The administration of President Donald Trump has made many of us eager to cheer on virtually any check or balance as it appears, even as we were briefly cheering on the old neoconservatives of and around the Cheney family (yes, the old torture caucus), insofar as it limited Trump's reach. It served a human and humane purpose.
Anyway, the issue of the independence of the Federal Reserve, America's central bank (the third central bank in the history of our country) has come to the fore of late.
The political hack's instinct is often to advance the cause of inflation, in part because it assists net debtors in relieving them of some of the net value of their indebtedness, and that can have stimulative effects in the marketplace and at the ballot box. Also, if the nation-state itself is a debtor, as the United States certainly is on a world history record-breaking scale, then reducing the value of the currency on which its bonds were issued is a way of getting the benefit of a partial default without actually defaulting.
But somebody has to be in a position to, and has to be willing to, resist this impulse. That is the lesson of Weimar -- the lesson of Zimbabwe -- the lesson of other times and places where the hack impulse went unresisted.
The US Supreme Court just heard arguments on whether Trump can summarily fire a Fed member, Lisa Cook. My understanding is that the arguments did not go well for the administration. We can only hope that the court follows through on what appears to be its inclination.
From a more philosophical Big Picture point of view, one has to ask: what about gold? The amount of gold on and inside the planet is fixed. Nobody is ever going to be able to increase it. We're not expecting any gold laden comets. A nation with a gold standard doesn't have these temptations, and doesn't have to deal with the nuisances of a central bank either.
Still: this is the world timeline we're in. We haven't had a gold standard of any sort since the early 1970s, and that one was limited in contrast to the pre-New-Deal version. We do have a central bank and at the moment it is worth rallying around Powell. Under attack himself (for the same reasons as Lisa Cook although with different pretexts) he has raised a standard to which the honest may repair.
And to the best of my knowledge he has never advocated "enhanced interrogation" of prisoners of war.
Apparently, the six Republican politicians who pose as justices of the U.S. Supreme Court will uphold the independence of the Federal Reserve Board but will destroy the independence of the other independent agencies, so as to allow the toddler to appoint people to head them who oppose their missions. Do the six Republican politicians distinguish between the Fed and the other agencies because they are concerned about the economy but, being Republicans, are not concerned about the environment, consumer protection, Social Security, securities fraud, and so forth?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete