http://www.thedailybell.com/1528/Fed-Up-with-Feds%20-Five-Myths.html
Fed Up with Fed's Myths
Tuesday, November 16, 2010 – by Staff Report
Ben Bernanke
The Federal Reserve's announcement on Nov. 3 that it will buy $600 billion
worth of Treasury bonds to help boost the struggling U.S. economy reverberated
around the world this past week, with condemnation from critics as varied as
Sarah Palin and the president-elect of Brazil. Yet much of what the Fed and its
chairman, Ben Bernanke (left), have done is shrouded in confusion and
misperceptions. – Washington Post
Dominant Social Theme: Let's be reasonable about this. Ben Bernanke is trying
very hard and he's getting a bad rap.
Free-Market Analysis: Below we analyze an article (see excerpt above) that
appeared in the Washington Post recently entitled "Five Myths About the Federal
Reserve." Let us mention some good things, first. The article is well written,
even elegant, and not overly-complex. It is composed by a smart person and has
an air of sincerity that presumably is authentic. On the other hand, the
article is just plain wrong in our view, and seems a bit defensive as well. We
would argue, in fact, that its appearance itself is a kind of metaphor, an
acknowledgement by the elite of just how much trouble the central banking meme
is in. That's the significance of the article, in fact. It's a rebuttal of
sorts to an assume skepticism about central banking that did not exist until
relatively recently.
We would speculate however, that such skepticism will continue to grow, no
matter how many pro-central banking articles appear in the mainstream media. Of
course, the concept will be defended ferociously, nonetheless. The idea that
there is a super smart group of people who can figure out how much money the
world needs is surely a fundamental dominant social theme of the Anglo-American
power elite. It is the foundation on which so much else rests. Control the
ability to print money and one has control, basically, over the whole world.
But in the 21st century, the financial crisis and the truth-telling of the
Internet have undermined much of the fear-based promotions that the elite uses
to consolidate control over society in order to move it toward one-world
governance. The central banking meme is increasingly a casualty as well, hence
the need for these sorts of articles. It is written by Greg Ip, who, we learn,
is the US economics editor for the Economist magazine.
Fifteen or twenty years ago, such individuals – equipped with a sophisticated
frame-of-reference and communication skills – were impossible to contradict.
The tools simply were not available. But today the Internet has deepened our
knowledge base and given us the ability to suggest alternatives perspectives.
Chief among these perspectives is the Misesian concept of "human action." This
is the idea that individual humans provide the cultural and economic engine for
the world – not elite leaders huddle in a room somewhere.
The idea that that the world needs "leaders" and "governmental organization" is
the logical conclusion of the fear-based themes that the elite attempts to
circulate using a wide variety of sympathetic instrumentalities such as
universities, think tanks, NGOs and the mainstream media which it by and large
controls if it does not own it outright. The idea that individuals are
powerless, that money is a governmental excretion and that the only way to get
things done is to lobby politicians is a core foundational element of power
elite propaganda.
We have long maintained that power elite memes would collide with the Internet
– a modern Gutenberg press – in the 21st century and that the elite might
eventually have to "take a step back" as they did after the press exposed the
underlying contradictions of the accepted knowledge of its day. Much of the
accepted knowledge of the current age is now under attack as well. Many of the
elite's centralizing fear-based promotions seem to be taking a drubbing, from
global warming to the war on terror to many of the central (and erroneous)
tenets of regulatory democracy itself.
Perhaps the promotion that is in the process of failing the most quickly is
central banking, with its economically illiterate underpinnings and
quasi-religious overtones. This article does provide a good pro-central banking
primer, though in our opinion it leaves out some positive (if false) arguments
for central banking – perhaps because it wants to maintain a tone of studious
neutrality. In any event, we are happy to offer excerpts from the article along
with free-market perspectives to counter what has been presented.
We don't think the central banking paradigm, the world's fundamental
organizational mechanism, is anything other than a fraud. But you may come to a
different decision, dear reader. Anyway, we now provide excerpts of the main
points of the article along with some additional thoughts ...
1. By printing money, the Fed will create runaway inflation ... The Nobel
Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman issued a famous dictum nearly 50 years
ago: "Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon." His belief has
become widespread over the years, to the point that even many non-economists
assume that when the Fed prints money, higher prices inevitably result. But the
link between money and inflation is weaker than people think ... The Fed is
trying to stimulate spending, but not by showering people with newly minted
dollars. Rather, when the Fed buys bonds, it pushes their prices up and their
yields down. Lower long-term interest rates will tempt some people to borrow.
They will also make stocks more attractive. Higher stock prices will make
consumers feel wealthier and spend more. If that spending outstrips the
economy's productive capacity, inflation could result. But that's years away:
The economy today is awash in idle factories
and unemployed workers.
While we are not Friedmanite monetarists, (we try to be Austrians) it is
patently untrue in our view that Fed money printing does not create inflation.
Money is just like every other commodity. If there is too much of it eventually
the price will drop. In a fiat-money environment, inflation happens as money is
printed and loaned into circulation. ... eventually. The velocity of money,
much remarked upon, is merely the flip side for DEMAND for goods and services.
Thus it is the DEMAND that aids in the circulation of money. The velocity of
money is actually representative of the demand for money.
Without "money" printing there can be no price inflation, nor any inflation to
begin with. Every dollar that Bernanke prints evidently and obviously
(eventually) adds to inflation and will, sooner or later, in our view, manifest
in price inflation. Bernanke's quantitative easing is a down payment for
something that may approach hyperinflation. The article does no one any
services by not disinguishing between the quantity of circulating money
(inflation) and a subsequent rise in prices (price inflation).
2. The Fed is endangering the global recovery by trying to drive down the
dollar ... Since Chairman Ben Bernanke hinted in late August that the Fed might
resume quantitative easing, the value of the dollar has fallen steadily,
dropping 7 percent against the euro, 3 percent against the yen and 7 percent
against the Korean won. Many foreign officials and analysts have accused the
Fed of deliberately driving down the dollar to give U.S. exporters a
competitive advantage abroad. The truth is more complicated. If the Fed had an
explicit policy of devaluing the dollar, it would sell dollars on the open
market, buying foreign currencies in return. However, the Fed does this only
with the Treasury's consent. The Fed hasn't sold dollars since 2000 ... This is
a zero-sum game. As a falling dollar boosts American exports, it hurts the
exports of our trading partners. But that's as it should be. After years of
living beyond its means, the United States must now save
more and consume less.
This point (above) intends to establish the continuing mythology that the
Federal Reserve is 1. not a conspiracy and, 2. not intentionally diminishing
the value of the dollar. Since the dollar has diminished by between 95 percent
and 99 percent over the past 100 years in terms of the goods and services it
can buy, it is a safe best that the Fed is not in the least concerned about the
buying power of the dollar. In fact, the Western power elite – if one probes
their statements and strategies – is very interested in reducing the
competitive advantages of the West via the rest of the world in order to more
easily introduce world government (in our opinion, anyway). To maintain that
what is going on is merely the result of innocent policy movements over the
past century is almost purposefully misleading.
3. The Fed is trying to finance the government's profligacy ... By buying
Treasury debt, the Fed is in effect financing the federal deficit. This raises
alarms: Hyperinflation in countries such as Zimbabwe or Weimar Germany occurred
when private investors wouldn't lend to the government, so the government
printed money to finance its spending. But that's not what's happening here.
Even with our budget deficit as a share of GDP near a post-World War II record,
there's no shortage of private and foreign investors to buy Treasury bonds.
Everyone wants dollars? We don't think so. The US is bankrupt. Its obligations
amount to some US$200 trillion. Nobody in his or her right mind should be
buying dollars (or any fiat currency for that matter). The reason that the rest
of the world wants American dollars likely has to do with the dollar as a
reserve currency. We have dealt with this in the past. People and countries
need dollars in order to buy oil. This policy was put into effect in the 1940s,
basically at the barrel of a gun. America, and presumably Britain, insisted
that the rest of the world purchase oil with dollars, and those funny, little
countries in the Middle East went along with it (not suprisingly). This
established the dollar as the world's dominant currency in one swoop.
Everyone needs oil. The cycle feeds on itself and the perception of the dollar
as a valuable commodity is inevitably fueled by the necessary nature of holding
such dollars. This is also why the US probably maintains so many military bases
around the world. The US prints to dollars to support its military and then
uses its military to intimidate the rest of the world into continuing to use
dollars to purchase oil.
The larger issue, of course, is that this strategy is now beginning to fail.
The rest of the world is less intimidated by the US and the US itself is having
increasing problems with its own solvency. But to maintain that the
institutional interest in the dollar is somehow simply because the US is seen
as "a good bet" by professional money managers is to provide an observation
that leaves out the underlying force (and military linkages) driving the
world's dollar-economy.
4. The Fed is immune to politics ... If only it were so. The Fed is technically
independent from the rest of the government, but presidents and Congress have
ample ways to pressure it. They can privately and publicly browbeat the
chairman, withhold his reappointment, appoint compliant governors or amend the
Federal Reserve Act ... Obama reappointed Bernanke last year and has been
solidly behind the Fed. But for how long? The time will come when Bernanke must
tighten monetary policy. Chances are, it will be sooner than Obama wants. Will
his support be as unwavering then?
"If only it were so!" If only the Fed were immune from "political influence."
But the Fed is not some sort of sterile entity; its bankers are not test-tube
creations and central banking policies tend to support the deliberate charade
of Western regulatory democracies. The operative term is "mercantilism" – a
program in which the wealthiest individuals and industries determinedly seek
access to the levers of government in order to manipulate them for private gain.
Central bankers meet in a expensive chambers all over the world to "fix" the
price of money; when difficulties arise, central banks "stabilize" the system
by giving away huge amounts of currency to their cronies under the pretext that
a failure of the paper money will be inordinately destabilizing. The idea is
that this entire exercise is somehow for the benefit of society at large. But
in the case of the Fed, for instance, the dollar has been debased by nearly 100
percent in the past century.
Stabilizing the current system obviously does not benefit the public at large
as they system is not being run for its behalf in the first place. Central
banks are operated not for your benefit, dear reader, but for that of the
elites that installed them. The ability to print money-from-nothing is an
impossible and ultimately dysfunctional privilege. The control of such funding
gives individuals the ability to impose their will on the larger society from
the shadows where they operate. Tidal waves of money wash over society and
recreate it with greater and greater authoritarian constructs. Over
generations, strategies are refined and plans are put in place. Central banking
and its money power are the fulcrum of regulatory democracy, which is growing
more intolerable every year.
"If only it were so!" In fact, we wish the Fed, in particular, were not merely
LESS immune to politics (and more responsive to Congress), but that Congress
would simply do away with it. There is no philosophical, moral or economic
justification for central banking. It is a brutal price fixing operation that
artificially mandates the value and quantity of money. There is no way that any
group of human beings can EVER know how much money the economy needs, and yet
every day around the world the banking industry pretends it is so.
Only the marketplace itself can provide information on the amount of money
necessary to its proper function. It does this via mechanism of supply and
demand. Too much money in circulation and the price of gold and silver begin to
drop – prompting hoarding and mining shut downs. The price gradually rises and
mines open up again and people dishoard gold and silver. This is the only way
that money ought to circulate, as a product human action, a million or a
billion individual decisions about the price of money and the volume of its
circulation.
5. Bernanke knows what he's doing ... Bernanke came to his job with an
impressive resume, including years of studying the Great Depression. To that he
can now add the irreplaceable experience of running the central bank through
one of its most harrowing periods. If anyone should know what he's doing, it's
him ... It would be nice if we could isolate these errors to ensure that they
never happen again. But the global economy is complicated and always changing,
and the Fed can never be certain of the consequences of its actions. Has it now
gone too far, fueling reckless speculation, inflation and global trade
tensions? Or has it not gone far enough, inviting stagnation and deflation? No
one knows for sure – Bernanke included.
This last argument is of the "limited hangout" variety. It is an increasingly
popular one, we think, as it must be. The Fed's predictive history is so
horrible at this point, its bankers so manifestly incompetent, its results so
dismal, that there are not many ways to defend it at the moment. This is one of
the reasons that as an elite promotion it has probably run its course. When
modern central banking was "new" – early in the 20th century – there was little
anyone could do to combat the "common sense" of building a bank of last resort.
But now there is a substantive track record behind this concept, one that
allows us to say (regardless of the larger economic illiteracy) that it simply
doesn't work.
In a sense, the entire paper money system around the world has virtually fallen
apart. Even now, Western banks are like the walking dead. Central banks are
throwing money at their zombie-like commercial bank distribution centers but
evidently and obviously it is not working. The system is so distorted that no
one wants to borrow and no one wants to lend. The only way to salvage something
is to unwind the system gradually – hence the predictions that current ruinous
status quo will continue on for at least another decade.
What is not said of course (nor written) is that people will not tolerate
another decade of what is going on today. In fact, this the elite's greatest
fear in our view – that it will run out of time. It is one thing to inflict
chaos on the world in order to offer the salvation of greater centralization
(as the Western elites are wont to do) but it is another thing to destabilize
society so badly that people end up in some sort of open revolt. That's not in
the playbook! The misery was to be pervasive – but not so deep that people
conclude that some sort of civil or even violent rebellion is more attractive
than their current environment.
Yet what did the elite expect? Central banking is a ruinous game. Along with
the graduated income tax, it is like a ravening two-headed beast that rips away
at the fabric of civil society until there is almost nothing left. Every
recession puts more people out of work and further centralizes industry and
hollows it out. Every boom sucks people out of productive jobs and into the
Dreamtime of fiat-money wealth that is as evanescent as the jobs themselves.
The end result, 50 or 100 years later is a shattered society with 30 percent
unemployment and the few people who do have jobs working two and three of them
to support themselves and their families.
Of course that's in the private sector. If you are lucky enough to have a
government job, you are probably doing fairly well. Unlike the private sector,
government flourishes in a central banking economy. Every downturn is
supposedly to be cured by new laws and new regulations. There is always a
solution just beyond the horizon that will magically fix the system. If there
is any one blessing to come out the current mess, is that is people are
gradually losing faith in government itself and its magic regulatory elixir.
Conclusion: Central banking doesn't work. No one, not even the smartest person
in the world, not even Ben Bernanke, can fix the value and quantity of money
for the larger marketplace. Articles like this one in the Washington Post –
well written and perceptive as they are – cannot hide this fundamental point.
And thanks to the Internet, we have the intellectual resources to formulate for
ourselves what is wrong and to try and put it right. We would humbly suggest,
as we often do, a free-market money system, hopefully built on free banking,
gold and silver, Real Bills and market-competition. Let the best money
solutions win. What's so hard about that?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of
opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of
increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all
its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.” - Harry S.
Truman
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations,
or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and
evidence." - John Adams
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually
come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State
can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences
of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its
powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and
thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one
fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a
few points and repeat them over and over.”
“Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.”
— Paul Joseph Goebbels, Reich Minister of Propaganda in Nazi Germany from 1933
to 1945
"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless
minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds." - Samuel Adams
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by
evil men." - Plato
"Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." -
Thomas Jefferson
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential and may
be protected by legal privilege. The information contained herein is for the
sole use of the intended recipient and any disclosure, copying, distribution,
or reliance on this message or any attachment by unintended recipients is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify
us immediately by replying to this email and deleting it from your computer.
--
This is a Free Speech forum. The owner of this list assumes no responsibility
for the intellectual or emotional maturity of its members. If you do not like
what is being said here, filter it to trash, ignore it or leave. If you leave,
learn how to do this for yourself. If you do not, you will be here forever.
