The United States Federal Reserve should be examined as an institution to see if it operates successfully, US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent said on Monday.
Whether or not the Fed “operates successfully” is a matter of perspective - if you’re fabulously wealthy, and particularly if you’re a banker or investor or corporate executive, then yes, as a general rule it does. If you’re anything else, then not so much so.
And Trump’s relationship with bankers et al is difficult, since he’s never been able to browbeat them - he’s always had to lie and wheedle and beg to get money out of them, then when he doesn’t bother paying them back, they have the gall to come after him and try to force him to pay and even to drive him into bankruptcy. Again.
So on the one hand, he likely wants to stick it to them.
But on the other hand, when push comes to shove, they’re likely still more powerful than he is, even now.
The economic stability the Fed system has delivered is indisputable over the last century. Reforms are always possible of course, but this is political theater.
Yeaaaahhhh… no. I don’t think “stability” is really an accurate descriptor of what the Fed has done.
Their “stability” consists of following policies explicitly and deliberately designed to generate an ongoing transfer of wealth up the economic ladder, and using slanted and incomplete indicators like GDP to create the illusion that their policies are of benefit to the country as a whole.
I mean… yes, it is “stability” of a form- it’s akin to the stability necessary to build a house of cards.
But that stability is revealed to be a fleeting and ultimately ephemeral thing when the house of cards comes crashing down, as this one most assuredly will.
That said though, I do agree that this is theater.
Stop trying to blame the failures of congress on the Fed. The Fed oversaw the greatest expansion of the middle class in US history, and has prevented all but one depression within the past century. Which is a hell of a lot better track record than previous century.
This could get interesting.
Whether or not the Fed “operates successfully” is a matter of perspective - if you’re fabulously wealthy, and particularly if you’re a banker or investor or corporate executive, then yes, as a general rule it does. If you’re anything else, then not so much so.
And Trump’s relationship with bankers et al is difficult, since he’s never been able to browbeat them - he’s always had to lie and wheedle and beg to get money out of them, then when he doesn’t bother paying them back, they have the gall to come after him and try to force him to pay and even to drive him into bankruptcy. Again.
So on the one hand, he likely wants to stick it to them.
But on the other hand, when push comes to shove, they’re likely still more powerful than he is, even now.
The economic stability the Fed system has delivered is indisputable over the last century. Reforms are always possible of course, but this is political theater.
Yeaaaahhhh… no. I don’t think “stability” is really an accurate descriptor of what the Fed has done.
Their “stability” consists of following policies explicitly and deliberately designed to generate an ongoing transfer of wealth up the economic ladder, and using slanted and incomplete indicators like GDP to create the illusion that their policies are of benefit to the country as a whole.
I mean… yes, it is “stability” of a form- it’s akin to the stability necessary to build a house of cards.
But that stability is revealed to be a fleeting and ultimately ephemeral thing when the house of cards comes crashing down, as this one most assuredly will.
That said though, I do agree that this is theater.
Stop trying to blame the failures of congress on the Fed. The Fed oversaw the greatest expansion of the middle class in US history, and has prevented all but one depression within the past century. Which is a hell of a lot better track record than previous century.