I would love to hear Lithose's take on the Federal Reserve.
What people don't get when they look at our monetary system is that money doesn't get dispersed "like magic". There is a lot of work that goes into creating money and making sure it goes to people who will it to actual make things (When things work well, this is what should happen). You can't simply say "the the fed is superfluous GARBABABLE!!!!" like most people do...The reality is, in a proper reserve system, the Fed's function as an actuarial and distribution body is absolutely needed (Again, it's a lot of work...However, right now, the problem is the people with access to the Fed, the big 5 or 6 commercials in the U.S., are way too concentrated. Combine this way them being able to use typical commercial powers (access to assets, reserve, leveraging), and you have a set of entities which can compromise a market, in a very small, incestuous little circle that leads to corruption and allows for control over what should be a "public good".
With that in mind, the Fed is a needed construct in the
currentmarket--touching it now would be akin to shutting down the reactor in the Ghost Busters. Until we localize lending, get investment banking off the mint's tit and return the commercial industries leveraging power back to only being able to create wealth through tangible growth (Rather than through speculation)--I would not touch the Fed, not with a mile long pole. Just asking for disaster. (And that's assuming it was done carefully.)
However, if we could do the above? Well, I still wouldn't get rid of the Fed, because a lot of the issues with it would be fixed. Without the big financials abusing the system, the Fed would function as it's supposed to--which is to say, the first relay between the Mint and the Market. Which is a needed service and is handled well by a quasi-private entity that should be half private (For some profit motivation, to keep things efficient) and public (Because, the reality is, the Fed's ability to generate profits is due to it's government granted monopoly over money supply)--In order to ensure this, I'd increase oversight, make audits mandatory and a few other things--but like I said, it's a complicated institution with being that line between public and private and I think it fills the role "okay"--the problem isn't really the Fed, it's the big banks which now monopolize access thanks to their size (And this is the most complicated aspect of the issue--and really where government needs to control things. The Fed should handle the money, government should handle access, private/public.)
Of course this would all give Paul supporters heart attacks--because somehow they think a "Gold Standard" is less arbitrary than a productivity one, which we have now. As if gold had some higher meaning than a new machine or job (Which I think is dumb, I think gold is far more arbitrary and "fake" in terms of value than a farm that will feed people). I personally think the reserve system is an excellent solution for an ever expanding market....The problem comes from greed at it's center and the collection of power there and the ability to profit without performing a useful service (Well, preventing financial ruin is useful but it only performs that role because it causes the catastrophes indirectly.). THAT is what I would correct....Which as said, would entail abolishing market corrupting super-forces like the big financials (Such as JPM ect), not the Fed.
