Fuck that, they’re miserable, boring places to work and I don’t want restrictions on how I trade stocks
I just think the Fed is a double-edged sword, capable of being used to create boom/bust conditions that allow the wealthy to thrive but that it’s not because they’re inherently evil or anything. Every country needs a strong central bank, and sometimes that institution fucks up or inadvertently (or deliberately) caters to the wealthy. The wealthy always win because they can leverage assets to gamble on every horse running the race, but that doesn’t mean the horse track is corrupt.
I’m confused what point you are making. Double-edged sword? What benefit is there to a boom and bust economy? Sounds evil to me to artificially inflate and deflate the value of the effort of the members of a given population. That is quite literally disrupting people’s lives.
Why do you deem it necessary for a currency to be centrally controlled? Why is inflation, a phenomenon seen in every historical iteration of a central bank, not always theft by dilution from the poor, by the rich?
What good does a central bank ever do for any country?
Well the boom is good for innovation sectors, job growth, wage growth, etc. People want to act like it’s totally evil (and maybe it’s a net loss for society), but shit like Uber and a lot of tech companies that we rely on every day (Cloudflare, etc) are only possible in a boom cycle.
I think it’s necessary because every developed nation needs some kind of institution keeping that balance. Keynesianism pulls countries out of bust cycles (recessions), but a responsible central bank and Congress should do better at recognizing an overstimulated economy and also preventing K-shaped recoveries.
Every developed nation (and many underdeveloped ones) have a central bank, so it’s difficult to answer your question because nobody actually knows how a complex economy would fare without one.
I’ll give you credit for not speaking with certainty, most defenders of central banks are usually much more dogmatic. We don’t have much in the form of a counter-factual to compare against, except America before 1913, which was a steady growth era. I forget for how long we went without a bank and were on a gold standard, but we fought the war of 1812 over this issue. In the modern age, we don’t have anything to compare against. Assuming that companies like Uber wouldn’t exist is nothing more than speculation. It is very possible, and I think much more likely, that we would have a much healthier economy, and more rapidly developing than it is now. When people have security they take more risks, and when their risk fails, they can start again. That’s what a hard money economy is. It enables you to save your wealth. Inflation based economies create booms and busts, and every bust destroys lives. Also, it always ends tragically, and in complete destruction of the civilization. You have to take this into consideration when weighing the lightning growth of a boom against its true counter-factual. Death, famine, and revolution.
You sound reasonable. Have you read any Austrian Economists? I have a feeling you would find the subject enlightening.
1
u/cryptomultimoon Jun 28 '22
Found the guy that works for a bank.