Hi everybody, this is Peter Schiff. It is Wednesday June 17th, 2015. You know, today was the day when many people thought the Fed would finally raise interest rates from zero where they remain for what?

Almost seven years. You know, they've been referring to the process as a lift off, right?

Kind of like a space ship, you know, a rocket lifting off from the launch pad. But I don't think that's the proper metaphor because lift off when you come to a spaceship would imply that once rates go up, they're going way up, right?

Like they go to the moon or something. But Janet yelling herself and I'll talk about that a little later in this video blog, but she went out of her way to remind people that even if the Fed were to raise rates by a quarter of a point, don't expect them to raise them again.

Anytime soon, order raise them by very much. So it hardly reminds me of some kind of a lift off unless you're going to harken back to the early days of the space program when the rockets were blowing up pretty much, you know, just after they cleared the launch pad.

They mean they would start to take off and then they would explode right away or they would turn upside down. Maybe that's the kind of lift off that we're going to have because the minute the Fed tries to raise rates, the entire commie is going to explode just like those old mercury program rockets that were early launched in the NASA space race.

But let me go back to what did happen today following the Fed's announcement that they would not raise interest rates. So now the June rate hike is off the table. And of course, everybody is still focusing their attention on September when I think the Fed will once again disappoint and fail to raise interest rates.

But more important, I think, than their official statement, which of course they painstakingly review every word. I think you can glean more from the question and answers, which are a little bit more off the cuff than the prepared remarks.

But I believe again that prepared remarks are just a smoke screen. What the Fed is trying to accomplish there is to pretend that its monetary policy has worked and that we have a legitimate recovery so that they can actually raise rates when in fact they can't do that because they don't have a real recovery.

They've inflated a gigantic bubble and if they raise rates, they'll prick that bubble. But of course, Janet, young can't let that cat out of the bag. So they have to maintain the pretence that everything is fine. And if everything were fine, then of course the Fed would be raising rates, which they have not done. But they keep talking about doing it to try to reassure the markets that their failed policy has in fact succeeded.

But I think the Q&A, as I said, is a little bit more revealing. First of all, I forget which reporter asked this question. It was the first one. It was a female reporter. And she asked Janet, young, about the fact that there are a lot of people, including the IMF, for example, or the World Monetary Fund, and some economists, including some on the Fed, who think the Fed should raise interest rates in 2016.

And not 2015, as everybody believes, Janet, young is planning to do. So the reporter asked Janet, young, why are those people wrong? Why are the people who think the Fed should wait until 2016? Why are they wrong?

And instead of telling the reporter why they're wrong, she basically ducked the question. And in fact, what she did is she pointed to the dot plots, which is the FOMC members estimates of where they believe interest rates will be at some point in time in the future. And where those dots currently sit. And by the way, those dots are coming down. They're lower in this meeting than they were at the last meeting. So why anybody would think they're closer to a rate height based on these dots?

I don't know how they get that. But what Janet, young, was saying is that the idea that the Fed is going to raise rates later this year is based on these dots, which she reminded the reporter, are mere projections.

She said that this reflects the forecasts of the FOMC members. And so they only believe that rates are going to go up later this year based on their rosy economic forecasts that they have for the US economy.

And Janet, young, admitted that if these forecasts are wrong, if the economy is not as strong as the forecasters believe, well then no rate hikes are coming.

Now of course, what does that tell you? Because the FOMC board members are always too optimistic. They always believe the US economy is going to be stronger than it turns out to be.

So if this is another example of history repeated self again, right? If they're wrong again and they've overestimated the strength of the US economy, what does that mean about the dots? Well, just erasement. They don't mean anything.

Because it's all based on a belief that is not going to be validated by reality. So I looked at that as another tacit admission that rates aren't going up.

Because again, she's hiding behind the data and she even said as much in the Q&A. She said that if the economy is not as strong as we think, well then the rate hikes will have to come later and they will have to be even less than we planned.

So you know she's went out of her way to say that even if they do raise rates, they're barely going to go up. But I thought an even more revealing comment was an answer she gave to a question from Steve Leesman who I joke about quite a bit.

He's the senior economist over at CNBC. And he asked a question, but he really didn't appreciate the answer very much. I mean he didn't pick up on this. He should have.

...