The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

23Dec13 Marks 100 Years Of The Fed

Posted on | February 23, 2010 | 11 Comments

by Smitty

100 years. 14-ish trillion in debt. The vampire should have been staked long ago, but the 100 year anniversary of its unnatural, undemocratic birth is a worthy target for building the pressure to kill it.

The Mint blog has an overview:

In a relatively short period of time, the Federal Reserve has morphed from a supposedly independent entity to one which actively takes sides in shaping economic outcomes of particular firms and industries. It has become, more than ever before, a political institution. Below, we’ll examine how the 2,100 employee Federal Reserve has changed since Bernanke took office, what’s ahead, and what it means for the American people.

They conclude:

Ironically, it is feasible that the continued expansion of Federal Reserve power could actually create new risks, aside from the risks that prompted the expansion in the first place. This being the case, Project Syndicate continues, President Obama, “…should not draw the conclusion that arguments about the Fed’s accountability have gone away with Bernanke’s confirmation.” Congressman Ron Paul, for instance, has repeatedly agitated for a full audit of the Fed’s activities – opposed by Bernanke on the grounds that it would be, “…highly destructive to the stability of the financial system, the dollar and our national economic situation.” Regardless, as the Federal Reserve grows in size and scope, the eyes of citizens and lawmakers will remain increasingly fixed on its activities.

2,100 unelected people effectively taxing us through currency debasement and doing who knows what else behind the shrouds of their financial priesthood is intolerable. Whatever scant pre-Information Age argument may have existed for the creation of the Fed (arguments were likely tripe then, too) has passed its sell-by date. Less centralization, not more, is the key to everything the Left claims to pursue, yet magically fails to attain. Every. Single. Lousy. Time.

Category: End The Fed

Comments

11 Responses to “23Dec13 Marks 100 Years Of The Fed”

  1. jefferson101
    February 24th, 2010 @ 2:50 am

    As much as I hate to admit it, there are a lot of levels on this one where I think Ron Paul has it right. The Fed needs to go.

    The only question I have about all that is this: What do you replace it with? Is the .Gov going to take over the Currency, or do our FRN’s just become worthless paper?

    That in itself could be an issue, don’t you think? As much as I’d be down with eliminating the Federal Reserve, I would really like to know what we are going to replace it with.

    If Ammunition is the Currency of the 21st Century, I’m good to go, but if it’s going to be something else, I’d like to hear some discussion of what it’d be.

    While I have no love for the Federal Reserve system, I’ve yet to hear anyone come up with a coherent plan for what we replace it with that doesn’t leave us all as broke as the eventual collapse of it will do anyway. So what is the up side?

    I’m listening……

    Anyone?????

  2. jefferson101
    February 23rd, 2010 @ 9:50 pm

    As much as I hate to admit it, there are a lot of levels on this one where I think Ron Paul has it right. The Fed needs to go.

    The only question I have about all that is this: What do you replace it with? Is the .Gov going to take over the Currency, or do our FRN’s just become worthless paper?

    That in itself could be an issue, don’t you think? As much as I’d be down with eliminating the Federal Reserve, I would really like to know what we are going to replace it with.

    If Ammunition is the Currency of the 21st Century, I’m good to go, but if it’s going to be something else, I’d like to hear some discussion of what it’d be.

    While I have no love for the Federal Reserve system, I’ve yet to hear anyone come up with a coherent plan for what we replace it with that doesn’t leave us all as broke as the eventual collapse of it will do anyway. So what is the up side?

    I’m listening……

    Anyone?????

  3. theCL
    February 24th, 2010 @ 3:27 am

    @jefferson101: Commodity-based currency. It wouldn’t be as big of an adjustment as people realize, much easier than if (when) the dollar blows. But the details are too much for the comments here. Check my blog, I’ll cover that topic soon. Should have a long time ago.

    arguments were likely tripe then, too

    Very. The truth is virtually the same story as the conspiracy tales.

    http://mises.org/daily/3823

    Btw Smitty, that bow-tie is giving you away as a Hayekian/Miseian/Austrian. Looks good!

  4. theCL
    February 23rd, 2010 @ 10:27 pm

    @jefferson101: Commodity-based currency. It wouldn’t be as big of an adjustment as people realize, much easier than if (when) the dollar blows. But the details are too much for the comments here. Check my blog, I’ll cover that topic soon. Should have a long time ago.

    arguments were likely tripe then, too

    Very. The truth is virtually the same story as the conspiracy tales.

    http://mises.org/daily/3823

    Btw Smitty, that bow-tie is giving you away as a Hayekian/Miseian/Austrian. Looks good!

  5. Ran / Si Vis Pacem
    February 24th, 2010 @ 3:30 am

    Smitty,
    You make a damned fine point about less centralization. Our confrères in the computation world know too well the dangers of central processing. The metaphor is apt: Distributed processing behaves much like any broad market. The less the centralization the more adaptable and rapid. The benefits outweigh the cost of redundancy – every time. Hell, they apply ‘ubiquitous computing’ as a maxim. Why should banking systems differ?

    Vast powers concentrated in few people has yet to prove to be a long-term viable, successful model anywhere in the human condition.

  6. Ran / Si Vis Pacem
    February 23rd, 2010 @ 10:30 pm

    Smitty,
    You make a damned fine point about less centralization. Our confrères in the computation world know too well the dangers of central processing. The metaphor is apt: Distributed processing behaves much like any broad market. The less the centralization the more adaptable and rapid. The benefits outweigh the cost of redundancy – every time. Hell, they apply ‘ubiquitous computing’ as a maxim. Why should banking systems differ?

    Vast powers concentrated in few people has yet to prove to be a long-term viable, successful model anywhere in the human condition.

  7. Right-Wing Links (February 23, 2010)
    February 24th, 2010 @ 12:03 am

    […] 23Dec13 Marks 100 Years Of Satan The Fed […]

  8. chuck cross
    February 24th, 2010 @ 1:40 pm

    Smitty — it was great meeting you at CPAC. It was refreshing to have real conservations about conservatism with you.

    I agree, End The Fed. James Grant wrote a brilliant essay in the last issue of Grant’s Interest Rate Observer. I’m going to see if he’ll republish it for public consumption, because it should be a must-read for those of us who fight the tax effectives of inflation caused by the Fed.

  9. chuck cross
    February 24th, 2010 @ 8:40 am

    Smitty — it was great meeting you at CPAC. It was refreshing to have real conservations about conservatism with you.

    I agree, End The Fed. James Grant wrote a brilliant essay in the last issue of Grant’s Interest Rate Observer. I’m going to see if he’ll republish it for public consumption, because it should be a must-read for those of us who fight the tax effectives of inflation caused by the Fed.

  10. Live Free Or Die
    February 24th, 2010 @ 10:44 pm

    Wrong monster analogy, Smitty. This monster is The Creature From Jekyll Island.Not sure how to kill it, but I’m in favor of it’s demise.

  11. Live Free Or Die
    February 24th, 2010 @ 5:44 pm

    Wrong monster analogy, Smitty. This monster is The Creature From Jekyll Island.Not sure how to kill it, but I’m in favor of it’s demise.