The Fed Invents $3 Trillion and That's OK (I Guess?)

This episode of the Planet Money podcast was really fun (as many of them are), but the first segment was particularly concerning. They talk about how the Fed (literally) conjured $3 trillion from the aether and banks didn't bother loaning it out. All this money is just sitting there, doing nothing. Hopefully, the banks won't loan it out all at once, which would seem, to me, like a reeeally bad idea (steroidal inflation!). In fact, the banks just sitting on it seems like a bad idea, too. I mean, the point was to stimulate the economy. However, according to the experts, it is recovering just fine.

$3 trillion just seems like a LOT of money to wish in from the Cornfield Bank. It's not as bad as that one time, but still. The fact that the Fed can invent money at all is irksome and with everything the USG, banks, and corporations have done over the last ten years, it's hard to trust them.
Just on principle, think about how the Fed works.

They help keep our economic system stable by creating money from nothing. But who benefits the most from our economic system? The 1%. And who runs the Fed? Members of the 1%. So, really, it's just the rich protecting the rich while making sure we get enough table scraps to survive, but not enough to get into a position of power so we can do something to stop this lop-sided system.

If you think about just how much money is in our economy, you realize that a ton of problems that America is dealing with could go away. Do you know how many homeless people that $3 trillion could house? How many it could feed? How many medical bills it could pay?

Ugh... I feel gross just thinking about it.

Yet, all this money exists and is moved around in circles you and I will never experience.
Then again, here is a segment of the Daily Show from January of 2015 that reports on how Salt Lake City, Utah, solved its homeless problem by giving the homeless homes. That's right, they gave them homes.

The Daily Show
Daily Show Full Episodes,  More Daily Show Videos,  Comedy Central Full Episodes

The clip is really funny, but the gist is this: it's cheaper to house everyone who can't house themselves. Between law enforcement costs, medical costs and other costs that occur thanks to people being homeless, it's cheaper to just put them in apartments. Meanwhile, the rest of the country still has this lopsided system.

So much emphasis is put on making money and spending money that we don't even think about the fact that there are other ways our system can work. Should we get away from Capitalism altogether? I don't think so. But the idea that some of us should suffer for not being able to play the game as well as some? Yeah, that's not right. We can certainly use a combination of both capitalism and socialism to the benefit of all citizens, except the 1%, of course. But I think they've gotten most of the benefits over the last 20 years.  I think they'll survive.

Help my personal economics and go buy a Ballpoint Adventures T-shirt or my novel from Amazon!

Yipes! NPR reports on Oxfam finding that the rich/poor divide is growing so fast there could be unrest (deservedly so, I'd say).

via Instagram http://instagram.com/p/jrNEQ5yrmv/

From the article:

In the U.S., where the gap between rich and poor has grown at a faster rate than any other developed country, the top 1 percent captured 95 percent of post-recession growth (since 2009), while 90 percent of Americans became poorer.

"Oxfam is concerned that, left unchecked, the effects are potentially immutable, and will lead to 'opportunity capture' — in which the lowest tax rates, the best education, and the best healthcare are claimed by the children of the rich," the relief agency writes. "This creates dynamic and mutually reinforcing cycles of advantage that are transmitted across generations."

In other words, Oxfam says that if trends continue, the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer.

"[People] are increasingly separated by economic and political power, inevitably heightening social tensions and increasing the risk of societal breakdown," the report says.

That's right, Oxfam is worried about societal breakdown. What the hell is wrong with big money people? Why do they seem to see no need to temper their greed? Or is it that being a non-rich person I just son't understand what it's like to have more money than I could possibly spend in my lifetime?

Yeah, I'm sure it would all make sense if I had more money than I could spend in my lifetime. Can someone hook me up so I can better understand this?

Thanks.

#SnagFilms iOS app featuring only documentaries is "Brought to you by #GoldmanSachs". App deleted on principle.

#SnagFilms iOS app featuring only documentaries is "Brought to you by #GoldmanSachs". App deleted on principle., a photo by thepetecom on Flickr.

I also wrote a negative review in the App Store. Where you get your money from does matter, doesn't it? (I'm honestly asking.)

Democrat Rep moans how a million bucks doesn't go so far these days but fails to offer a trade with me.

This is the Absurd Disconnect buying the souvenir mug right here--the above "quote of the day" comes from the NYTimes daily top headlines email. Just so Google can see it, here it is in the text:

QUOTATION OF THE DAY

"To say that I'm enjoying a millionaire's lifestyle - well, I can tell you, I guess a millionaire's income doesn't go very far these days."
ED PASTOR, an Arizona Democrat who is among 250 members of Congress with a net worth of $1 million or more.

What a douchebag. Um, hey man, you want to try trading incomes with me? Because I'll gladly take the tough life you've got going on and then you can see how the other half lives--er--the other 99% lives, I mean.

Ed Pastor is profiled in an NYT article today where his comments clearly show that, Republican or Democrat, money makes you stupid--or at least amoral, or maybe both--I mean, how, in today's economic climate, do you talk about being a millionaire and that a million doesn't go very far these days??? Did Pastor even stop for a split second to consider how that sounds to himself, let alone the rest of us?

The article also reports on how the income gap between our leaders and us is more dramatic than it has ever been. It even goes so far as to refer to Pastor and other millionaires in Congress as "aristocrats." That sure sounds accurate to me. These guys need to wake up and smell the reality that their corporate overlords/golf-buddies are robbing us to pay them. If they can't make a million go very far then maybe they should try giving the money to people who will put it to better use. For instance, shelters, hospitals that can't afford to stay open, schools, charities that provide relief to disaster-stricken areas or ANYONE who isn't a rich, jerk-off, politician.