On the “fostering democracy” bit. Do you believe governmetns should not be “fostering democracy” when some of their people enter into too much debt and cannot repay it? How many foreclosures should stop you trying to create civil society - one per month maybe? Would the limit be 5? 100? 1000? Two million per month? What figure would be an allowable limit? What should a government do if it is boldly fostering democracy and the number of foreclosures goes above that limit? Immediately stop and pull back?

You seem to be very keen to establish some benchmarks. Whereas, I on the other hand, have expressed no preference for them.

I await to be convinced that there is any need to establish a precise benchmark, no matter what the figure may be.

What is your argument in favour of any benchmarks?

To be precise, I am not a US citizen. I pay very little US tax. I wouldn’t presume to tell US citizens, residents or taxpayers how much of their hard-earned or how many of their creature comforts they should expend to “foster” someone else’s democracy.

But it seems that you may think differently…

However, I now know much more about the Federal Reserve System, so it has been educational for me.

However, thanks to yet another example of your graceless quibbling we’ve made it to 300, so a big WELL DONE, Lolkatz.

I’m slightly disappointed that my interlocutors couldn’t find this definitive evidence.

LOL, Lolkatz.

I’m less than slightly surprised that’s the best you could produce. The evidence was definitive - the fact that you chose to ignore it was entirely your fault.

The definitive answer was in the legislation:

the President shall fix the term of the successor to such member at not to exceed fourteen years, as designated by the President at the time of nomination, but in such manner as to provide for the expiration of the term of not more than one member in any two-year period, and thereafter each member shall hold office for a term of fourteen years from the expiration of the term of his predecessor, unless sooner removed for cause by the President.

[link]

I’m slightly disappointed that my interlocutors couldn’t find this definitive evidence. They should strive to do better next time.

You live and you learn.

Gentlemen, I dips me lid. Youse are grouse. Thanks AR.

I take it that you concede that the Japanese have in fact disinvested in US Treasury paper auctioned by the Fed Open Market Committee in the period March 2007 to March 2008.

The FOMC doesn’t auction US Treasury paper. The US Department of Treasury does. Don’t you remember me correcting you those last couple of times?

No Little Grasshopper, I couldn’t feel calmer.

But I do detect just a soupcon of Birdyesque vituperativeness in your contributions.

Thus, I am enjoying your projection of “desperation” on to me.

Mmyeah…Birdy used to whinge about other people “projecting” on to him as well…

The Fed is “subject to oversight” by Congress. The Fed is not “accountable to Congress.”

More quibbling, Lolkatz. From the FAQ:

However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute.

The Federal Reserve is authorised by an Act of Congress, reports to Congress and may have its powers altered by Congress. Furthermore, its Chairman and Board of Governors are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

I take it that you concede that the Japanese have in fact disinvested in US Treasury paper auctioned by the Fed Open Market Committee in the period March 2007 to March 2008.

What’s to concede? I never contested that point of trivia; it changes nothing of the argument and, moreover, you’ve already conceded at #274 that “Japanese entities are the largest holders of US government paper”. But, of course, you had to hedge that graceless concession as well.

But I do detect just a soupcon of Birdyesque vituperativeness in your contributions.

Thus, I am enjoying your projection of “desperation” on to me.

The Fed is “subject to oversight” by Congress. The Fed is not “accountable to Congress.”

I take it that you concede that the Japanese have in fact disinvested in US Treasury paper auctioned by the Fed Open Market Committee in the period March 2007 to March 2008.

The Fed System is controlled by its Board of Governors, who are appointed by the executive and accountable to the Congress. It’s own FAQ, which I quoted to you FIRST, at #275, states categorically that it is part of the government. The fact that is has a high degree of independence from the executive and legislature in no way mitigates that basic fact.

BTW, your desperation is transparent. Now that this particular tangent of yours has blown up in your face, why don’t you take up AR’s suggestion at #266 and fuck that one up as well?

P.S. Re: driving Birdy into a Savage Fowl of Fury, Lolkatz, you’re a rank amateur. Pull your head in.

This “within government” business is a mystery like the definition of the Holy Trinity.

The point is that no bank is compelled to belong to the Fed system. The Fed System does not answer to any branch of government. It merely reports to Congress. The Fed System is not funded by government.

What would you call the US Army were it constituted in the same way? That’s right — mercenaries.

A one-word oddyssey unrolling through the ages, spilling from the mewling maws of the new-born, echoed in life’s last laboured breath?

Is that about the size of it Ambi?

And I’ve driven Birdy into spasms of fury using far fewer than 3000 threads.

Not hard, I know, but one collects such pleasant memories during life’s journey.

My answer to yours of #266 is embodied in my comments about the confusion that appears to exist in your mind between cumulative holdings and recent activity in the market for US instruments.

For example, your own table demonstrates that the Japanese have actually disinvested between March 2007 (holdings $611b) and March 2008 (holdings $600b). On the other hand, the Chinese have increased their investments by $70b.