The Federal Reserve signaled Wednesday that a full economic recovery could take “nearly three more years,” and it went further than ever to assure consumers and businesses that they will be able to borrow cheaply well into the future. The central bank said it would probably not increase its benchmark interest rate until late 2014 at the earliest – a year and a half later than it had previously said. Some economists said the new late-2014 target might foreshadow further Fed action to try to “invigorate the economy.” Julie Coronado, an economist at BNP Paribas, said she thought the Fed was indicating that it will step up its purchases of bonds and other assets if economic growth fails to accelerate — even if it doesn’t slow. That is a “very low bar indeed,” she wrote in a note to clients. Other analysts fear that the Fed’s longer-term timetable for a rate increase could hamstring it, even though Bernanke stressed the Fed’s ability to adjust rates “as it sees fit.” Dana Saporta, an economist at Credit Suisse, worried that the much-longer timetable would compromise the Fed’s credibility if it must raise rates sooner because of unexpectedly strong growth and inflation. “It’s striking that the Fed would make an implicit commitment for almost three years,” Saporta said. “It seems like an awfully long time to make such a statement. Given that no one knows what will happen … the (Fed) may eventually regret this.” The new timetable showed the Fed is concerned, if not surprised, that the recovery remains “stubbornly slow.” However, the Fed also thinks inflation will stay tame enough for rates to remain at record lows without igniting price increases. Chairman Ben Bernanke cautioned that late 2014 is merely its “best guess.” The Fed can shift that plan if the economic picture changes. But he cast doubt on whether that would be necessary. “Unless there is a substantial strengthening of the economy in the near term, it’s a pretty good guess we will be keeping rates low for some time,” he said. The bank’s tepid outlook suggests it’s prepared to do more to “help” the economy. One possibility is a third bond-buying program that will supposedly drive down rates on mortgages and other loans in an effort to convince consumers and businesses to borrow and spend more. In a statement after a two-day policy meeting, the Fed said it stands ready to adjust its “holdings as appropriate to promote a stronger economic recovery in the context of price stability.” It was the first time the Fed had released interest-rate forecasts from its committee members. It will now do so four times a year, when it also updates its economic outlook. The central bank slightly reduced its outlook for growth this year, from as much as 2.9 percent forecast in November down to 2.7 percent. For the first time, the Fed provided an official target for inflation – 2 percent – in a statement of its long-term policy goals. The bank sees unemployment falling as low as 8.2 percent this year, better than its earlier forecast of 8.5 percent. December’s unemployment rate was 8.5 percent. However, that number is very much debatable. As noted earlier on The Blaze (via Zero Hedge ): One does not need to be a rocket scientist to grasp the fudging the BLS has been doing every month for years now in order to bring the unemployment rate lower: the BLS constantly lowers the labor force participation rate as more and more people “drop out” of the labor force for one reason or another. While there is some floating speculation that this is due to early retirement, this is completely counterfactual when one also considers the overall rise in the general civilian non institutional population. …we are redoing an analysis we did first back in August 2010, which shows what the real unemployment rate would be using a realistic labor force participation rate… It won’t surprise anyone that as of December, the real implied unemployment rate was 11.4% – basically where it has been ever since 2009… Bernanke noted that the Fed expects only moderate growth over the next year. He pointed to the persistently depressed housing market and continued tight credit for many consumers and companies. The Fed described inflation as “subdued,” a more encouraging assessment than last month. “This is a fairly clear-cut signal that inflation is not on their radar at this point,” Tom Porcelli, an economist at RBC Capital Markets, wrote in a research note. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Read the original post:
Does This Latest Decision by the Fed Foreshadow Future Plans for the Economy?
Mitt Romney won the Iowa caucuses by a razor-thin margin . . . or did he ? A southern Iowa supporter of Texas Rep. Ron Paul has filed a notarized statement claiming former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum is the real winner. Edward L. True has informed the Republican Party of Iowa there was a 20-vote error in the caucus results from Appanoose County. Keep reading this post . . .
Continue reading here:
Final Official Results in Iowa . . . Arrive in Two Weeks!
Daniel Flynn describes intellectuals who had their finger on the pulse of the real blue-collar America.
Comedian Jon Stewart embarked on a USO tour in Afghanistan over the summer. In an interview with “Newsweek,” he said there was nothing “not humbling” about it. Stewart also joked that the men and women risking their lives overseas needlessly thanked him as if he were “the real hero”: “It’s an incredible experience,” he says. “From the first one that I ever did until now, always the thing that strikes you the most is they’re thankful you’re there. It’s the most shocking part.” He shakes his head. “They’ll say to you, ‘Thank you so much.’ The guy who’s been clearing mines in Helmand province and has just lost a leg. ‘Hey, thank you so much.’ And you’re like, Really? You want to say, ‘You know, you’re right, I am the real hero here. Coming down to see you. You know that traffic on I-95? That Delaware Corridor? That is never not backed up.’” Read the full story here .

View post:
Jon Stewart chats about USO tour
As Jon noted last night, a man trolling around the “Occupy Wall Street” protests calling himself the “Lotion Man” (yuck) is making quite a name for himself on YouTube. His obscene diatribes and deviant behavior have caught the attention of camera-wielding New Yorkers, including NRO’s Charles Cooke who caught him berating an older Jewish man who challenged the protesters. Gawker’s Adrian Chen now worries that the crazy “Lotion Man” will become a figurehead of sorts for the anti-capitalist protest marches and that conservatives will use his image to show what a bunch of nut-job loons the protesters are: Chen sarcastically writes: Did you know that the real reason Occupy Wall Street protesters hate banks is that they’re anti-Semitic loons? Yep, just look at this video of a completely representative Wall Street protester that the National Review discovered down in Manhattan’s Zuccotti Park. … His name is Danny Cline and he is either insane or a horrible conceptual comedian—maybe an insane, horrible conceptual comedian? Hard to tell… But never mind that! Lotion Man is the real face of Occupy Wall Street! If the protesters have their way, they will pass new laws that require all your daughters to marry Lotion Man. Having completely ignored this articulate protester, Fox News will soon put up Lotion Man as Occupy Wall Street’s representative in a debate with Charles Krauthammer. That would actually be awesome. Don’t you just hate it when your political opponents pick one or two bad apples out of the bunch and use them to paint an entire movement in a negative light? That must be super annoying…

Read this article:
Anti-Semitic ‘Lotion Man’ owns the Wall Street protests
After lots of leftist hand-wringing and excuse making from the liberal U.K. media, The Daily Mail’s Max Hasting decides to provide the real rationale behind the riots Years of liberal dogma have spawned a generation of amoral, uneducated, welfare dependent, brutalised youngsters A few weeks after the U.S. city of Detroit was ravaged by 1967 race riots
Originally posted here:
What’s The Real Reason Behind The U.K. Riots?
From Naomi Schaefer Riley, at Wall Street Journal , ” As more students question rising college costs, professors defend useless research and their lack of teaching .” Read it at the link. The key is academe’s divorce from the real world, and I’d pile on about how this is killing the education of waves of students.
View original post here:
Academia’s Crisis of Irrelevance
And all this time, I thought I was using the word “alarmist” in the correct context, ie, people who practice chicken littleism on the climate, like Kelly Rigg: Will the Real Global Warming Alarmists Please Stand Up? I wish I had a dollar for every time someone called Al Gore an alarmist. I wish I had a
Read this article:
HuffPo: You Climate Realists Are The Real “Alarmists”