Nobel Prize-Winning Economist: Federal Reserve System is Corrupt and Undermines Democracy
-
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/03/nobel-prize-winning-economist-federal.html[^] Joseph Stiglitz - former head economist at the World Bank and a nobel-prize winner - said yesterday that the very structure of the Federal Reserve system is so fraught with conflicts that it is "corrupt" and undermines democracy. Stiglitz said: "If we [i.e. the World Bank] had seen a governance structure that corresponds to our Federal Reserve system, we would have been yelling and screaming and saying that country does not deserve any assistance, this is a corrupt governing structure." Stiglitz pointed out that - if another country had presented a plan to reform its financial system, and included a regulatory regime that copied the makeup of the Federal Reserve system - "it would have been a big signal that something is wrong." Stiglitz stressed that the Fed banks have clear conflicts of interest, since the banks are largely governed by a board of directors that includes officers of the very banks they're supposed to be overseeing: "So, these are the guys who appointed the guy who bailed them out ... Is that a conflict of interest? They would say, 'no conflict of interest, we were just doing our job. But you have to look at the conflicts of interest"... The reason you talk about governance is because in a democracy you want people to have confidence ... This is a structure that will undermine confidence in a democracy." Indeed, by all objective measures, the Fed has performed horribly (and see this). As 6 congressmen wrote last November, there are at least 4 reasons to demand full transparency of the Federal Reserve, and a change in the Fed's structure: First ... how effective a regulator can the Federal Reserve be if it is unwilling to strive for good public policy through its regulatory powers? Second, there is an inherent conflict in the manner in which regional reserve branch presidents are selected – in that representatives of the member banks select the regional president. It seems counterproductive, yet the banking system has provided case after case of regulated entities selecting their own regulator. Third, the Federal Reserve has continually resisted efforts to engage in discussion on structural and governance refo
-
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/03/nobel-prize-winning-economist-federal.html[^] Joseph Stiglitz - former head economist at the World Bank and a nobel-prize winner - said yesterday that the very structure of the Federal Reserve system is so fraught with conflicts that it is "corrupt" and undermines democracy. Stiglitz said: "If we [i.e. the World Bank] had seen a governance structure that corresponds to our Federal Reserve system, we would have been yelling and screaming and saying that country does not deserve any assistance, this is a corrupt governing structure." Stiglitz pointed out that - if another country had presented a plan to reform its financial system, and included a regulatory regime that copied the makeup of the Federal Reserve system - "it would have been a big signal that something is wrong." Stiglitz stressed that the Fed banks have clear conflicts of interest, since the banks are largely governed by a board of directors that includes officers of the very banks they're supposed to be overseeing: "So, these are the guys who appointed the guy who bailed them out ... Is that a conflict of interest? They would say, 'no conflict of interest, we were just doing our job. But you have to look at the conflicts of interest"... The reason you talk about governance is because in a democracy you want people to have confidence ... This is a structure that will undermine confidence in a democracy." Indeed, by all objective measures, the Fed has performed horribly (and see this). As 6 congressmen wrote last November, there are at least 4 reasons to demand full transparency of the Federal Reserve, and a change in the Fed's structure: First ... how effective a regulator can the Federal Reserve be if it is unwilling to strive for good public policy through its regulatory powers? Second, there is an inherent conflict in the manner in which regional reserve branch presidents are selected – in that representatives of the member banks select the regional president. It seems counterproductive, yet the banking system has provided case after case of regulated entities selecting their own regulator. Third, the Federal Reserve has continually resisted efforts to engage in discussion on structural and governance refo
You havent answered the previous post yet, maybe we should restrict you to a single post untill you answer your critics
Smile and the world smiles withyou, laugh and they think you are a nutter
-
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/03/nobel-prize-winning-economist-federal.html[^] Joseph Stiglitz - former head economist at the World Bank and a nobel-prize winner - said yesterday that the very structure of the Federal Reserve system is so fraught with conflicts that it is "corrupt" and undermines democracy. Stiglitz said: "If we [i.e. the World Bank] had seen a governance structure that corresponds to our Federal Reserve system, we would have been yelling and screaming and saying that country does not deserve any assistance, this is a corrupt governing structure." Stiglitz pointed out that - if another country had presented a plan to reform its financial system, and included a regulatory regime that copied the makeup of the Federal Reserve system - "it would have been a big signal that something is wrong." Stiglitz stressed that the Fed banks have clear conflicts of interest, since the banks are largely governed by a board of directors that includes officers of the very banks they're supposed to be overseeing: "So, these are the guys who appointed the guy who bailed them out ... Is that a conflict of interest? They would say, 'no conflict of interest, we were just doing our job. But you have to look at the conflicts of interest"... The reason you talk about governance is because in a democracy you want people to have confidence ... This is a structure that will undermine confidence in a democracy." Indeed, by all objective measures, the Fed has performed horribly (and see this). As 6 congressmen wrote last November, there are at least 4 reasons to demand full transparency of the Federal Reserve, and a change in the Fed's structure: First ... how effective a regulator can the Federal Reserve be if it is unwilling to strive for good public policy through its regulatory powers? Second, there is an inherent conflict in the manner in which regional reserve branch presidents are selected – in that representatives of the member banks select the regional president. It seems counterproductive, yet the banking system has provided case after case of regulated entities selecting their own regulator. Third, the Federal Reserve has continually resisted efforts to engage in discussion on structural and governance refo
-
I read Washington's Blog already. Why don't you read Stiglitz's speech and make your own comments upon it?
Bob Emmett CSS: I don't intend to be a technical writing, I intend to be a software engineer.
Bob Emmett wrote:
make your own comments upon it?
requires independent thought.
-
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/03/nobel-prize-winning-economist-federal.html[^] Joseph Stiglitz - former head economist at the World Bank and a nobel-prize winner - said yesterday that the very structure of the Federal Reserve system is so fraught with conflicts that it is "corrupt" and undermines democracy. Stiglitz said: "If we [i.e. the World Bank] had seen a governance structure that corresponds to our Federal Reserve system, we would have been yelling and screaming and saying that country does not deserve any assistance, this is a corrupt governing structure." Stiglitz pointed out that - if another country had presented a plan to reform its financial system, and included a regulatory regime that copied the makeup of the Federal Reserve system - "it would have been a big signal that something is wrong." Stiglitz stressed that the Fed banks have clear conflicts of interest, since the banks are largely governed by a board of directors that includes officers of the very banks they're supposed to be overseeing: "So, these are the guys who appointed the guy who bailed them out ... Is that a conflict of interest? They would say, 'no conflict of interest, we were just doing our job. But you have to look at the conflicts of interest"... The reason you talk about governance is because in a democracy you want people to have confidence ... This is a structure that will undermine confidence in a democracy." Indeed, by all objective measures, the Fed has performed horribly (and see this). As 6 congressmen wrote last November, there are at least 4 reasons to demand full transparency of the Federal Reserve, and a change in the Fed's structure: First ... how effective a regulator can the Federal Reserve be if it is unwilling to strive for good public policy through its regulatory powers? Second, there is an inherent conflict in the manner in which regional reserve branch presidents are selected – in that representatives of the member banks select the regional president. It seems counterproductive, yet the banking system has provided case after case of regulated entities selecting their own regulator. Third, the Federal Reserve has continually resisted efforts to engage in discussion on structural and governance refo
Sorry, Pillowpants... Not going to read this post until you actually answer the other one.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of Guardians of Xen (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel) -
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/03/nobel-prize-winning-economist-federal.html[^] Joseph Stiglitz - former head economist at the World Bank and a nobel-prize winner - said yesterday that the very structure of the Federal Reserve system is so fraught with conflicts that it is "corrupt" and undermines democracy. Stiglitz said: "If we [i.e. the World Bank] had seen a governance structure that corresponds to our Federal Reserve system, we would have been yelling and screaming and saying that country does not deserve any assistance, this is a corrupt governing structure." Stiglitz pointed out that - if another country had presented a plan to reform its financial system, and included a regulatory regime that copied the makeup of the Federal Reserve system - "it would have been a big signal that something is wrong." Stiglitz stressed that the Fed banks have clear conflicts of interest, since the banks are largely governed by a board of directors that includes officers of the very banks they're supposed to be overseeing: "So, these are the guys who appointed the guy who bailed them out ... Is that a conflict of interest? They would say, 'no conflict of interest, we were just doing our job. But you have to look at the conflicts of interest"... The reason you talk about governance is because in a democracy you want people to have confidence ... This is a structure that will undermine confidence in a democracy." Indeed, by all objective measures, the Fed has performed horribly (and see this). As 6 congressmen wrote last November, there are at least 4 reasons to demand full transparency of the Federal Reserve, and a change in the Fed's structure: First ... how effective a regulator can the Federal Reserve be if it is unwilling to strive for good public policy through its regulatory powers? Second, there is an inherent conflict in the manner in which regional reserve branch presidents are selected – in that representatives of the member banks select the regional president. It seems counterproductive, yet the banking system has provided case after case of regulated entities selecting their own regulator. Third, the Federal Reserve has continually resisted efforts to engage in discussion on structural and governance refo
Why don't you actually post things from the original source like the fed site itself after reading an article?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Second, there is an inherent conflict in the manner in which regional reserve branch presidents are selected – in that representatives of the member banks select the regional president. It seems counterproductive, yet the banking system has provided case after case of regulated entities selecting their own regulator.
According the fed's own site this is true, if I'm reading this right. http://www.federalreserveeducation.org/fed101/structure/BOD/BOD.htm[^] I thought http://www.federalreserveeducation.org/fed101/structure/[^]was very informative at a basic level too.