A recent talking point re-emerges in another light....

[Technopaegnion Tapinosis]

Ben, some assume, is trying to placate Paul & Company with press
conferences and such. He has certainly changed the Fed, but why he has
implemented these new policies, which seem political, is open to debate. I
suspect that some of the changes are owed to his style and to his theories
about markets and economics and to his desire to distinguish himself from
his more secretive predecessors, some may be owed to political pressures,
both within the Fed itself and from the US government and from other
governments, some from the extraordinary mess we are in, some from the
technological innovations that are changing the way major institutions
engage the people they serve, the interests they represent, some to the
need, the very pressing need, of financial literacy, and this is not
only in the public here but in the world and even in those who can have a
profound influence markets. It is a risk to open the Fed as he has. He can,
with only a botched or misconstrued statement, send nervous and fragile
markets and economies spinning. So far, I like his plan and his style. I
believe that he has a real and genuine concern for the ordinary man and
woman on the job in this country and that is  much in demand these days. On
this, I suspect he sees eye to eye with his nemesis, Paul.

On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 5:52 PM, <malignd at aol.com> wrote:

> I agree with everything you say -- it is all transparently true -- except
> about the independence of the Fed.  It is not an issue often, but it is
> important.  It does not often come up as an issue *because* the Fed is
> independent.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20120127/1914dd51/attachment.html>