Skip to comments.Ryan's Fed policy views well outside mainstream
Posted on 08/19/2012 11:05:21 AM PDT by mdittmar
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Paul Ryan doesn't quite want to end the Fed. But if Mitt Romney's pick for vice president had his way, he might curb the central bank's powers enough to make it harder for policymakers to respond aggressively to economic downturns.
The Wisconsin Republican has supported controversial legislation that would strip the U.S. Federal Reserve of its mission to seek maximum employment, and has been a harsh critic of the central bank's continued loose monetary policy.
Further, he has hinted at sympathy for the days when the U.S. dollar was tied to gold, a regime that constrained the Fed from printing dollars to help the economy.
Romney's choice of Ryan suggests the campaign could step up attacks on the Fed if the central bank moves to ease monetary policy further as many economists expect, and that a Romney White House might want to restrict the institution's powers.
In a detailed speech on monetary policy in December 2010, Ryan hardly minced words in his criticism of the Fed.
"There is nothing more insidious that a government can do to its countrymen than to debase its currency - yet this is in fact what is occurring," Ryan said at an event sponsored by FreedomWorks, a right-wing think tank originally called Empower America, where Ryan worked as a speech writer in the 1990s.
Such strongly worded criticism is viewed by some analysts as a challenge to the Fed's independence, an effort to dissuade the central bank from taking the type of unconventional and aggressive actions it has pursued under Chairman Ben Bernanke.
Ryan's perspective on the Fed is in keeping with the free-market,limited-government stance
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Are there any American journalists left or have we imported them all?
They don’t even try to feign objectivity anymore.
This quote isn't entirely accurate. Since 1977, the Fed has had a dual mandate:
"The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Open Market Committee shall maintain long run growth of the monetary and credit aggregates commensurate with the economy's long run potential to increase production, so as to promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices and moderate long-term interest rates."
Some, like Newt, disagree with the dual mandate and believe the two goals are often in conflict.
This is why I think if Romney wins, one thing that we'll likely see is a complete re-assessment of the entire income tax code and see how far we can alter it (e.g., lower the rate in exchange for less tax loopholes). I'd like to see Romney/Ryan adopt the Steve Forbes no-loophole flat tax proposal, one that would have spectacularly positive effects on the US economy both from cutting yearly tax compliance costs 75% and by tremendously encouraging savings and investment in the USA since the Forbes flat tax eliminates including bank account interest, capital gains and stock dividends from earned income.
I don’t think we’ve had many objective journalists since the 1950s or 60s. All journalistas since then have been outright propagandists for, or fellow-travelers of, the CPUSA or the Democratic Party (which, strangely enough, at times, seem indistinguishable from one another).
Sounds great, but I don't trust them. Once they eliminate the loopholes, what's to stop them from raising the rates again?
I find the “mainstream” pretty unimpressive as of late!