Fed haters, what would you replace the Federal Reserve with?
Asked by
ETpro (
34605
)
December 29th, 2010
For those who want to shut down the Federal Reserve, what sort of central banking system would you want to replace it? Most countries have a government-owned central bank that controls their monetary policy, the base cost of credit, regulates and monitors the nation’s financial institutions, and the growth or contraction of their money supply. The USA is rather unique in having a quasi-private network of banks called the Federal Reserve with a presidentially appointed board of governors handling these activities.
Clearly, somebody has to control monetary policy. Would the Fed opponents replace it with a government owned central banking system? Would you just let any bank that wants to do so print money when they feel like it—which would probably be about 24/7? Do you think that if there were no boss, the money supply would manage itself, and banks would self regulate better than the Fed manages things now?
I am no great fan of recent monetary policy, but I understand the meaning of jumping form the frying pan to the fire. Is there a nation state with a well managed monetary policy that demonstrates the workability of the strategy you would suggest we adopt as a replacement for the Federal Reserve System?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
18 Answers
They are more than welcome to use my bank account to store their money…...and the gold can be stored at my house…
Here’s the thing – I am not an expert in running a country’s federal reserve and I should not have to come up with the solution because of this – however, that does NOT mean I can’t see obvious flaws in the system. I’ll pass this on to Alex, he’ll have a much more concrete answer and I feel like there was a video (he can link it) I saw a couple of months ago that made my eyes widen because of how clueless we are about the corruption going on in our economy, given all the bru-ha-ha banks are doing these days.
Fair trade for goods and services with other goods and services or for an internationally recognized unit with value based on scarcity.
I wouldn’t replace it I would do what Congress did do and that was pass IMO the single most significant piece of legislation President Obama passed and that was the Wall Street Reform Act! <<Knuckles BO!>>
TJ has the foresight to address the potential for conflicts of interest that IMO has plagued the Fed in the past few decades…
“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and the corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered…. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs. The modern theory of the perpetuation of debt has drenched the earth with blood, and crushed its inhabitants under burdens ever accumulating.”
——————————-Thomas Jefferson
@bob_ Worked great for tens of thousands of years.
Everywhere amongst all people before organized society invented currency.
Right… well, you know what they say, nostalgia isn’t what it used to be.
@JeanPaulSartre 10,000 years ago wqe didn’t have 7 billion people on earht to feed, clothe, house and keep warm in in good health. We aren’;t doing great at it right now because of human greed and rigging of the financial game by those in control of it, but it would be an impossible task with stone age technology and trade practices.
@Cruiser TJ, My here. I don’t agree with him on his every sentiment, but he was spot on on that one.
Not stone age tech – though certainly less gratuitous use of it in some places, and much more use of it in others. The number of people is too high, sure, but how using an invented monetary system assists that many people, I couldn’t tell you.
Not all motion is progress…
Do I really have to point out every fallacious statement about “stone age” people on this site?
The social and economic technologies of so-called ‘stone age’ people are, in many cases, far more complicated and, I argue, useful. Social justice activists like Vandana Shiva have repeatedly pointed out that industrial economics, banking, and all of the concomitant issues wrapped up in cash economy are exactly what causes so much starvation and poverty. And guess what: those places where people are allowed to practice indigenous gift and limited trade economies do just fine.
Ways of life based on trade and commerce will always be exploitative and violent, because being based on commerce means you’re not self-sufficient, i.e. you need to import from outside your landbase. Needing to import means that when the person who has the thing you need suddenly won’t trade enough, either you starve or you go to war to get it. It also means you’ve already denuded your surroundings of that resource.
By contrast, the norm for economies throughout human history have involved localized control with relatively equitable distribution of food and other resources, involving reciprocal relationships between the people and the land.
10,000 years ago we didn’t have 7 billion people on earth to feed, clothe, house and keep warm in in good health. Too many damned people to keep starving them with this system. It would be an impossible task with industrial age technology and trade practices. We need to use proven ways of interacting with each other, which although may not work perfectly with so many people, still is a good sight better than systems which specifically do no work in terms of sustainability and justice.
@bob_ You linked argument makes basically no sense in response to @JeanPaulSartre‘s comments, since it’s an article solely about “Middle Ages” Europe; you present evidence of one place in a narrow amount of time supposedly to argue to universality through time of circumstances of humanity unique to only the last 1% or so of our history. I believe that’s what the kids call a ‘fail’.
* rolls eyes *
@incendiary_dan I’m sorry I failed to provide evidence about the universality of humanity and whatever. My bad.
You guys have fun.
* unfollows *
There was never any good excuse for the Fed bank to be privately / quasi-privately held. Nationalize that pronto.
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
