This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
These Are The People Who Do Not Want The Fed's Veil Lifted
- Borrowing Costs
- Cliff Asness
- Deutsche Bank
- Dresdner Kleinwort
- Federal Reserve
- Federal Reserve Bank
- Ford
- Institute For International Economics
- Lehman
- Michigan
- Monetary Policy
- Morgan Stanley
- NYU Stern
- Ohio
- Raymond James
- recovery
- Robert Shiller
- Testimony
- Transparency
- University of California
- University Of Michigan
- Wells Fargo
The following individuals whose primary goal in life is getting tenure and publishing a textbook, yet believe they have a voice in deciding whether over 300 million American people should know just whose interests the Fed so staunchly protects, have issued an open letter to Congress and The Executive Branch, demanding that no one ever dare tinker or have audit powers over the private institution that is the Federal Reserve. Those who run hedge funds, operate semi-failed companies, work for an Investment Bank, especially taxpayer bailed out ones, or are otherwise conflicted, are highlighted in bold.
It makes sense to recall that the recent grassroots campaign to enforce the opposite - i.e., more transparency at the Fed, has been supported by over 5,000 individuals at this point. Zero Hedge recommends all who believe in transparency in this time when we have anything but, sign the petition to demonstrate their disagreement with the individuals below.
"Fed Independence" Petition Signatories:
Ricardo Caballero MIT
Kenneth French Dartmouth College
Robert Hall Stanford
Anil Kashyap Chicago Booth
Pete Klenow Stanford
Frederic Mishkin Columbia
Thomas Sargent NYU
Michael Woodford Columbia
Andrew Abel Wharton School,University of Pennsylvania
Daron Acemoglu MIT
Michael Adler Columiba University
Yacine Ait-Sahalia Princeton University
Fernando Alvarez University of Chicago
Scott Anderson Wells Fargo & Co.
Cliff Asness Managing and Founding Principal, AQR Capital Management LLC
Paul Asquith Massachusetts Institute of Technology
David Backus NYU
Dean Baim Pepperdine University/UCLA
Ravi Bansal Duke University
David Bates University of Iowa
Andrew Bernard Dartmouth College
Richard Berner Morgan Stanley
George Borts Brown University
Scott Brown Raymond James & Associates
Markus K. Brunnermeier Princeton University
Ralph C. Bryant Brookings Institution
Michael Carey Calyon Securities (USA) Inc. Credit Agricole Group
Christopher Carroll Johns Hopkins University
Martin Cherkes Columbia University
Diego Comin Harvard University
Jernej Copic UCLA
Dora Costa UCLA
Steven Davis University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Angus Deaton Princeton University
Davide Debortoli University of California, San Diego
Eddie Dekel Northwestern University
Harold Demsetz UCLA
Scott Desposato University of California, San Diego
Douglas Diamond University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Peter Diamond MIT
Francis X. Diebold University of Pennsylvania
Avinash Dixit Princeton University
Matthias Doepke Northwestern University
Darrell Duffie Stanford
Pierre Collin Dufresne Columbia
Martin Eichenbaum Northwestern University
Andrea Eisfeldt Northwestern UniversityKellogg School of Management
Jeffrey Ely Northwestern University
Eduardo Engel Yale University
Eugene Fama University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Henry Farber Princeton University
Roger Farmer UCLA
Jon Faust Center for Financial Economics, Johns Hopkins U.
Michael Feroli J.P.Morgan
Wayne Ferson U.S.C.
Kristin Forbes MIT-Sloan School of Management
Mark Gertler New York Univiersity
Marc Giannoni Columbia University
Simon Gilchrist Boston University
Robert J. Gordon Northwestern University
Roger Gordon UCSD
David Greenlaw Morgan Stanley
Gene Grossman Princeton University
Steffen Habermalz Northwestern University
James Hamilton University of California, San Diego
Gary Hansen UCLA
Robert Hansen Tuck School, Dartmouth College
Gordon Hanson UC San Diego
Milton Harris University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Tarek Hassan University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Zhiguo He Chicago Booth
John Heaton University of Chicago
D. Lee Heavner Analysis Group, Inc.
Christian Hellwig UCLA
Gailen Hite Columbia Business School
Yael Hochberg Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University
Stuart Hoffman PNC Financial ServicesGroup
Bengt Holmstrom MIT
Bo Honore Princeton University
Peter Hooper Deutsche Bank
Takeo Hoshi University of California, San Diego
Christopher House University of Michigan
Peter Howitt Brown University
Chang-tai Hsieh University of Chicago
Ellen Hughes-Cromwick Chief Economist, Ford Motor Company
John Huizinga University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Erik Hurst University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Ravi Jagannathan Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University
Dana Johnson Comerica Bank
Karen Johnson Federal Reserve Board of Governors (retired)
Charles I. Jones Stanford University, Graduate School of Business
Paul Joskow MIT
Matthew Kahn UCLA
Juno Kang The Bank of Korea
Steven Kaplan University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Bruce Kasman J.P. Morgan Chase
Peter Kenen Princeton Uniiversity
Ralph Koijen University of Chicago Booth School of Business
David Kotok Chariman, Central Banking Series, Global Interdependence Center, Philadelphia, PA.
Arvind Krishnamurthy Northwestern University
Rafael La Porta Dartmouth College
David Lake University of California, San Diego
Bruce Lehman UCSD
Nan Li Ohio State University
Hilarie Lieb Northwestern University
John Liew AQR Capital Management
Juhani Linnainmaa University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Andrew Lo MIT
Kevin Logan Dresdner Kleinwort
Guido Lorenzoni MIT
Hanno Lustig UCLA Anderson
Louis Maccini Johns Hopkins University
Burton Malkiel Princeton University
Eric Maskin The Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton University
Robert McDonald Kellogg School, Northwestern University
Daniel McFadden University of California, Berkeley
Doug McMillin Louisiana State University
Rajnish Mehra UC Santa Barbara
Robert Mellman J.P. Morgan
Robert Merton Harvard University
Laurence Meyer Macroeconomic Advisers, LLC
Atif Mian University of Chicago
Gregory Miller Suntrust Banks, Inc.
Robert Moffitt Johns Hopkins University
Stephen Morris Princeton University
Dale Mortensen Northwestern University
Giuseppe Moscarini Yale University
Tobias Moskowitz University of Chicago, Booth School of Business
Stefan Nagel Stanford
Maurice Obstfeld University of California,
Berkeley
Lee Ohanian UCLA
Maureen O’Hara Cornell University
Stavros Panageas University of Chicago BoothSchool of Business
Dimitris Papanikolaou Northwestern University
Robert Parry President & CEO, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, Retired
Lubos Pastor University of Chicago BoothSchool of Business
Lasse H. Pedersen NYU
Monika Piazzesi Stanford
Keith Poole University of California, San Diego
Giorgio Primiceri Northwestern University
Valerie Ramey University of California, San Diego
Enrichetta Ravina Columbia University
Esteban Rossi-Hansberg Princeton University
Michael Rothschild Princeton University
Tano Santos Columbia Business
School
Ulrike Schaede University of California, San Diego
Richard Schmalensee MIT
Martin Schneider Stanford
Kermit Schoenholtz NYU Stern School of Business
Jay Shanken Emory
Robert Shiller Yale University
Hyun Shin Princeton University
Stephen Shore Johns Hopkins University
Costis Skiadas Northwestern University
Matthew Slaughter Dartmouth College
James F. Smith Kenan-Flagler Business School, UNC-Chapel Hill
Chester Spatt Carnegie Mellon University
James H. Stock Harvard
Rene Stulz The Ohio State University
Amir Sufi University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joseph Swanson Northwestern University
Vefa Tarhan Loyola University Chicago
Edwin M. Truman Peterson Institute for International Economics
Harald Uhlig University of Chicago
Andrey Ukhov Northwestern University
Sergio Urzua Northwestern University
Chris Varvares Macroeconomic Advisers, LLC
Pietro Veronesi University of Chicago
Paul Wachtel New York University, Stern School of Business
Richard Walker Northwestern University
Mark Watson Princeton
Shang-jin Wei Columbia
David Weil Brown University
Pierre-Olivier Weill UCLA Economics
Burton Weisbrod Northwestern University
William Wheaton MIT
Michael Whinston Northwestern University
Mirko Wiederholt Northwestern University
Mark Witte Northwestern University
Tiemen Wouteren Johns Hopkins University
Jonathan Wright Johns Hopkins University
Wei Xiong Princeton University
Stanley Zin New York University
And here is the text of the endorsed letter:
Open Letter to Congress and the Executive Branch
Amidst the debate over systemic regulation, the independence of U.S.
monetary policy is at risk. We urge Congress and the Executive Branch
to reaffirm their support for and defend the independence of the
Federal Reserve System as a foundation of U.S. economic stability.
There are three specific risks that must be contained.
First, central bank independence has been shown to be essential for
controlling inflation. Sooner or later, the Fed will have to scale back
its current unprecedented monetary accommodation. When the Federal
Reserve judges it time to begin tightening monetary conditions, it must
be allowed to do so without interference. Second, lender of last resort
decisions should not be politicized.
Finally, calls to alter the structure or personnel selection of the
Federal Reserve System easily could backfire by raising inflation
expectations and borrowing costs and dimming prospects for recovery.
The democratic legitimacy of the Federal Reserve System is well
established by its legal mandate and by the existing appointments
process. Frequent communication with the public and testimony before
Congress ensure Fed accountability.
If the Federal Reserve is given new responsibilities every effort
must be made to avoid compromising its ability to manage monetary
policy as it sees fit.
»
- 9694 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
TD juxtapose that news with this one:
A large group of investors with $3 trillion in securities assets and former top regulators on Wednesday released a report attacking the White House's proposal to give the Federal Reserve more power as part of a massive regulatory restructuring under consideration on Capitol Hill.
Now we have a list for when the dollar collapses. Good stuff.
I'll put my vote for transparency and audit against any one of these nits!!
PS: I really don't think that many are really that smart......hear me Cliffy.
Hondo:
Are you the guy Rick & I had dim sum with in S.M., LA about 10 years ago? I call Rick every month at his house in PA.
I trust the free market (free people) to choose a monetary system. Money is too important to be controlled by gov.
Considering the growing population of the world, money and "monetary policies" aren't actually the questions anymore. More important at this point of time, is the fact of the "american-empire" exploiting it's "democratic policies" over the entire world - taking the resources which all people need to survive, with the money they print "out of thin air". so now, the question isn't "do we have enough money in the world?", but, "do we have the resources, for everyone?"
thank-you for listening! (ok...reading) ;-)
The talk media completely misrepresented this petition--i guess the x-enron lobbyist sent out press releases to the unsuspecting, but the proof is in the pudding. God how the lies can grow--and like someone said, 'getting rid of a bad statistic is harder than killing a vampire'--yes and getting rid of conventional wisdom that is perpetually supported with more lies is even more of a nightmare.
What an unbelievable lie!!!The Fed's independence is a strawman--our country deserves to know that the privately held Federal Reserve corp is a monopoly of mammoth proportions and runs every elected official (except for maybe r paul, and a. grayson). The elected officials that can't stop kissing the ring of this monster, need to be ousted out of office, and the Fed's charter needs to be revoked--we would still have the Fed, but it would be owned again, by our country, not by private parties. This is NOT socialistic but socialism is the clever way that the big bank heist for all the fed member banks was accomplished--pls wake up and don't buy it--think.
What we have here is tenured and politically connected guys trying to protect their retirement while the rest of the country be damned... These bearded nutwads don't want anyone to rock their boat. Why would anyone want to kill the golden goose, unless offcourse that golden goose doesn't come to your door to lay the nugget.
And we thought the liberal institutions are against business and anti establishment. Talk about being mislead by misinformation and psycho-babble.
is that 'the' Robert Schiller?
Shiller. Yes, that's him
These idiots actually think the FED is independent??? HAHAHAHAHAHAH
It is independent silly. It is just independent of the country, its people busy making a bounty for its independent members who keep rotating into and out of politics.
The Fed is actually the true governing body of the US. Wasn't it a Rothschild who said something to the effect of, "Give me control of the money and I don't care who makes the laws." The Fed is a shadow government masquerading as a private corporation with a mandate from the 1913 act. The basic charter serving as the backbone for that act was crafted by Rockefeller, Mellon, Carnegie, Morgan, et al. The Fed doesn't serve to protect us, it serves to protect itself/banks.
Now I see why my alma mater went from $32k to $56k/yr from 2001 to 2008. Academia is one the main beneficiaries of the inflation of money and credit. They get paid to give intellectual cover to these monsters.
The bulk fuel distributor just left.
I just bought 300 gallons of diesel and 300 gallons of gasoline.
If Ron Pauls' HB 1207 and S 604 fails to pass the streets of America will run with blood.
www.ronpaul.com/on-the.../audit-the-federal-reserve-hr-1207/
it's not too late to sign-up ==
https://survey.chicagobooth.edu/ViewsFlash/servlet/viewsflash?cmd=showfo...!FedIndependence
Hey all you great researchers-- it would be so wonderful if one of you would take on the challenge of looking to see if any member banks of the federal reserve have gone down vs the toobigtofail banks that were annointed too precious to fail ( and the affiliated hedge funds that use to be investment banks ).
CIT bank is in the news--funny how it's affiliated bank (CIT Bank) is NOT a FED member bank and all kind of hullaballo is happening about to save or not to save...funny that the Fed's member banks seemed to be protected without question--is it like mafia protection--the member banks are the money producers for the fed so they get protection?
The letter reads like it was written five years ago before the Fed turned American capitalism into a farce.
@ #7360
American capitalism has been a farce for far more than five years.
Why can't we have both a transparent and independent FED. Is it too much to ask?
(P.S> I disagree, independence is very important factor, however given the FED played along with absolutely every white house scheme, I don't see how anyone can call it independent; my point is that most of those people that signed are probably fooled by the purpose of this letter. )
I think it was more like the White House played along with every FED scheme.
Shocking that Brad DeLong didn't sign it.
Why is it that those who are supposedly more educated are so stupid?
It is easy to reason using just bare facts with a person with commonsense but not learned. It is improbable to reason with an educated individual with no commonsense.
Not stupid at all.
Where has price inflation outpaced the rate of general inflation? Academics.
With no Fed-induced inflation, these clowns wouldn't be able to hide their empire building. Imagine if the only price that went up year-after-year was the price of education.
Wouldn't be easy to hide.
Somewhere in this debate, transparancy became equated with independence.
large number of academics - why
Groupthinkthinktank members
Every single one of them wants to be called in by the Fed for some kind of CV builder to raise their profile and allow them to study things from the inside for their Nobel work. They're prostitutes. Economics is social science and there are no right answers, just mountains of data supporting contradictory positions on all three sides of a binary issue. They're never held to account for anything they do or say. What a great job. When I'm wrong I loose oodles of money and everyone thinks I'm a twit. .
But, in fairness, I like economics, and some economists -- anyone from GMU pretty much.
I spy Fama in there. Fucking circle jerk.
shills
The democratic legitimacy of the Federal Reserve System is well established by its legal mandate and by the existing appointments process. Frequent communication with the public and testimony before Congress ensure Fed accountability.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ahem. Is that so? If all legistlative powers are vested in Congress and if not properly delegated the exercise of power is illegal, how can a delegation under the Constitution be proper when it effecitvely takes an entity and puts it outside - and above the - law and establishes a body that has neither accountability to nor real oversight by Congress?
The Federal Reserve Act puts the Fed outside the Constitutional order and is thus void. The Fed does not have authority whatsoever.
Tyler,
I tend to agree with most of what you write but not in this case. I don't think Fed transparency and this letter this letter defending monetary policy independence are mutually exclusive. I think this letter is directed at the grilling of Bernanke a couple of weeks ago. I'm pretty sure we can all agree that many of the Representatives asking questions had no idea what they were talking about and were doing a bit of grandstanding. (Given that the Representatives all seemed to be regurgitating the exact same questions, they all probably asked their staffers to prepare questions and those staffers all asked the same person) To my point, the letter specifically addresses ability to remove the unprecedented monetary accommodation when necessary and interference with personnel selection. Further, the Fed minutes released today mention treasury purchases. Specifically, it was mentioned that much larger purchases were necessary to materially affect long term rates but there is a risk that markets may interpret expansion of purchases as monetizing the deficit. I understand the argument for transparency. However, The Fed is probably resisting congress because if they do concede any independence, the floodgates of political pressure may open which would crush the dollar. Personally, Larry Summers a Chairman of The Fed is a bit scary. To conclude, the signatories are more concerned with ability to remove monetary accommodation not transparency.
Sorry what you said, " The Fed is probably resisting congress because if they do concede any independence, the floodgates of political pressure may open which would crush the dollar."...just ain't so!!!!! The money printing, the passing of US$'s to "toobigtofail" was a scheme that looks very crooked to all the world and when a country becomes corrupt, the currency follows. If we could redo the lies of the fall, and unwind, MS, GS, MER and C or let them be bought in pieces the way that broken entities deserve, and need to be treated, the world would view us as honest again. It won't be the blackmailing of the US to "keep the Fed status quo or else" that breaks the US$, it will be the US continuing to allow the corruption that has prevailed in it's apex over the last 10 months thanks to all the agents and shills of the privately held federal reserve monopoly.
The easy smell test on all of this is to take notice--all that so called "need for liquidity" that was "SO" important last fall only accomplished keeping the failed entities alive-but, it didn't provide any added liquidity. And there won't be any 'mopping" up of liquidity, only the big hammer to fall on all of our heads by an increase in the fed funds rate--so the federal reserve member banks make even more on their margins....very corrupt.
No, if the dollar fails, it will be because wethepeople have allowed this banana republic to take hold in our cherished republic--not because we have awakened and decided to resist, and take back mammoth corrupt power from the privately held federal reserve corporation.
I mostly agree with "pcdunham ", however without transparency there is no way for us to make sure that FED is independent. Right now it seems to follow everything that comes out of White House with absolute obedience. FED was planned as a tool of financial stabilization and not the economic planning. As far as I am aware, we don't have any economic planning bodies that were designed for the economic planning. And since suddenly we do, maybe we should stop calling ourselves a free market economy.
That makes sense, and I'm not arguing against transparency. Just trying to point out that the petitiion and signatories aren't arguing against transparency either. There should be a distiction between transparency and independence.
"Finally, calls to alter the structure or personnel selection of the Federal Reserve System easily could backfire by raising inflation expectations and borrowing costs and dimming prospects for recovery."
This is the statement that bothers me. How is that transparency or changing personnel or altering the structure would raise inflation expectations and interests and dim the prospects for recovery? They never defend the statement. And if that were really true, then it means that inflation expectations and interest rates are being held unnaturally low for no other reason than the perception of the people at the helm. And if that's the case, then why bother with the macroeconomic modeling? Why not just take a series of opinion polls and say it's the "animal spirits" of the marketplace? If the Fed's veil is removed, so too will be the alchemy that is macroeconomics. The whole discipline is a joke.
Go do some research on central banks where staff is changed without warning by elected politicians. Do some statistical analysis of interest rates and see which central banks have higher interest rates and inflation. The letter doesnt say rates are dependent on specific personel. Its remarkably smple. altering personel or structure introduces uncertainty to confidence in the currency.
all them crooks should be jailed
I have mixed emotions about all this. On one hand, the Federal Reserve needs to be held accountable. On the other hand, the whole Federal Government needs to be held accountable.
I have great confidence in both of these institutions to fail spectacularly due to their endemic confluence of greed, corruption and bureaucracy. My only uncertainty surrounds whether they have failed sufficiently at this point. I suspect they'll need to screw-up in a more flagrant and absurd way before the collase gets fully underway.
and by signing the petition, I'm sure to have my phone tapped, mail opened, taxes audited, etc. Suer, where do I signup. REVOLUTION NOW!
Bwaaahahahaha. The opinions of the educational industrial complex are worth exactly jack shit. Those phonies played a huge role in this mess as well. As an aside was always amazed at how wonderfully my professors explained how things worked in the real world. You know, the same world they were too chicken shit to join so they hid out in academia their whole life.
You want to get laid, go to college. You want an education, go to the library.
-Frank Zappa
unfortunately, the fed will never be audited. the bill will neverr reach a vote. people will be spoken to.
I feel like I'm on acid reading this... Why do the opponents of this bill assume that "audit power" = "policy control"? Could someone explain?
As others have noted abovev, I don't think this letter was meant to address the bills to audit the fed. It's addressing other concerns.
Wow....great comments all around.........I think that we need to reserch the backgrounds of the signers of the letter/petition, and find out what connections they have to the major banks. Methinks that somewhere there is a little back scratching and hand smothing going on. Revolving door.....how many of these are economists who have "consulted" for the Fed or for members. Just wondering outloud!
did you guy read post from foafa.blogspot.com and john rubino at dollarcollapse.com. the dollar is in for an imminent devaluation no later that 9/15/2009. their logic is solid. i believe so too because we can't just print paper dollars and force upon the world to accept them. that is why tim geithner at middle east and saudi right now to tell them continue accept dollars for oil. that is why chinese president mr. Hu rather skipped g-8 meeting to go back to his country to prepare. news said because of ethinic classes but i don't think so. 135 han dead chineses will not change a thing for a president of more than 1 billion people during an important meeting. china does not need us anymore, they can consume their product themselves or ship to other countries can buy without borrowing them money.
here are links
http://fofoa.blogspot.com/2009/07/call-me-contrarian.html
http://www.dollarcollapse.com/iNP/view.asp?ID=102
I'm shocked. Really.
Members of the eduacational/financal/political establishment rushing to defend the Fed's independence?
there was a day of
independence
way back when,
When the folks who are advancing the concept of not only continued Fed secrecy, but of greater Fed powers are forced to premise the basis of their argument upon the all emcompassing umbrella of Fed independence to set monitary policy rather than upon the requirements for Fed secrecy to protect the formal banking system from the same fate the shadow banking system suffered at the hands of its "depositors" or primary sources of funding, or any other discussion of the matters at hand then those of us that support greater transparency of the operations of the Fed are gaining the upper hand in the debate.
In other words, the failure to address the primary issue in the debate is another means of communication of the admitted weakness of the position.
,wait, am I supposed to sign that son-of-a-bitch.... let me read it .
money=debt
banks=evil
After spending 10 years in academia -- financial markets -- I must say NOBODY is as surprised by the failures of capital markets as the finance and economics faculty.
Especially the finance guys, we were buying the "efficient allocation" and "smart guys like GS are best and you just dont understand TALENT"
Econ guys on the other hand, at least didn't buy the whole thing hook and sinker.
Also, I might add, it is IMPRERATIVE for the business school faculty to tell their students that upon graduation they will work for hedge funds etc. Some of these guys are taking large loans and selling them the math "financial engineering" was one way to justify the outrageous salaries of business school faculty. All a big lie more less.
LENDER OF LAST RESORT? THE FED. MORE LIKE THE US TAXPAYER !
HA HA HA
Why are so many afraid of the Fed being audited? Hanky panky going on? Would be no surprise.
i am really amused by all these comments ... delightful indeed and smart!