Saturday, December 5, 2009

More dangerous than, say, a $12T debt?

by Smitty (h/t HotAir)

I'd like to pose a few questions to Frederic Mishkin,

the elite fellow quoted by Bloomberg:
U.S. Representative Ron Paul’s proposal to allow audits of the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy is "incredibly dangerous" and could stoke inflation, said Frederic Mishkin, a former Fed governor.

"The Ron Paul bill is incredibly dangerous," said Mishkin, who is now a Columbia University professor, in a Bloomberg Radio interview. "It is remarkable the kind of attacks that are occurring on Fed independence."
Here is a small set of questions:
  • How much power given to unelected officials is 'too much'?
  • Why should a power such as the Federal Reserve exist without an explicit Constitutional Amendment to support it?
  • Why is the view that the Federal Reserve is an undemocratic cartel 'remarkable'?
  • How specifically would you refute the claims of the Austrian Economists who argue that you and your ilk preach, more or less, Economic Global Warming?
May Fortune bless the efforts of Representative Paul, Mr. Mishkin. 2013 shall mark a century since the bluff of you and your cronies should have been called. Inflation? Bring it on, Mike Foxtrot: better a period of suffering now than enslavement to the condescending elite.


  1. Smitty,

    Just stumbled back onto your blog, from a link @ ( a libertarian blog). I'm trying to pin down exactly where you stand rather quickly. Are you a libertarian or a neoconservative, or some type of mix. It's rare to find talk of Austrian Economics or Ending the Fed on any conservative blog, sadly you usually have to go to a libertarian blog to read the truth on this nightmare. (As a libertarian I say sadly, because I wish I could see more of this in the conservative blog world. Anyone who truly loves liberty and understands the FED, is sickened by it)

    Anyway, look forward to reading more of your articles.

  2. One suspects this a pre-emptive bit of propaganda setting up for the blame shifting when the inevitable inflation happens. Lay the ground work for blaming the anti-fed people now.

  3. @Jason,
    I'm definitely not a neo-con, which is just Progressivism with a muscular foreign policy.

    My view is a Federalist one, which lets me lean heavily libertarian in Washington, DC, while not caring whether the States are Socialist, Conservative, Libertarian, or whatever.

    It's the 'one-size-fits-all, at every level' case that I deem most difficult to make.

  4. Jason, though I'm not Smitty or RSM I'm definetely a like-mind. I'm "neocon" only because I'm newly conservative. I'm also fully invested in Austrian economics, though I reject the Rothbardian arguments for pacifism that are based on a rejection of the principle of self defense. The numbers of Austrians online are swelling, prompted both by Ron Paul's arguments during the last presidential campaign and the wonderful online resources at the Mises Institute.

    Of course the fact that standard neoclassical economics are broken, with a great big unbridgeable crack right betweeen micro and macro, and the obvious fact that every Keynesian idea manifestly fails to deliver what is promised for it, doesn't hurt the case for Austrian economics.