Skip to main content

Central Banks and Digital Currency

Image result for central banking

We have reached a critical moment in the life of the institution known as a "central bank."

A central bank, as many of you likely know, is paradigmatically a bank that is NOT part of the government that it serves, an institution that has both private and public characteristics, and an institution that serves as the grease for macro-economic gears in the machinery of governance.

Alexander Hamilton, an admirer of the London model, brought the institution to The United States. We now have a rather peculiar form of central bank, the Federal Reserve Board, created by the Wilson administration more than a century ago. Its peculiarities need not interest us today.

But as I said above, we have reached a critical juncture. The central banks of the developed world appear to be running out of their usual arrows. They'll have to come up with something non-traditional when the traditional quiver is empty.

What might that be? They might adopt distributed ledger technology -- that is, they might use bitcoin-style digital currency as a supplement of sorts to the open market operations (which work through the bank accounts of private sector sellers of T-bills)  that have long been the central bankers'métier.

The idea is not mine -- it is being bruited about among greybeards and consultancies. There is some   
irony in it, though. For many of the enthusiasts of bitcoin, its and its and its imitators are the cure to the disease of state controlled money and the authority of their poohbahs too decide upon its quantity. 
The idea, then, that a central bank's own digital currency could be used to provide countercyclical stimulus without some of the impediments that limit ordinary "quantitative easing," in part because it could be injected into the system by means easier that the usual bond-buying open market operations, must be galling.
I have no real point to make, except that the idea is out there, it might be acted upon, and if it is, some of you will have heard it here first.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak