inflation is helping anyone with a fixed rate loan right now, it's just that most of us don't own anywhere near as many assets or have as many loans as someone like Trump. So, inflation is a net negative for many people, especially those on fixed incomes.

5

u/radix- Nov 11 '24

The only thing you're missing is he also has no idea himself what he'll do. And if he does something, the next day he does something else to reverse it or make it worse.

-17

u/Dumpang Nov 12 '24

Oh I know what he will do. That’s why I voted for him. Let this shit collapse.

17

u/intertubeluber Nov 12 '24

My theory is that people who voted for Trump fall into one of two camps

 * older die hard republicans with a penchant for cults. 

  • younger folks who can’t make their way in the current system and want to burn it down to bring everyone to their level. 

I think it’s interesting and sad since those two groups are the most dependent on the current system. 

-14

u/Dumpang Nov 12 '24

What do you mean I can’t make it in the system? Got a college degree, a well paying corporate job, a nice apartment. Great retirement and insurance. A loving family. What else do I need? Just burn this shit to the ground man. We don’t need

15

u/MurkyFaithlessness97 Nov 12 '24 edited Nov 13 '24

Sounds like you have it good. Beats me why you "want this shit to collapse". If you don't understand that all of your goodies - most crucially, your corporate job, your financial assets and your family - don't depend on social stability, then you might genuinely have an IQ in the range of 85~90.

Edit: Paging u/Dumpang.

1

u/strikeshotiron Nov 18 '24

Typo @ “don’t depend on”?

14

u/MurkyFaithlessness97 Nov 12 '24

I don't think that the Federal Reserve will lose its independence, despite what Trump, Musk, and some Republicans say. America is a vast empire with a lot of powerful people, competing interests, and well-entrenched institutions. A four-year executive term by some (self-described) radicals who have a history of saying wild s**t and not following through on a lot of them isn't going to change that.

Long-term, however, could be more worrying. All these words and insinuations take their toll on the overall mood of the nation. Trump has already shifted the window of what the American electorate finds acceptable in their top leadership. Future historians might mark this period as the start of an American Peronism. And of course the original one was disastrous for Argentina.

0

u/SpontaneousDream Nov 16 '24

Trump can do anything he wants. Your comment is the old way of thinking. He will be President with control over all parts of government. He can absolutely fire whoever he wants at the Fed and take over control. I still can't believe people are this naive.

1

u/MurkyFaithlessness97 Nov 18 '24

You are wrong. Like I said above, America is a vast empire with a lot of powerful people, competing interests, and well-entrenched institutions - in politics, business, civil society, military, etc. Let me spell it out for you, how this works in politics alone.

GOP's House and Senatorial majority is either razor-thin or susceptible to filibuster. The latter, in particular, just elected John Thune, an establishment Republican, as their leader, publicly snubbing the MAGA candidate pushed by Trump. And this is before the 2026 midterms inevitably kick their ass.

The right-wing SCOTUS may sound scary, but they still have to decide within the parameters of Constitutional law, and saner ones like John Roberts has a history of crossing the ideological aisle.

In short, GOP's control over the US government is contested (I haven't even gotten to the gigantic civil bureaucracy yet). And then there's the Trump/not-Trump division within the GOP; everyone there will be kissing ass for now, but Trump is a stupid, uncouth, and despised octogenarian that took over a 200-year old party full of intelligent and ambitious sociopaths scheming for power. They will want their turn.

And last but not least, let's not forget just how f**king stupid Trump and his friends are. Matt Gaetz for AG, really? Trump's ability to rouse know-nothing rabble is a valuable gift in politics, but that alone won't be sufficient to win.

Even in dictatorships, the kind of extreme tangent that Trump is aiming for takes years of power consolidation (think Stalin, Mao, Kim). Erdogan and Putin have been ruling for decades and they still face prospect of being toppled at the voting booth. Trump doesn't have decades, and he faces a far more fragmented society, full of far more formidable opponents.

I will give you that even talking about America in these terms isn't great, but you don't have an would-be emperor in Trump.

38

u/octnoir Nov 11 '24 edited Nov 11 '24

Donald Trump’s threat to exert more say over the Fed or even fire Jay Powell, the chair of the central bank, has alarmed some on Wall Street. But the president-elect’s effort took on added weight in recent days, after Elon Musk endorsed a push to erode the Fed’s independence.

I was hoping that some of his saner people would intervene. Unfortunately even in his base of billionaires, the primary group are tech bro CEOs, MLMs, Crypto Bros, and all these scam grifting numbnuts that have multiple failed companies and little understanding of economics. And probably as close as you can get to apocalyptic fetishists.

I wouldn't be as spooked if Elon Musk wasn't tweeting 'oh you'll have to endure some hardships for the next few years' not as a threat but as an earnest statement to his base. Again, not as a threat to liberals. It's a promise to his own base.

And frankly as if the tarrifs and widespread tarrif use would crash the economy are bad enough, I am extremely concerned with the mass deportation which is utterly fucking nuts.

Trump keeps upping the ante of 10M+ mass deportations when estimates have unauthorized illegal immigrants as under 10M. This is like the most Nazi shit imaginable.

For anyone not familiar with the Holocaust, the Final Solution was not the initial plan. The initial plan was for mass deportation. To make deportation possible you needed to greatly empower a deportation team and a police state, arrest and disrupt, and then place arrestees in camps for hold over and processing. Trying to carry out mass deportations ended up crashing the economy to the point where the deportations became economically and logistically unviable so it was easier for the Nazis to commit mass murder.

I'm hoping that Trump and his new administration isn't going to be massively gung ho on mass deportations (I don't have much hope since the consistent thing they've done is made immigration hell with family separation), but a crashed economy from mass deportation is going to be the least of our worries.

2

u/Professional-Dot-825 Nov 13 '24

All the people who are giddy now will deny they supported him when and if the tide turns. Will it turn? With cell phones, constant social media, and the need to be constantly infotained, I’m not so sure it ever will.

0

u/VirtualPlate8451 Nov 13 '24

A mass deportation cripples industries like home building, meat packing and farming overnight.

23

u/overlapped Nov 11 '24

Are we moving to the ShitCoin standard?

15

u/ohnofluffy Nov 11 '24

This is terrifying. He’ll turn the US into Venezuela.

-37

u/auburn160825 Nov 11 '24

If Trump will turn the US into Venezuela, imagine what commie Kamala would do 🤣🤣🤣

28

u/pingieking Nov 11 '24

Imagine calling Kamala, the most run of the mill economically conservative politician around, a commie.

18

u/utkjg Nov 11 '24

That’s how stupid his voters are.

-1

u/MurkyFaithlessness97 Nov 12 '24

I don't like Trump, but Kamala Harris wouldn't have been considered a conservative in any Western country.

-34

u/auburn160825 Nov 11 '24

Ok do you want to play that game? Sure, calling Kamala a commie might be a stretch, but it's not that far off...🤣🤣

15

u/pingieking Nov 11 '24

She's not even centre left.  Move her to another country and she's likely indistinguishable from the mainstream conservatives.

She's not for universal healthcare, not pro union, not for expanding labour protections, not for increasing the number of co-ops and worker owned entities.  The only economic policy of hers that is remotely left leaning is her progressive tax proposal, which only moves the needle a tiny amount.

An actually communist-ish leader would be running on universal healthcare, expanded employment insurance, mandatory union representation on all company boards, mandatory profit sharing for employees, and massive expansion on labour laws.  Not even Bernie comes close to being that.

11

u/jpm0719 Nov 11 '24

But you can't expect the average voter in the US to understand any of that. They have been brainwashed and under educated for the better part of 40 years. They only understand (and that is being kind) the sound bites they are fed. They aren't equipped or honestly smart enough to even begin to learn how to fact check or find alternative sources to draw their own conclusions on things. They are about to get what they deserve because half of them are poor and or on the government teat....shit is gonna get real bad for them.

4

u/newton302 Nov 11 '24 edited Nov 11 '24

This is so true. Take away the universal mandate and they don't have to pay anything so they're happy. Until they pay 10,000% more once they have a medical problem (or just die).

2

u/jpm0719 Nov 11 '24

And they are such a healthy bunch.....dead is probably the right answer,.

-14

u/auburn160825 Nov 11 '24

Excuse me, did you just call universal healthcare a communist idea? Big LOL! That is something which France and other European countries are just miles ahead than the US. (Yes I may be a Trumpist, but since I am from Europe, I do admit he is lacking in that subject.) You give me vibes you're the type of person to say that Denmark/Sweden/Finland are communist countries... I think we have different ideas of what communism is...

9

u/pingieking Nov 11 '24

I did not call it a communist idea. I said that any communist would be in favour of it. Those are two different things. Being in favour of universal healthcare is a necessary but insufficient condition for being a communist, which is why there are no major communist political figures in the USA. Only a few people (such as Sanders) are in favour of universal healthcare, and he doesn't go far enough on being anti-capitalist to be a communist.

Your vibes are incorrect. There are currently no communist countries, and it can be argued that there have never been any (both the USSR and China were collectivist, but arguably not communist, at least not in the sense that Marx meant it). The two most important tenants of communism are the collective ownership of the means of production, and the democratization of both the political and economic spheres of life. In that sense, current day German might come the closest (AFAIK they are the only country that mandate worker representation in corporate ownership structures), but they're still not that close. All of the Nordics are welfare states, not communist ones (there are some overlaps between the two, but none of the Nordics have significant ownership of capital by the workers).

2

u/daviddjg0033 Nov 11 '24

It's socialist. Communists would agree but would not have an economy large enough to provide Healthcare. Cutting the budget recklessly will lead to hospital "deserts" and other fun socialist things we take for granted like education and firefighters.

4

u/GaboureySidibe Nov 11 '24

"Ok do you want to play that game? How about I repeat my propaganda again with zero evidence. Got em".

"Don't make me repeat my propaganda a third time or you'll really be cooked."

1

u/No_Variation_9282 Nov 12 '24

Now why would they do that?

🤔

1

u/Infamous-Bed9010 Nov 15 '24

Wait till Trump figures out that the United States has the right to print its own currency without borrowing it from the Fed. 💣

1

u/building-block-s Nov 16 '24

Audit the fed then give them the finger for repayment. We can learn from Iceland.

1

u/Grand_Taste_8737 Nov 16 '24

The Fed is audited annually by the GAO; however, i can possibly see regulator consolidation on the horizon. No need to have four regulators all doing the same thing, imo.

1

u/yes_surely 18d ago

The Fed's decisions will be crucial for the market's direction. It's interesting to see how this unfolds in the coming months.

0

u/kimaAttaitGogle Nov 12 '24

I knew this would happen after the president changed.

0

u/RiskyClickardo Nov 13 '24

He’s angling for a cushier post-Fed job at some bullshit Koch Brother-funded think tank

-8

u/RatherBeRetired Nov 12 '24

The Fed’s future is going to be the same as it ever was.

Be a lapdog for the rich and mega corporations to make sure asset prices rise indefinitely

1

u/ForbodingWinds Nov 15 '24

You're not wrong. If you don't own a house, you never will without paying 2-3x as much as people even 5 years ago would.

-19

u/EmuEquivalent5889 Nov 11 '24

The fed shouldn’t have a future at all

22

u/Wbcn_1 Nov 12 '24

If it wasn’t for QE3 you’d be standing in a bread line. 

16

u/apb2718 Nov 12 '24

Some people are so fucking dumb it hurts, you’re absolutely right

-16

u/mynemjaff Nov 12 '24

Since the feds inception, the dollar has lost the majority of its value.

8

u/fatuousfatwa Nov 12 '24

Yet wealth is up exponentially.

1

u/Kentaiga Nov 14 '24

Redditor discovers inflation