SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Zeev's Turnips - No Politics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: NOW who wrote (44061)3/26/2002 1:19:26 PM
From: The Freep  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 99280
 
"mandate" might not have been the right word. They do have a "job" however, and I'd be willing to bet that legally, they can do a fair amount of things that you might not really want them to. But let's go back to the original point I was making, and let me throw it right back at you on your terms: Tell me where in the Constitution it says that the Fed can't discuss taking emergency measures? That was my point, davidd. Dispute it with proof if you can.

Again, I don't much care if someone likes the Fed or not, nor was I arguing Fed policy, as a quick read of the posts in question would show.

the freep



To: NOW who wrote (44061)3/26/2002 2:12:20 PM
From: KyrosL  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 99280
 
The Fed does have a mandate from Congress: keep the economy humming AND keep inflation under control. Looking at how our esteemed representatives question Greenspan when he testifies, it seems that they are clearly much more interested in the first part of the mandate.

Kyros


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News