The purpose of QE was never always to boost asset prices. They did this by increasing the money supply (by buying government bonds). Oh and it worked. It greatly benefited the wealthy at the expense of the poor and middle class (as savings rates have been decimated, which is now taking a huge toll on pensions, which have to invest heavily in government bonds, but the pensions' target return rate is often 8%, but bonds now only pay 2-3%, so those pensions are now in a serious shortfall position, which means either that payouts get cuts and contributions from the poor and middle class have to go up, which means that their pay is effectively cut, but who cares about all of that right?).

As for spurring lending, see the chart below. I'll summarize it for you. Household lending? WAY DOWN. Financial sector lending? WAY DOWN. Corporate lending? Down. Lending to the U.S. government made possible by QE? WAY, WAY, WAY, WAY, WAY UP. So in that regard we're in total agreement. QE was designed to boost lending to the U.S. government and succeeded marvelously. As to how any of this relates to benefiting the poor over the rich (unless you're going to tap the trickle down theory that liberals hate so much), which was the entire premise of Yellen's idiotic comments, you've yet to produce a shred of evidence supporting that notion. The fact is that employment as a % of the population has not only never recovered but continues to go down to depths not seen in 40 years. The ENTIRE drop in the "unemployment rate" is due to people dropping out of the workforce, many of whom unvoluntarily. In other words, those people just don't count anymore. Weekly hours are down, as are wages. So in no sense whatsoever has Fed policy benefited the poor over the rich. In every sense of the word it's benefited the rich over the poor. The only way not to see this is to choose not to see this. Otherwise, lay out a case. If you can prove it, the Nobel Prize awaits!