Trump Selects Herman Cain for Federal Reserve Board, Sources Say

President Donald Trump intends to nominate Herman Cain, the former pizza company executive who ran for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, for a seat on the Federal Reserve Board, according to people familiar with the matter.

In Cain and Moore, Trump would place two political loyalists on the board of a central bank that has frequently crossed him. The president has repeatedly attacked Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell for raising interest rates, and Bloomberg News reported in December that Trump had even discussed firing him. One way the president can directly influence monetary policy is through nominations to the Fed board, though anyone he picks must be confirmed by the Senate.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-04/trump-is-said-to-select-herman-cain-for-federal-reserve-board

Because sure, why not? I look forward to a 9 percent interest rate, 9 percent inflation, and 9 percent unemployment rate.

Herman Cain is good. Don't see a problem here.

@n64dd: He's continually proven himself to be a moron and/or shill economically in many of the same ways Moore has. He stated monetary policy was too loose at 9 percent unemployment. He stated it was too tight at 4 percent unemployment. He's advocated for the ****ing gold standard, ffs.

Don't see anything wrong with that.

@n64dd: "Don't see anything wrong with that."

Do you approve of the idiocy or the shameless shilling?

No no no no no no!

I thought Trump was the Herman Cain of the 2016 campaign trail.

uhh, you do realize every fiat system with no backing has failed? Every single one? Including those that have a monetary backing and STILL participate in deficit spending? The reason why cost of living is increasing is because the Federal Reserve keeps printing money to artificially keep interest rates low, pushing inflation up too? The federal Reserve is a PRIVATE institution with shareholders? Profiting off the Americans and destroying the economy and their purchasing power?

Reminder: Real life.

Paulbot alert, Paulbot alert.

Remember when recessions/depressions used to last years and years? Oh yeah, we don't since we haven't had a prolonged economic downturn, due to our ability to fight them with competent monetary policy.

Do we really, seriously need to discuss why the gold standard is bad in the modern age? There's scores of literature on the subject, it would be silly to try to fit it into a thread.

It is an inescapable conclusion that Republicans A) believe the principles of Keynesian economics and monetary theory and B) intentionally harmed their countrymen via fiscal policy in a moment of crisis for political gain.

Just what we need, a fiscally illiterate goon going to the federal reserve, nominated by a guy who claims wind turbine noise causes cancer. I never thought a sentence like that would exist before today.

C)They work for those really in power, enriching them on the backs of the masses. The same policy that has been carried forward for last 40 years without stop, regardless of who controls congress, the senate or the presidency.

Meanwhile you guys cheer lead for your favourite side in a game that doesn't matter.

I'm terrified as Trump continues to replace experienced and skilled people with his own loyalists. I'd hope that smarter people would have been able to keep him in check, but he seems to fire anybody who doesn't profess undying loyalty to him. I just hope the elections come up before he ruins the economy and the foundation of the country.

He worked for Pizza Company though can he be trusted?

Good shit, demonstrated your low IQ real well

So every modern country's fiat system has failed? Uh, yeah, you're going to have to do some real rhetorical gymnastics to prove that one. Not to mention that countries that converted from the gold standard during the great depression recovered from it faster than those that didn't. If that's what failure looks like, then sign me up.

And the fed doesn't print money to keep interest rates low. It doesn't print money at all, the Treasury Department does. What it does is essentially buy loans from the banks so that they have cash on hand instead of low-interest investments, and thus are more willing to extend cheap credit. And if this is supposed to drive inflation then why haven't we had yearly inflation rates of 3% since 2011 and haven't gone over 4% since 1990? How come there are more modern economies dealing with deflation than inflation?

Which is why not only has the new Fed chairman's policy differed greatly from his predecessor, but his predecessor has criticized both his moves and Trump's statements about policy, right?

You're right that there is a game being played here and that there are people on both sides profiting from it, but you're massively wrong about what the game itself is. If you really want to know why these policies are being pushed, look at who benefits. Businesses are sitting on massive amounts of cash reserves made even more massive by the Trump tax cuts, but they haven't drastically expanded hiring or wages. They've gotten used to easy credit caused by low rates, and as soon as the fed starts ticking rates up they cut forecasts and send the stock market downward. Wall Street traders are making bank speculating on companies with easy access to credit, and therefore highly decreased risk of failure.

On the other side, people like Herman Cain are pushing the gold standard, but why? Well, for one it calcifies the current economic distribution. If we go back to the gold standard then money and thereby wealth is limited by the amount of gold in a given country, making economic mobility harder to achieve. If you believe that people who have money deserve it and people who don't don't, then a gold standard fits in perfectly with this worldview. Second, it would constitute a massive boon to people with investments in gold and gold mining. I wonder if Cain either has interests in gold or is connected with people who do? Hmmm. Thirdly, it would grant vastly more power to countries with large gold reserves and unmined gold. The country with the largest amount of unmined gold is Australia, and the top four countries in terms of gold reserves are the U.S., Italy, France and Germany. Hmmmm. If you want to know the power those gold reserves could play, just look at what happened recently in Venezuela. The government tried to call in its gold reserves that are being held by Britain when the international community refused aid, and Britain refused to comply. If national currencies were based on the gold standard, it would give tremendous power to Western countries to shape the policy decisions of other nations.

So, on one side, you have a bunch of people cynically keeping rates low in order to benefit their big businesses buddies, on the other side you have people pushing for a change of standard in order to increase their own wealth and power, and in the middle there are people interested in crafting nuanced policy that responds to everyone's needs, and you want to say everyone's the same? No, there are very big differences between the ways the two parties approach monetary policy.

Historically speaking refers to the past. Sure the modern fiat systems have not crashed, but its not a matter of if, but when will it crash. Unfortunately, history is against you and demonstrates fiat systems do not work. And every time these systems failed, guess what it converted to? Good ole silver and gold baby. As for the recovery, ofc they recovered faster. The government artificially propped up the economy through policies. They forcibly printed out more money, trying to stimulate the economy. You can't create artificial boom/bust cycles if you can print only whats backed by a standard.

Just look at the history dude. While America was on the gold standard, they were pretty stable in terms of CPI.
http://usfunds.com/investor-library/frank-talk/an-illustrated-timeline-of-the-gold-standard-in-the-us/

look at historical perspective of why nations ever left the standards. It was to finance war, which can only be done through deficit spending. I highly recommend people to watch the Hidden Secrets of Money documentary created by Mike Maloney, it might open your eyes to a few things.

This explains why the fiat system is corrupt
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFDe5kUUyT0

What history exactly? I see no mention in any of your links of any fiat currencies that collapsed. In fact, in the two minutes of searching I did, they seemed to have been a historical success (see: Kublai Khan's empire and early French colonies). In fact, even when it did collapse it was more due to other countries still utilizing resource-backed standards. Furthermore, there are plenty of examples of economies on the gold standard going bust, the great depression being just one of them.

What's wrong with propping up an economy through policies? The way I read that is less human suffering. And the government doesn't create boom and bust cycles, they are an inherent part of capitalism. In fact, the very reason the economy had to be propped up in the first place was because of an entirely natural bust.

I always find it funny when conspiracy theorists tell other people to open their eyes while ignoring the selfish interests of the people peddling the conspiracy they're spreading. Like I said before, look at who benefits from the gold standard: people who believe in wealth stratification, people who want to leverage large gold reserves in order to reshape world politics as they please. But somehow that's more fantastical than every modern economy across the globe colluding for decades in order to, what, make money worthless and cause a massive economic crash? Please.

What history are you referring to? I searched up both that you mentioned and found no evidence of it succeeding. And how does another nation using resource backed standards affect it? If the system was capable of surviving, why would it depend on another nation having the same system or not?

Here's some examples of failed fiat currencies.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-28/failure-fiat-currencies

Notice how gold standard systems fail BECAUSE it was left to pursue deficit spending, whereas fiat systems collapse on themselves.

Gold standard goes bust BECAUSE of deficit spending. They LEAVE the gold standard for whatever reason (majority times to finance war), which afterwards, results in inflation. The issue is not a backing, but rather deficit spending.

No, boom/bust cycles are not an inherent part of capitalism. Its an inherent part when Gov't does deficit spending, and heavy interest rates. That's what causes it. The bust was not natural at all. The bust was created because of the gov't doing heavy deficit spending to finance war, which lead to hyperinflation.

"Conspiracy theorists" lol.
Why do you think the rich continues to hoard gold even during the fiat system? If the fiat system is so great, don't you think the richest would find no reason in keeping gold? Use some logic.

https://www.businessinsider.com/why-billionaires-like-gold-2017-6

Oh my God, hyperinflation fears remain after 4 decades of them failing to materialize? After more than a decade of failing to even meet target inflation rates?

Hyperinflation is possible, yes. We are not in danger of triggering hyperinflation. So why would you warn of hyperinflation and herald a return to the gold standard to guard against it? No serious economist would. Economists overwhelmingly reject the idea of returning to the gold standard because it's such a bad idea, and the fact that Cain wanted to return to it (notice the past tense - he doesn't anymore - I wonder why?) is EXTREMELY telling.

Hey, want to discuss the gold standard as a viable option? Line up flat Earth theory afterwards. All ideas are equal!

There's no use in having a conversation when the premise they're presenting is patently false via historical data. There's a reason why no economist (left or right) is actually advocating for it.

Once they source zerohedge, the game is over.

@HoolaHoopMan:

>Claims its false via historical data
>Provides no historical data

Damn, two low IQ posts in a row. Try to go for three, should not be that difficult for you.

@HoolaHoopMan: Never mind, You just edited your post to make 3 low IQ comments

>Does not consider zerohedge a source because its right wing

>Uses Vox as a main source of information

Can't make this shit up. Disprove what zerohedge states in the article. You can't

You got me, low IQ. I can barely type while I drool over my keyboard.

https://www.businessinsider.com/chart-inflation-since-1775-2013-1

LOLOL. Gold standard only ever saw increase of CPI during war times (because of deficit spending), whereas your beloved fiat currency has been on the rise since it initially entered.

You must be mad bro

Oh shit! I forgot! My source is right wing!!! Just disregard it o wise intellectual one XD

I'm sorry, you'll first have to explain why CPI indexes are the ONE measure of economic performance, oh and ONLY during war times. Then give us a comparison to fiat currencies in comparison. But then again we're still waiting for hyper inflation in the US. What has it been, how many decades and still nothing?

Less than three percent inflation in the past eight years despite rising deficits,

Conservatives: "OH MY GOD, think of the hyperinflation!!!!!!!!!"

[Looks at watch]

Nevermind, there's a Republican in office right now. We have to lower rates!

Everyone's a Keynesian when they have an incentive for the economy to succeed.

Who stands to gain?

I feel like the answer to this is so obvious that I'm misunderstanding your question. Are you asking how Moore and Cain stand to gain from a growing economy under a Republican president?

Oh, I was trying to stealth-quote Lenin. Rhetorical question.

@theone86: Haha, I thought I was missing something critical. No worries, my fault, not yours.

So Matt can you please point out how someone who was a massive success running 400 Burger King restaurants, made Godfather Pizza a success and lastly sat on the Federal Reserve bank in Kansas City where he was from 89 to 94 moving up in the ranks and because of his political ambitions quit in 96

You may disagree with some of his politics but you cannot deny that the guy has clear abilities and has experience in this field.

Do you guys really think Herman Cain matters?

Do you really think private bankers are going to go against their own interests just because he is on the board?

Best case scenario he works as a distraction(which seems to be working judging from this thread), worst case he is a scapegoat if something goes wrong.

Successfully selling burgers and pizzas doesn't grant you knowledge in the field of economics, nor does a role as a Class C director of a regional federal reserve board.

Class C directors are prominent members of the public who do not come from economic backgrounds and are highly insulated from relationships with banking entities. They're specifically intended to be outsiders, and are essentially figureheads insomuch that their decision making capacity in the organization is minimal.

@mattbbpl: Regarding your own inflation chart, I think you shot yourself in the foot.

Although you may be right that it was not stable, the general trend is the gold standard offsets any inflation with deflation, which is a good thing yenno, because you don't want CPI to be indefinitely inflating or deflating? Good Job Fiat Currency! your very stable by causing inflation at only 3% per year! Because making sure its stable is more important than it constantly inflating.... I hope you sense the sarcasm.

Look at how many wars America has participated in from its formation to now, a large amount of them were fought in the 18th and 19th centuries. Deficit spending was done to finance it. Its simple to see why inflation occurred. At least it was offset with deflation so prices would eventually drop too. Your point of a stable INCREASE OF 3%PER YEAR is quite stupid to be blunt.

Ironically, I've also seen you comment on other threads complaining about the debt America continues to accrue, yet you support a system that:

1. Has no backing

2. Because it has no backing, deficit spending is done at immeasurable rates

3. As more money is printed, this results in DECREASE of purchasing power

4. Has to deficit spend EVEN MORE to keep inflation rate stable

5. Has to keep interest rates low to incentivize the economy

6. Which in return... adds EVEN MORE debt because of... you guessed it, DEFICIT SPENDING!!!!

But hey, at least you get your stable 3% inflation rate right? You sure got me there pal XD

Ps. Stop listening to economic "experts" like AOC who have NO EXPERIENCE in the business world, but claim they understand the economy because of a 4 year degree based solely on theories. Not the best of decisions but you do you

Can't tell if trolling or ignorant. How can you say a businessman who created a business that contribute MILLIONS, if not BILLIONS to an economy does not have any knowledge in economics???? Last time I checked, a BUSINESS is a core component to an economy.... Wow

Do you get all your news information from the tv and your facebook feed? I'm genuinely curious. I was spewing this nonsense too when all my political information was coming from just those two sources....

You make it out like Cain was a Burger King employee who was flipping burgers and frying Fries. He was the boss of Burger King and later managed to turn Godfather pizza around and even buy it, so not sure where you get the idea that he is not knowledgeable in economics? last I checked running a business the size of Burger King or Godfather Pizza requires a bit of knowledge in economics.

But I do get what you mean, that he is not a well-versed in the theory of economics you live by, which is true he has actual practical experience in running a business and does not hide behind theories and dusty old books.

As to his Federal Reserve bank job, not sure why you class him as a C-member, he was at the end the head of the board so, clearly he was able to prove his abilities.

But don´t worry i think we can all see that this comes more from TDS than anything else.

If making money for a business is the criteria you're looking for, line up the Kardashians then.

Management and economists are two distinct fields.

You are arguing two different things here.

Does running a business involve economics? just answer yes and no. (any other answer than yes is of course wrong) , Does running a business mean that you sit behind a desk and study economic theories and operate in "hypotheticals", of course not and that is why companies have real people who know this difference run businesses and let people who operate in theoretical economics sit behind desks and operate in obscurity

Making money is what makes the world go around.

If the government was run more like a business and less like a far-left hippie commune, we might not have a massive national debt.

Fine, I'd rather have Kylie Jenner on the board then. She's made more money, therefore she would be a better fit.

Well, if she made that money because she had a sound businesses sense, then, by all means, get your next democratic president to appoint her.

But the facts are not with you on that, taking advantage of your already established fame and having business managers and people like Cain behind you, does not make Jenner able to hold any position.