2016 USA Presidential Election

[ViciousVi]

sc94597 said:

ViciousVi said:

I don't think Sanders has ever come out against the Fed in concept like Ron/Rand Paul. He has argued for auditing them and introduced the bill to audit the fed in the Senate but accepted an amendment which would allow audits during financial crisis only and not of the Feds Monetary policy actions. Which was the right thing to do if you believe in a central bank because the attempt to audit Fed monetary policy is really just an attempt to politicize the institution to death. Both the Pauls openly call for an end to the Federal Reserve system as a whole, Sanders has only called for reform. He supported a more moderate reform effort in the end (which was probably because of how blatantly the Pauls want to use the audit process to "End the Fed").  Sanders has made it clear he disagrees with certain Fed policies (namely how the bailout and QE were handled), but not with the institution itself. There is nothing hypocritical about this. 

The argument that ending the federal reserve will come naturally from auditing them requires the assumption that what we will see from these audits is sufficient reason to enact legislative action that will end it. I don't think there is any realistic belief that the FED could be burdened enough by the audits that it can't keep up with its role in fiscal policy. Nevertheless, an audit of the Fed during financial crisis only is worthless, because that gives the Fed plenty of time to cover its tracks before any crisis comes to be. Bernie knew this in the beginning and that is why he wished for a full audit. Then his policy changed. 

 

This statement is simply incorrect and reveals that you do not understand the history of how central banking has been conducted. It is very easy to demonize the actions of a central bank on any given action because the majority of the populace does not understand monetary macroeconomic theory. The very reason we have a public -private hybrid institution is so that we can have a central bank that acts in the interest of the people without being burdened by the scrutiny of laymen whose opinions can be swayed by emotional rhetoric over subjects they do not understand (i.e. politicalization). The average person really does not understand how the economy works. For example, surveys show that consumers typically overstate inflation by 1-2% whereas surveys of professional forecasters usually lineup with public information regarding the rate of inflation. Expertise in this area matters and we want a central bank that is both independent from the public yet beholden to their interests. If you don't like the governing philosophy of those in charge at any given time (like say, Bernanke) then you should put fault on the public actors who empowered them (Bush first, Obama later) and not on the institution they lead. People like Ben Bernanke are largely academics who are simply doing what they believe is best for the economy. Economists come in all stripes, just like Judges, and there is great value in maintaining a separation of powers (independent central banks hold down inflation better, for example).  With that said, I think it's obvious that Sanders wanted to look into the actions surrounding a particular policy undertaken during the crisis. You still haven't really proven that to be hypocritical, in the video you posted he affirms he is not opposed to an independent central bank, he rather wanted to look into how the policies in this one instance were handled. Also the comment about the Fed "covering it's tracks" is ridiculous. An audit is an audit, they would have to comply by law. The Fed is not a gang of criminals.