• Welcome to the New Conservative Angle!

    We're excited to introduce a new era for our readership.

    For years, Conservative Angle has served as a clearinghouse for news, commentary, and analysis from across the conservative movement. Thousands of readers have visited these pages to stay informed, discover new voices, and keep pace with the stories shaping our nation and our world.

    Today, we are building on that foundation.

    The new Conservative Angle is more than a news aggregator. It is a community.

    Our mission remains the same: to provide access to important stories, encourage informed discussion, and promote the free exchange of ideas. But now, readers have a place to participate, share perspectives, ask questions, and openly and respectfully engage directly with fellow conservatives and independent thinkers.

    As Conservative Angle grows, we will continue adding new features, new content, and new ways for readers to participate. The site will evolve over time based on the interests, ideas, and contributions from the community.

    Whether you are a longtime visitor or discovering Conservative Angle for the first time, we invite you to become part of the conversation.

    Register for an account, introduce yourself to the community, and join the discussions that matter most to you. Together, we can create a place where news is not merely consumed, but examined, debated, and understood.

    Thank you for your patience during our transition and for your continued support.

    Welcome to the new Conservative Angle.

    — The Conservative Angle Team

Federal Reserve Chair Treats Inflation With Quack ‘Cure’

GettyImages-2295666687.jpg


Kevin Warsh—the new, spiffy Federal Reserve chairman—just offered an old, threadbare “therapy” for nagging inflation.

On Sept. 16, the central bank increased the federal funds rate from 3.75% to 4.00%, up 0.25%—the first such hike since Aug. 1, 2023. This move was both disappointing and counterproductive.

Betraying his supply-side supporters, Warsh is peddling the exhausted and discredited Phillips Curve nonsense that inflation is fueled by too much growth and employment. Furthermore, this foolishness argues that to slow rising prices, you should hobble the economy, hinder prosperity, and hire fewer workers.

If Warsh has caught 30 seconds of news since Feb. 28, he would know that today’s chief driver of inflation is not too many booming businesses. Rather, it’s too many booming bombs in and around Iran, the Strait of Hormuz, and the Persian Gulf. The Iran War, thankfully, has left the ayatollahs’ atomic toys harmlessly glowing in the dark beneath tons of rubble. If not obliterated, the mullahs’ fledgling nukes have been delayed for years, and perhaps even decades.

Unfortunately, the price for that vital improvement in national security and long-term international stability is a current increase in oil prices. Middle Eastern chaos boosts global petroleum expenses. A barrel of West Texas Intermediate crude cost $66.96 last Feb. 27, Iran War eve. The price on Sept. 15, Rate-hike Eve: $107.02—up 59.8%. The off-again, on-again closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the destruction that Iran’s missiles have unleashed on nearby oil-producing countries have buoyed energy prices.

This, not “runaway” GDP growth, drove August’s 3.4% year-over-year inflation rate. Indeed, the Consumer Price Index’s measure of “All items less energy” rose 2.5%—eerily close to the Fed’s 2% “healthy” inflation target.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics blames the correct culprit for the gap between 2.5% and 3.4% inflation: “The index for gasoline rose 3.9 percent in August, accounting for over one third of the monthly all items increase. The index for energy increased 2.1 percent over the month,” BLS reported. “The energy index increased 16.3 percent for the 12 months ending August.”

Hiking interest rates does zippo to protect Saudi Arabia’s oil pipelines; permanently open the Strait; or place bullets between the eyes of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, the ayatollahs, and Tehran’s other tyrants who oppress their own people, terrorize their neighbors, and impoverish the Earth.

Boosting interest rates to treat energy-driven inflation is quackery, much like prescribing chemotherapy to cure high cholesterol.

The Phillips Curve that Warsh pried from some witch doctor’s medicine chest has been ridiculed since at least the days of dial-up internet.

Warsh could have helped matters by admitting that the Fed has no control over the U.S. Armed Forces and their valiant efforts to neutralize the evildoers in Tehran and the damage they are doing to price stability worldwide. He should have wished America’s GIs the best of luck in wrapping up that engagement with a decisive victory that keeps the oil flowing, lowers energy prices, and decreases inflation.

Warsh should have explained, too, that economic growth, increasing productivity, and more goods to absorb any excess cash in the system also would fight inflation.

To that end, Warsh should use his highly influential voice to promote the expansion of U.S. energy capacity to the breaking point. He should urge Congress to use a Reconciliation 3.0 bill to index capital gains taxes; lower other tax rates for corporations, small businesses, families, and individuals; and otherwise increase incentives for Americans to work, save, invest, and produce. Meanwhile, by holding interest rates steady or lower, the Fed could work on behalf of the American people, rather than hammer them with higher bills.

These steps would lower inflation and keep the economy growing. Making money less affordable will not.

“A quarter-point hike sounds trivial until you see the math,” CrossCountry Mortgage’s Robert W. Ring tells me. “On a $500,000 loan, it adds an extra $1,000 annually, or $30,000 over 30 years. Warsh cannot bomb-proof the Strait of Hormuz with a rate hike. He can only blast first-time buyers out of their initial homes.”

Before Kevin Warsh bombs again, the Pentagon should give him targeting lessons.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.

Continue reading...

[ H/T The Daily Signal ]
  • Reading time 2 min read
  • Views13
  • Reading time 4 min read
  • Views15
  • Reading time 5 min read
  • Views3
  • Reading time 2 min read
  • Views11

Comments

There are no comments to display
Back
Top