Answer: because we are not in charge.
My old friend Jeff Tucker has written a dynamite article on ending the Federal Reserve. It’s in a newsletter called Whiskey and Gunpowder, which publishes dynamite articles.
He is happy that a public debate over the FED is in progress. But he wonders why there is any debate at all. The idea of central banking makes no sense.
I ask: Since when did anything the U.S. government does make much sense?
He is corrdct. The U.S government has not created a cartel that plans shoe production. The free market handles that.
How about keyboards? Books? Clothes? Nope.
Why should money and banking be any different? Money is a commodity. Banking is a business. They both originated in the market, not the state. They should have been left that way, so that the quality of the product could be subject to market discipline. In a market economy, things work themselves out. There is supply and there is demand. Entrepreneurs take notice of profit opportunities and jump in to pull the two together.
All true. But governments want money. They want low interest rates. They use central banks to provide cheap loans to the government.
Why do people still believce in the FED in the age of the Internet?
My answer: because old dogs do not learn new tricks, and neither do old economists, old politicians, and aging former hotties on CNBC.
During the Dark Age, only geniuses like Ludwig von Mises and F.A. Hayek knew that the Fed was a hoax. Most everyone else imagined that the people at the Fed were doing magical, wonderful things inside hallowed walls so that the economy would be stable and grow. Its board of governors was populated by people who knew the economic future and held the power to steer it in a way that benefited everyone.
Thanks to the digital age, we now have access to what really goes on. In the last 12 months alone, we’ve been inundated by reports of what actually goes on at the Fed. In 2006, according to released transcripts of its board meetings, its wise men were busy reassuring themselves that absolutely nothing was fundamentally wrong with real estate and that all other economic structures were humming along beautifully.
But hardly anyone understands any of this. It was designed this way.
The FED minutes reveal secrecy. They reveal deception.
No one cares. Lies are universal. Why single out the FED?
What can the FED do, other that manipulate digital money and misinform the public? Not much, Tucker says.
The economy is not responding as the FED’s old playbook said.
The FED inflates. Banks don’t lend. The economy lags. But prices don’t shoot up, either.
Tucker gets close to the #1 fact of the FED: it is an enforcer of a cartel that favors only very large banks.
The sheer power of the Fed was in full display in 2008, and all the public records indicate what it was used for. The Fed provided liquidity for its friends. They said that they did it all for the nation, but it is unclear that the nation got anything at all from the deal. What is clear is that its friends survived and thrived, whereas many institutions should have gone belly up, as the capitalist system would dictate. That’s the essence of its power and the core of what the Fed does.
The FED is under fire on the Web. Problem: the Web does not reflect the masses who vote.
The dollar has depreciated. But who blames the FED.? Hardly anyone. Hardly any college professor of economics.
We would have commodity money if we had a free market, he says. Quite true. But we don’t have a free market in money and banking.
What is the worst cost of the Fed? It has made the federal government, no matter how big it gets, beyond failure. This is the ultimate moral hazard. It has puffed up the leviathan state beyond anything that should ever exist in the world. It’s not taxes that have done this. It is the Fed. In this way, it has made itself the ultimate enemy of freedom itself. And as goes freedom, so goes human rights.
Correct! That has been its #2 job ever since 1914. The #1 job is to save the largest banks.
For the full article, click the link.