Occupy Democrats has the article Watch: Bernie Sanders Epically Shreds the ‘Immoral’ Republican Budget.

In this video from today’s Senate hearing, a passionate Bernie Sanders unloads both barrels on the immoral Republican budget, listing the many ways that it does “exactly the opposite” of what the American people think needs to be done to rebuild the American middle class.

Here is the video.

Thanks for Bernie Sanders’ saying this, because it leaves me speechless.

Not that this will settle any arguments, but it is “interesting” to see who the Federal Reserve Bank thinks of Who owns the Federal Reserve?

The Federal Reserve System fulfills its public mission as an independent entity within government.  It is not “owned” by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution.

As the nation’s central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the Congress of the United States. It is considered an independent central bank because its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by the Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.

However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by the Congress, which often reviews the Federal Reserve’s activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as “independent within the government” rather than “independent of government.”

I wonder if Rand and Ron Paul know of this?  If they do know, do they care?  Even if they know and care, they will still argue about what this means.  I only use the Pauls as representative of the people who argue this.

Someone is bound to say that the private member banks own shares of the Federal Reserve Bank, and thus they own it. So here is the last paragraph from the Federal Reserve’s document.

The 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by the Congress as the operating arms of the nation’s central banking system, are organized similarly to private corporations–possibly leading to some confusion about “ownership.” For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.

I can imagine all the “Yes, but …”s gurgling through the readers’ minds. My take on the meaning of this second excerpt is that the “shares of stock” are more like tickets the banks have to buy if they want entry into the system. It gives the banks who buy them certain privileges and benefits, but it doesn’t give them ownership. When you buy tickets to Ringling Brothers’ Circus, do you think you own the circus?

There are other links in the document, but the above two excerpts are all the explanatory text in it at the time of writing this post.

See my subsequent post Bernanke: “The Fed will do whatever Congress tells us to do.”

I received an email from Elizabeth Warren, pretty much in rebuttal of what the President said, see my previous blog Obama Says Elizabeth Warren Is ‘Wrong’ on Trade.

For all the corporations and their lawyers who have written sections of the TPP that we are not allowed to see, I wonder if the President would like to tell us how many labor activists, environmentalists, and other counterbalancing groups have been allowed to write sections of the TPP. If someone asks me to sign a blank check, I always say “No” in the most emphatic terms I can. If you want me to sign something, you’d better show me what I am signing, give me a chance to read it, and let me consult with my lawyers.

The response “but you can trust me” just makes me more suspicious. Why would the President trade his credibility for this “trade” deal?

Time Magazine has the article Obama Says Elizabeth Warren Is ‘Wrong’ on Trade. This article is about an MSNBC show that had a panel discussion about the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership) that included President Obama.

“Chris, think about it,” Obama responded. “I’ve spent the last 6½ years yanking this economy out of the worst recession since the Great Depression. Every single thing I’ve done from the Affordable Care Act to pushing to raise the minimum wage to making sure that young people are able to go to college and get good job training to what we’re pushing now in terms of sick pay leave … Everything I do has been focused on how do we make sure the middle class is getting a fair deal. Now I would not be doing this trade deal if I did not think it was good for the middle class.”

“And when you hear folks make a lot of suggestions about how bad this trade deal is,” the President continued, “when you dig into the facts, they are wrong.”

Chris Matthews kept asking the President why his fellow Democrats are saying these bad things about TPP.  Every time the President indicated that he didn’t know why, I kept wondering why he doesn’t talk to these people and ask them why.  From the commentary by Chris Matthews, he seems to have had shows that have only critics of TPP, and this show is only supporters of TPP.  If the two sides cannot understand what the other side is talking about, wouldn’t it be better to have a show where people from both sides talk to each other?

Knowing what a bill of goods Onama’s advisers were able to sell him on going easy on criminal Wall Street executives, it wouldn’t surprise me that he is falling for another set of equally bad advice.  MSNBC would do the whole world a great service by getting both sides to talk to each other in front of the viewing audience.  I don’t need a debate.  I want to see an arbitration.

Watch the MSNBC panel discussion with Obama here. Part 1 and Part 2.