we've heard from ron paul we've seen protests occupy the fed protests in the u.s. we've seen him in europe at the e.c.b. first before we get to how to get rid of it what's your case against the fed well i think it's very interesting we live in a country where we've returned that we love capitalism we love free market we love for him to process and then we have the central planning apparatus that's running our money and banking system we've only had it for one hundred years all throughout the nineteenth century there are debates we have a national national bank going on and typically was the mercantile as the state is the national is the people that wanted to grow government and have a kind of a nineteenth century version of big government programs who always love the central bank we do have one but banking was getting ever more centralized and every time they made a bigger more problems and finally in one thousand thirteen they created some. and look what's happened over since you know the dollar is now worth less than a nickel of what it was at the beginning of th

meantime, fed chairman ben bernanke was in the hot seat today, as he defended the fed low interest rateolicy before lawmakers of the house budget committee. he told them that several factors are still threatening the u.s. economy right now, so rates need to remain low for the foreseeable future. keep it right here, because maria will be talking live with the house budget committee chairman bill ryan himself coming up this hour. >> first, let's take a look at where we stand in the final stretch. the dow jones industrial average down at this point. the nasdaq, also very fractionally moved here. once again, victory for technology. tech is really the leadership group in 2012. same with 2011 movers as well. the s&p 500 up 1.5 points. bob pisani is our eye on the nyse. >> two things, volatility, the vix and facebook, that's what they're talking about. the volume, we're not talking about volume. but let me point out the vix. people have been asking me, the vix is 18. isn't that really low? here's the problem i have with this. if you back out greece, concerns in iran, the indications are that t

let me commend you and the fed.t's very important for us to recognize the achievement and the progress we are making with economic recovery. and i think it's in no small measure to your monetary policy of accommodation and creating credit facilities and certainly ensuring liquidity for borrowers. i think that is the real core. unemployment now is going down, we're at 8.3%. we're averaging 200,000 new jobs each month now. we're not bleeding jobs, we're adding. and the dow jones is still cracking around 13,000. we've come a long way. but we're not out of the woods. but i do, it's important for us recognize that your contribution in helping us to wade through some very troubled waters. let me ask you about the stringent prudential standards that you are required under dodd/frank and under section 165 of dodd/frank. you were given the opportunity to differentiate among companies on an individual basis or by category, taking into consideration capital structure, riskiness and complexity. and of course congress put this p

the law says that the fed has to appear to discuss his management of the monetary policy. it is a federal agency created by congress to mend the nation's economic policy and it is a oversight that he comes down twice a year. he will appear before the house today and the senate tomorrow and do it all over again in june. >> so finally as you take away from the hearing indicating that economists and the fed chair specifically seeing modest growth and modest growth continuing over the next couple of months, what else did you learn today, if anything? >> well, you know, i learned farce new information, not an abundance of it, but what was most striking is that we didn't see any change in the fed's outlook. and there is a lot of talk that the economy is improving and growth is accelerating and the housing market may have bottomed out, but none of the news has been sufficient to convince our pre-eminent economist, the guy who is in charge of the nation's monetary policy that the good times have really returned, and that is a cautionary message to americans, and that his opinion i

well how is that because if you read the i mean the fed cannot we hear this all the time that the fed prints money the fed does not print money if you read the federal reserve act the only thing the fed can do is make a loan is discount something so it'll take one asset a bond or something from the public and it'll exchange that for a balance in the banking system a reserve balance ok so they're not doing three dates there they have to create debt in order to issue money but at the end of the day that's still issuing money so expanding the money is monetary supply. lauren if i if i take a million dollars worth of treasury bonds from you which is this an obligation or a liability of the united states government in the value of one trillion and i give you one trillion in cash yeah your net worth has in shea's you haven't suddenly received a million new of dollars or nine new net financial knowledge my guess is they'll hold up for just one second i'm not interrupting you i literally have to go to break we will be right back with more with you that in just a minute i was back with mike no

>> well, i'd rather know how the fed thinks than what the fed thinks. the problem with this is that we know what the fed thinks about some various scenarios at a point in time, and in fact it's kind of a -- we know that different people think different things. but even if you stick with the main thrust of what they're saying, sometime down the road when events begin to develop, we may find a situation that seems to be very close to this situation they've laid out now, but they do something differently because not everything is the same. in short this is a conditional outlook and the fed can't possibly know today everything that's going to happen one, two or three years out. that's why this isn't particularly useful. >> susie: all right. well, stay tuned, we're going to keep monitoring this. thanks so much, bob. >> thank you, susie. >> susie: we've been speaking with robert brusca, the chief economist at fact and opinion economics. >> tom: still ahead, apple, like many companies, is sitting on a big stash of cash, from dividends to fresh acquisitions. wh

by the way the fed chairman testifies twice a year for a formal review of the fed's management of the nation's monetary policy. the senate hearing will be taking place tomorrow in washington. the tone of the hearing today was one of caution. reporting of benjamin applebaum for the new york times. >> they have been burned a couple times in recent years by being overly optimistic about the condition of the economy by predicting things were about to take a turn for the better and then when things flatlined or took a turn for the worse they looked foolish. you are now hearing a greater caution on pronouncing the economy has turned the corner. >> we heard a moment ago about the potential of higher gas prices, oil prices and energy prices overall and the impact on any economic recovery. >> the higher gas prices go, the greater the impact on the economy. there is an estimate that every $10 increase in gas the economy will expend .2 percentage points slower this year. that's obviously if you get to $20 to $50 increase in the price of gas which we have seen, it could be a significant hit to gr

that being said, congress created the fed. congress gave us our mandate. if you determine that you want to change it, we will, of course, do whatever you assign us to do. >> you, of course, determine how to implement that mandate. you said with reference to price stability, a goal of about 2% is your goal. and with reference to unemployment, did i hear you say 4.5% to 6%? >> 5.2. >> 5.2% to 6%? >> congressman, the difference between inflation and unemployment is the fed can control inflation in the long run. we cannot control unemployment in the long run. that's determined by many other factors and labor markets and other policies that we do not control. so we can't set an arbitrary target. what we can do is try to make our best guess of where the economy -- what level of unemployment the economy could sustain over a period of time. and we don't have an official number, but 5.2% to 6% is the central tendency of the estimates provided by the members of the fomc. >> while we would certainly be delighted to be at that range today or at the end of this year, t

edward griffin who's been opposing the fed since the sixty's let's get to today's capital account. ok before we really get into the meat today i just want to touch on this because obama today unveiled his two thousand and thirteen budget he gave a speech at a community college in northern virginia there is to tout it to manage expectations take a listen. we can restore an economy where everybody gets a fair shot everybody does their fair share everybody plays by the same set of rules from washington to wall street to main street. great so the new budget is a solution to america's rising inequality to wall street and corporate welfare and big business is the advantage over the small entrepreneur i've let's see where the budget goes from here well as one book points out in the washington post like the two thousand and twelve budget it has no chance of being adopted by congress the big ideas in it are d. o. a in the house dead on arrival ok well obviously obama knows this let's listen more. the last thing we need is for washington to stand in the live america's combat it. here we go a

do you like this new fed? how does it effect bond, gold, futures, whatever, how does it impact trading the way the fed is communicating data differently? >> i think in my opinion what interests me or disinterests me about the fed has very little to do with communications. there was a point in time where i thought transparency was a positive, but at this point it just creates a bigger roar shack diagram. and i think that the decenters aren't necessarily leading or misleading. i think that you have your charles evans on one side that thinks we need bigger puddles in the kitchen. you have fisher who thinks we need to get the mop out. in the end ben's going to get what he wants. i think the one thing in the minutes that you can't dispute is the get away car is still in the driveway idling. there's nothing concrete one way or the other. and i do think they're going to continue to underpromise in terms of the economy, i think that's their strategy. >> i thought the exchange was excellent because it sort of dug into

i for one am skeptical that the fed the fed has the tools to create growth i think it's doing what it can i personally in my view what i would like to see more fiscal stimulus actual investment into things i think that would probably help i think to some extent the fed is pushing on a string and you look at a lot of the you know see if you look at the effects of q.e. sure they're buying up these assets held by banks but then that money isn't getting lent out anywhere and it's just sitting in excess reserves held by the banks so it is kind of pointless and there is no. there's only yes there's pretty marginal effects of all this stuff but it is not the reason why rates are so low it is not the reason investors all around the world are stuck in these risk free investments because throughout europe and the us right now due to the mediocre economy and basically the crisis stage in europe there's just an incredible demand for liquid risk for investments and until that demand eases there's just going to be no way that anyone can make money on a risk free and i question why people think that

the fed. there's a lot of diversity in terms of whether the fed should do qe3 or not. but basically it's going to be cost benefit analysis and at the end of the day i don't think they're going to do it, number one. the economy in the u.s. has improved. if you look at just the latest data, retail sales, once you toss out the quirky auto sales component, look very good. industrial production in terms of manufacturing looks robust. the fed is keeping its options open but it's looking more and more like in the u.s. that it's not going to be needed. >> and, mark, we'll have to leave it there, senior u.s. economist. up next, we'll look at the trading day ahead on wall street as general motors is due to release fourth quarter earnings. >>> the head of the euro group says he expects a greek bailout to be agreed with in days. now looking at a euro group meeting next monday. i feel like we've been here before, though. silvia has been in portugal talking to the finance minister there trying to gauge whet

>> the fed was kind of quiet.uestioning, really, so market was a little bit disappoint. it hard to be when you look at gold market it was built -- >> don't use the word disappointment. this is me you're talking to. >> okay. >> what i'm getting to is, it's seen for the here and now that maybe qe isn't front and center. wouldn't that totally explain maybe auger for bigger moves in the markets? >> certainly. listen, a one handle move as we say in the 30-year, off of this is nothing. fat fing, it's nothing. it's -- it's been caught in this range, ten year's moved a half point down. yeah they were up a bit. insignificant moves than was a reaction to hey, maybe there's not much come in as i thought which if we're right we can look at long end to hold in here. we know what the fed's going to do. should mosh pressure on the short end i believe. >> i agree. maybe curve implications. curveball back to you, carl. >> rick and yra. bob pisani who i know is going to talk about gold. is this true, worst day in almost three month

morgans of the world who set up the fed wrote the fed act god has adopted and i've run it ever since so if we if you don't want these special interest plutocrats running the economy then you don't want a federal reserve you want to money that the government can't print up money like gold and that can't be manipulated that can't be inflated so that the federal reserve uses its horrendous power to and. late to cause the business cycle to bring on recessions and depressions but to benefit the government itself and the special interest connected with the government especially the bankers so the spirit of j.p. morgan still hovers over the federal reserve and that's an exact example of why there was a fed because j.p. morgan wanted a fed ok interesting point after you say that that public private partnership is a cartel for the schizm right that's fascism that's the for that's the definition of fascism or government and big business get together to stick it to the rest of us and so no i don't think fascism in money or in any other aspect of society is a good thing you know let me ask you t

so i don't think the fed can do too much about price of gas. i think more important that we try to establish security of supply and also take measures to continue to reduce demand. i think it's important to note that the united states has been reducing its dispense because we're producing more energy and we're using -- importing less. >> if i ask, you would suggest tapping into the reserves? >> that's really for administration to decide. the reserves are typically used for disruptive situations where there's been some breakdown in supply chains like during katrina, for example. there is less of assistance during a situation where there is a long term supply/demand problem. again that, is an administration decision. >> thank you, my time is up. >> the gentleman from ohio is now recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and, thank you to the chairman for coming to testify before us. i appreciate the job you do and you have a hard job. i want to ask you about one big picture question and then talk about some things that are importan

does the fed have the story wrong?ell, we have former federal reserve governor randy crossner, professor of economics, university of chicago, booth school of business. hi, randy. i just don't get this. we're growing at 3%. we're not melting down. you're running the same -- your friends at the fed are running the same zero interest rate. no matter what happens. the economy's growing. it wasn't then. but you're still at zero. everyone's getting more bullish on wall street. you had a game-changing jobs number. the fed is so far behind the curve, what are they thinking? >> well, i don't think you would have had the strong jobs number without the low interest rate policy that the fed's had for a while. and also, we've had a couple of false starts. about a year ago we started to see job growth more than 200,000 per month and then it faded away. >> you know, randy, my friend and your friend john taylor from stanford hoover institute, the taylor rule, which i am told is used by some in the fed, says that now with the economy e

he was a democrat and vice chair with you at the fed. and let me quote. they talk about aggressive fiscal and monetary policy that not only avoided a great depression. when we divide the effects to the components, including the feds easement, we estimate that the latter was more powerful than the former. so it says that things in the jurisdiction of the fed were more important than the stimulus, although the stimulus was important. so this effort to den grate the role you play in that seems to be greatly mistaken. i have handed out a chart to the press and i would ask those that have the copy, look to page 17 of your report and there's a chart on the bottom, net change in private payroll employment, 2005 to 2000 and 12, what it shows is, and it measures monthly job loss. the lowest point of this, the worst monthly job loss comes in early 2000 and nine, in other words just after the change in the administration. and you then beginning, in like february or march of 2009. you get one of the steepest rises i have seen. you get a substantial, an almost vertica

which sort of evoked a response on the part of the fed.concerned as some of my colleagues. i think over the cause of the fall and into the first part of the year, we've actually seen a substantial firming of growth. i think we're entering growth here in the first part of the year, on a much firmer stance than we did last year. and certainly the unemployment rate, which has fallen over a percentage point since last december of 2010 is kind of remarkable. not many people predicted we would get that much of a response. i'm actually cautiously optimistic. i'm not expecting a booming economy anytime soon, because i think what we suffered is a very serious shock that's going to take a while for the economy to repair itself. but i do believe i'm encouraged over what we've seen over the last few months. >> what are the metrics that are most important that you're looking at. in other words, what would it take to actually move the hand of the fed to start actually a tightening process? >> i tend to look at a few things. one is inflation, obviously,

was seen as a necessity for the country to avoid a default on its debt but thousands in greece are fed up with what the austerity measures have already done to their lives and their economy and they made sure that that anger was known and the. police estimate eighty thousand protesters turned up in the streets to protest they set more than forty building buildings on fire and hurt rocks and fire bombs at police who in turn used tear gas and arrested dozens of people now the concept of the plan was seen as a major step but the approval of the second package will not be decided at least until wednesday when finance ministers are scheduled to come together for a meeting. a lot of people of course will be keeping our eyes on what's happening there and to talk a lot about what a few of these decisions might mean we're going to the president of euro pacific capital here said he is and he says access hey there peter what do you think is this the right move by greece's parliament was the right direction maybe it's not the right order of magnitude the problem is the austerity is an austere enou

while i have no problem with of fed audit i mean we saw the fed basically handed out twenty nine trillion in low interest stories zero interest loans to the financial sector was that necessary we see the fed doing these massive multi hundred billion forex swaps with. other foreign central banks i got no problem with that the elimination of the fed i think ron paul stands for that a little bit i don't think that's necessary i think it's good to have it is to to should which you know let's say he sets the interest rate on us of money but basically the fed and the treasury should switch roles i mean the treasury should be the one who credits bank accounts like the fed does now and the fed should be the one that is shoes to control the interest rate was set the interest rate where it was i mean if we if the treasury in the bed or if they consolidated both under the treasury i think we'd have a much better system that's a really interesting idea i'm mad to bring you want to get if you'll come to talk about that more i also love to talk about zero percent money now you can resist the excited we

restoring our currency or competing currencies auditing the fed these banks that have been bailed out the money vanishing if you take m.f. global for example you know money is vaporizing and i think that they're setting. stage for something like that to happen here and nobody else is even talking about it ron paul is the only one who is willing to shine a light into the dark corners of our political parties and these big corporations who are running the show and people are awakening to it and deciding that they can take part and make a difference so. and lastly mary just want to ask you. paul that we see he is gaining some momentum how can he continue to attract more voters we are seeing that he's winning some people over from the mainstream and he does have his loyal base how can he continue to take advantage of this leverage. well everyone who does some researching and gets involved and understands the policies usually gets profoundly moved by them and wants to be active in this and wants to make a difference so i encourage everyone who does come along and decided to support them pa

if fed has been around for 99 years. and 99% of the dollar value is gone from the 1913 dollar, so that is not really a very good record. we are witnessing the end stages of a experiment, yes, they have been debasing currencies for hundreds of thousands of years, they always end badly. and they also run to gold and simple. this experiment is something different than what we had before, it started in 1971 where we were actually given an opportunity in many ways to be the issuer of the currency and we had too many benefits from that then people realized. but it's gone on for 40 years and people keep arguing from the other side of this argument that it's working, it's doing well. and yet, from from my viewpoint and the viewpoint of the free market economists, all it's doing is building a bigger and bigger bubble and the free market economists are the oneses that predicted the housing bubbles and nasdaq bubbles. we never hear the bankers saying, watch out there's a bubble out there, there's too much credit and too many proble

is the fed simply increasing its insurance expertise or does dodd-frank give the fed authority to regulators first? >> no, we don't have any authority to regulate insurers unless, in the future, a systematically critical insurance company is so designated by the fsoc. that hasn't happened yet. it would be there's been some discussions just to give ourselves a better insight into the industry. >> what i'm alluding to is that there's been insurance companies where they've been -- ten of your staff has kind of moved in and taken up residency and they don't know exactly why they are there. >> i will find out and i will xun indicate with you. >> i appreciate that.with you. >> i appreciate that.cwith you. >> i appreciate that.owith you. >> i appreciate that.mwith you. >> i appreciate that.mwith you. >> i appreciate that.uwith you. >> i appreciate that.nwith you. >> i appreciate that.iwith you. >> i appreciate that.awith you. >> i appreciate that.tewith you >> i appreciate that. with you. >> i appreciate that.cate with >> i appreciate that. >> what kind of discussions are you and your staff having

we begin with the fed. fed chief ben bernanke getting grilled by lawmakers on capitol hill and issuing new warnings about the budget deficit and overall economy. steve liesman has the highlights. >> sue, thanks very much. there was a bit of an exchange from congressman paul ryan, a republican, and the fed chairman, over the long-term goals of the fed higher inflation, get to those in a second. first i want to give you the monetary and deficit headlines. he issued a stern warning on the deficit saying increased possibility of a sudden fiscal crisis from the deficit, he warned interest rates can soar quickly if investors were to lose confidence in the american government. he did say on the economy that it's gradually recovering from a recent deep recession, but the pace of recovery has been frustratingly slow. the outlook is uncertain. on the jobs marveket, bernanke says the situation is improving but appears to have improved modestly over the past year but still talked about the long-term unemployed. on the

>> that's a question for the fed.e united states as you've seen from concerns, we propose regulations in draft form so that people have a chance to assess them, and the regulators who write the rules have a chance to take advantage of broad-based view from everybody affected, and that's the strength of our system. >> last question, mr. secretary, on housing. there are concerns that foreclosures could start up again or could -- because a lot had been held back. and meanwhile, our understanding is that the new refi program that's been proposed by the administration is probably dead on arrival in congress. is the government done with helping foreclosures in the housing market at this point? >> no, i don't think so. i think it's very important that -- and we will continue to do this with all the authority we have, and we'd like congress to do more, too. we're going to do everything we can to help americans refinance and take advantage of lower rates, to help americans who can afford to stay in their homes take advantage o

let me commend you and the fed. i think it's very important for us to recognize the achievement and progress we are making with economic recovery. i think it's in no small measure to your monetary policy and accommodation and creating credit facilities and certainly insuring liquidity for bow rowerrow -- borrowers. we're averaging 200,000 new jobs each month now. we're not bleeding jobs. we're adding them. dow jones is still cracking around 13,000. we've come a long way. but we're not out of the woods. i do, as it is important for us to recognize that your contribution in helping us wade through some very troubled waters. let me just ask you about the stringent standards that you are required under dodd/frank and under section 165 of dodd/frank. you were given that the opportunity to differentiate among companies on an individual basis or by category, taking into consideration the capital structure, riskiness and complexity. and, of course, congress put this provision in because we expected that you will differentia

>> the average gallon of gas at $4 ties the hands of the fed. i don't want to pick within commodity and price level and say that's the case, but that is the biggest high profile one. you take that away from the fed, you take the ltros away from the ecb, the bank possibly stepping away and i think people would be in denial to think that's not going to have an impact on global equity markets since test the qe in fact that's lifted them so much over the past couple months. >> that's absolutely right. as for commodities, of course today we're seeing quite a selloff in gold, silver, oil and many other commodities, john, how excited should we be about this pullback? is this presenting some kind of entry point for people that perhaps have missed out? >> well, you know, we've only had a very modest pullback today. so i wouldn't get too excited about that. but if you look at the commodities that have taken a beating today, i do like a couple names in that space. freeport machina ran. i do agree with peter, we do have to have some concern about having com

is it fair to say the fed did not see the severity of the housing crisis? >> i think the mistake was a little different. house prices were already falling in 2006. what we did not know was what is the impact going to be? we did not have a sufficient understanding of how the fall of house prices would affect the financial system. that was the linkage we did not see. yes, we did not see the prices come in. we were aware that the housing market was pulling. i talked about it in testimony. we have learned a lot of lessons. we have changed the way we do our supervision and will now focus on the interaction between different parts of the system, looking at it from a systemic point of view. >> looking at the economic projections from last january, you projected growth at 3.4% to 3.9%. why were you so far off? will you be that far off for the coming year? >> i would like to look at those numbers. there would two glasses of things. there were developments that were impossible to anticipate, like a tsunami in japan. the affects of the arab spring. i think, more gener

. >> there you have it and should the stock market thank the fed for the really. the stock really continued today inching closer to 13,000 but not just the fed, hint, students, what is the mother's milk of stocks? we will get to all of that in a few minutes. >>> first up the top sizzle, santorum sweep puts rick back in the race and yet another sign that republicans are not ready to let romney role. here is what giuliani told me last night on the show. >> frankly people are still looking for an alternative to mitt. i would like to see how santorum develops. i have not understood why he has not done better in many of the polls and some of the early primaries. >> all right, that was rudy before the voting returns were in. so he was right. now, let's get the latest to republican race rescrambled, cnbc contributor, robert acosta, what is the team romney saying and thinking today, their knees knocking? what is up? >> team romney is very nervous, larry, they are going hard at santorum, they are picking out two things. they are going after his congressional earmarks and p

fed, i can speak for myself. i can refer you to the statements we make at every meeting when we release this, no matter what the date is, 2013, 2014 subject to developments and you know how the fed works. constantly setting the end trails, constantly look at data and models, updating views 24/7. >> are some of your colleagues as optimistic as you are on the economy? >> well, the operative word is "some" and yes, there are some i think you heard them speak, they have to speak for themselves, of course there are some and again, all members of that committee are just trying to do their best to get it right and everybody will tall note of this improved data. the question is what do we expect to happen going forward in the future that is for each to decide. get together as a meeting, 17 people, ten voters, under the leadership of a chairman who is all trying to get it right. that is all i can tell you larry, a great group of people. >> i leave it there. richard fisher president of the dallas federal reserve bank. i li

those words to borrow from james work records is burning the warrants wealth of our time conducting fed policy with help from the same tricks. and. you get it that was a bubble machine we'll talk about it let's get to today's capital account. from currency wars to actual wars we're going to break it all down for you today first what you could call the war on the u.s. dollar you have ben bernanke the federal reserve chairman testifying a couple times on the hill recently saying hey we don't want higher inflation at the fed we won't tolerate it but well listen to an example. we're not going to seek higher inflation in order to advance unemployment. it's possible you know because we don't control in the short run perfectly obvious leave inflation unemployment to do you could have shocks that would drive both objectives away from their target which and currency wars author jim record says in a recent op ed to paraphrase hey wait a minute higher inflation is exactly what the fed wants inflation to limp dollar an asset bubbles are all in a day's work just think of ben bernanke he is the moder

you indicated that the fed is prepared to use all the different liefers that you have. so that is the general questionment but specifically, i'd also like you to speak to the money market mutual fund market. right after lehman, there was a bailout of the money market mutual funds because over panic over breaking the buck. that is the investment income wouldn't cover all operating expenses. it wouldn't cover all the investment losses. and so there was an intervention by the united states into that market. could that also be something that people begin demanding right here in washington? we bail out the money markets as a result of a disorderly default in europe? >> so in terms of preparations, other than beyond the swaps which we just discussed, the federal reserve has been operating as in a supervisory capacity, work working with other supervisors to understand the exposures of banks to european nations, to european banks, european economies. >>> trying to help reduce the risks wherever as possible. we've been doing that. the other set of tools that we have in the event

fighting inflation and protecting the dollar's value mood what exactly would that mean then for the fed's unofficial mandate of trashing the dollar will take a look at that question and turkey the fastest growing economy after china is being penalized in the credit markets reportedly for failing to promote consumer savings that's according to bloomberg see there you have it more evidence that savings matter so does this mean the federal reserve needs to end its work process and zero percent interest rates i'll talk about it finally with central bank policies of the fed and the e.c.b. with trash to cash programs are we seeing transfers create exponential wealth extraction turning into compound inequality and ultimately serfdom it's what we at capital account like to call the kleptocrats carry trade we'll break it all down let's get to today's capital account. so we have seen central bank and government policies responsible for wealth extraction literally siphoning off wealth with what we call the kleptocrats carry trade now in the us you have zero percent interest rates forecast for years