|
Below is an extract from a commentary originally posted at www.speculative-investor.com on
3rd April 2007.
In our research we occasionally come across articles in which the writer rails
against the 'fact' that the Fed is privately owned, the implication -- whether
intentional or not -- being that everything would be fine if the Fed were a
government agency. That is, the implication of such complaints is that private
corporations can't be trusted to do the right thing when it comes to management
of the monetary system whereas the government can. This, however, is a case
where two wrongs -- the belief that the Fed is privately owned and the belief
that government ownership would represent a significant improvement -- definitely
don't make a right.
First, let's deal with the myth that the Fed is privately owned*. As noted
by G. Edward Griffin in "Creature
from Jekyll Island":
"The federal government does not own any stock in the [Federal Reserve]
System. In that sense, the Fed is privately owned. That, however, is misleading
in that it implies a typical private-ownership relationship in which the
stockholders own and control. Nothing could be further from the truth. In
this case, the stock carries no proprietary interest, cannot be sold or pledged
as collateral, and does not carry ordinary voting rights. Each bank is entitled
to but one vote regardless of the amount of stock it holds. In reality, the
stock is not evidence of "ownership" but simply certificates showing how
much operating capital each bank has put into the System. It is not a government
agency and it is not a private corporation in the normal sense of the word.
It is subject to political control yet, because of its tremendous power over
politicians and the elective process, it has managed to remain independent
of political oversight. Simply stated, it is a cartel, and its organization
structure is uniquely structured to serve that end."
To operate as a commercial bank in the US a bank must own the stock of the
Federal Reserve, but, as Mr. Griffin points out, this stock does not confer
any of the normal rights of ownership. Furthermore and as explained elsewhere
in Mr. Griffin's book, the members of the Fed's National Board of Governors
-- the seven most senior executives of the Fed -- are appointed by the US President
and confirmed by the Senate. These 7 senior executives dominate the 12-member
Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), not just because they form a majority
but also because they have veto power over who the other 5 members of the Committee
will be.
In other words, a small group of people appointed by the US President exerts
almost total control over the Fed, while the stockholders are stockholders
in name only. Of course, banks are major beneficiaries of the Federal Reserve
System in that the existence of the Fed paves the way for banks to grow their
assets at a much faster pace than would otherwise be possible. Also, the private
banking system exerts considerable influence over the government and, therefore,
over the President's appointees to the National Board of Governors. It's important
to understand, though, that this influence has nothing to do with the ownership
of Federal Reserve stock. In fact, some of the most important US financial
corporations in terms of their influence on the government -- Goldman Sachs
springs to mind -- are not even members of the Federal Reserve and hence own
no Federal Reserve stock.
This leads us to the question: does it matter whether the Fed is, or isn't,
privately owned?
The answer is no, it doesn't; the question of the Fed's ownership is really
just a "red herring".
The main issue (problem) is that the Fed, regardless of its ownership, has
the legal power to counterfeit money in unlimited amounts. This power, in turn,
enables the unfettered growth of both the Federal Government and the banking
system. Specifically, due to the existence of the central bank there are no
rigid limits on how much the government can borrow and spend because the Fed
stands ready to monetise (purchase using money created out of 'thin air') every
dollar of new debt not purchased by private investors. As a result, the rampant
expansion of government gets 'paid for' by the devaluation of the existing
stock of money. And due to the potentially unlimited quantity of money that
can be created by the Fed, the private banks are able to grow their balance
sheets to a much greater extent than their equity levels would otherwise dictate.
In summary, the issue is not the Fed's ownership; the issue is its ability
to create an unlimited amount of "legal tender" money out of 'thin air'.
*Some writers have claimed that the US Fed is not only privately owned,
it is privately owned by a small group of FOREIGN banks. Dr Edward Flaherty
specifically addresses, and refutes, this foreign ownership claim in an essay
at http://www.usagold.com/federalreserve.html.
|