So you're saying that governmental leaders have no effect on the priorities of the organizations they head, given their "official" stated mandates? C'mon, that's laughable.For now Ill pretend that creating equity is unrelated to full employment, and that mitigating climate change is unrelated to price stability.
Ill do that just long enough to point out that the quoted phrases are not part of the Feds dual mandate. And to point out that the Fed cannot change its mandate -- no matter what Elizabeth Warren or Rupert Murdochs WSJ say or want -- only Congress can do that.
Finally, if the concepts by some amazing and criminal chance work their way into Fed speeches its because the pretense of the first paragraph is probably plain wrong -- or at very least the Fed members disagree with that pretense.
maw
Study what's been happening at the ATF over the past two years with regard to bureaucrats inventing new "interpretations" of existing gun laws (for example, last year "ghost guns" and a few weeks ago, "pistol braces"). And they are in the process of getting slapped down for their bureaucratic over-reach.
Congress makes the rules on guns; the Supreme Court clarifies them; and the ATF / executive branch is supposed to enforce them -- not re-interpret laws that Congress has made to their own ends.
What about the recent push by the current administration to inject ESG into 401(k) investments? Is that stated in the current official laws?
Just about everything in government over the past two years has been viewed + skewed by the lenses of DEI, ESG, "equity" and other buzzwords.




Folks are in business to serve their customers and make profit for their shareholders.

