that has a dual mandate charged with protecting the dollar and maintaining full employment so paul volcker would say it is the same thing hillary to maximize fulham pro -- employment is through deflationary but there are periods when there is room to do things to promote employment that could be inflationary but then it comes into conflict with one another so my daughter starts colleges they work hard have fun most of the time they're the same but they are not and then does it operate more effectively with the explicit rules or the discretion to act as necessary this is technical and very political debate as current lead the congress tries to bring in the fed to explain its decisions on monetary policy some of the bills would say they must declare a set of rules and if they deviate have to report to congress on why some of my to take even more control away them that i will stop here that money is important and it is also very political legacy that in the presidential race. i will be happy to answer questions. [applause] >> that was fast. >> what about the impact of the fed creation of seve

the same relationship with some of the republican appointees that preceded secretary ruben, and paul volckerthe federal reserve with some republicans and not so much some democrats because paul volcker's policies put the economy into a recession which was damaging for some democrats. it is not a partisan relationship. some federal reserve chairs going on the hill, making clear to the american republic, been bernie c -- been burning key by the fed, and does what it does, and their own style and ability, and it depends on whether or not they think monetary policy is the appropriate way to handle the crisis. and policy in american government, the federal government wanting to control the economy through tax and spend policies. and moderating the economy. and there had been a sense in the george w. bush administration, the business cycle he had gotten so good at that the federal reserve, to handle things worth having a major collapse again. interest rates were low. some people argue the federal reserve kept interest rates too low too long but people went into housing markets for a variety of rea

you don't necessarily have come here to relationships with paul volcker at the federal reserve was somelicans and not so much with some democrats and vice versa. because paul volcker's policies really put the economy into a recession which was damaging for some democrats. it isn't necessarily a partisan relationship. i think what people appointed to since ben bernanke was at the head of the fed is that some of the researchers are very critically upon the hill and talking to people and making clear to the american public, i know that's been ben bernanke's income could open up and demystified event and let him understand why it does what it does and opened it up but they've all had their own style and all of the beleaguered some people are better at working with others and it depends on whether or not they think monetary policy is the appropriate way to handle whatever the crisis is with a sector of the treasure might think fiscal policy is or is not. you have a shift in policy in the american government between the federal government wanting to control the economy through tax and spendin

charles: we had ronald reagan, and he had a great partner in paul volcker.the pain for about a year, and then we were on that gold been road of process -- golden road of prosperity for all. dan, thank you very much. appreciate it. >> you're welcome, charles. charles: trump is pounding his post-convention boost. it's been a nice one. >> i'm doing very, very well. record-setting numbers, folks. and here's the good news. whatever we're doing, we're doing something right, because we had, i believe, the largest bump in the history of conventions. charles: lappny davis on if this -- lanny davis on if this post-convention bump is worrying democrats. lanny, i think even democrats and experts certainly are surprised by the degree of donald trump's post-convention rebound. >> actually, i don't know a single person who's surprised, and, again, donald trump misrepresents the facts. shocking. in 2000 george bush was down eight going into his convention. he was up eight after. that's +16. in 2008 john mccain was down six to barack obama, after the convention he was up fiv

anything that was truly dedicated to banking, peer banking, as paul volcker would have liked to say, the guy who named the volcker rule. a lot of these institutions got a lot of time. a lot of people think it's one of the reasons why there's been less liquidity in the bond market. >> an extension on the test. >> right. >> you don't have to have that paper in until next week. >> not too much reaction on the financials. but let's take a check on the broader markets. the dow and s&p 500 both close to the lows of the session here, the nasdaq is hovering in positive territory. coming up, a man who says he can predict earnings season, or at least he's got a read into earnings season. he'll tell us what he sees this time around. stay tuned. >>> and now the latest from tradingnation.cnbc.com and a word from our sponsor -- >> when it comes to investing, there are really two popular methodologies, fundamental analysis which focuses on things like earnings, re-s and cash flow, and technical analysis, which focus on chart patterns, price movement and momentum. most employ some method of both meth

see a steady as you go, with i want to see some price rules, some monetary policy rules, like paul volckeras suggested, some currency dollar stability like volcker and john taylor and many other sensible people have said. right now the fed is rudderless. they're operating a ph.d standard with econometric models the that do not work. and i think that's got to change and i think individual men and women from business would have a better chance on it. >> why would you bring businessmen on and business women on and other people from the business community if you want it run by a rule? >> well, look -- >> they would just set it by the rule. what do we need them for? >> if you need rules -- you said don't regulate interest rates. how do you deregulate interest rates and still have rules in place then? i don't -- >> are you kidding? listen. that doesn't mean the fed can't ever intervene, but it does mean the public would know with greater clarity what they're aiming for. that's one of the biggest problems. look at steve liesman, he is a great reporter. my hat is off to him all these years. but he