Why? Congressmen are not typically trained in economics or finance. Most of them have absolutely no understanding of how the Fed works. Do you really want to hear congressional campaigns include promises like "If I'm elected, I'll keep the interest rates low"? Ughhh.
I really want the Constitution followed.
I'm curious what you think Bernanke should have done. And I'm curious as to why you think his decisions (whether you agree with them or not) weren't independent. He isn't an elected official, so he doesn't have any campaign coffers to fill. Are you saying that the banks bribed him with kickbacks?
Not exactly bribed, no. Just bending to the establishment. Bernanke went in there like a lion, talking about how he wasn't going to allow this and that. He was going to tighten the leash. He whimpers now, nothing more. Did nothing to solve any problem, did nothing to run the fed in a proper manner.
That's a fairly accurate description of the Fed's job. I don't see anything wrong with it. Enlighten me.
The federal reserves mandate is to balance inflation with unemployment. Growth is not synonymous with unemployment. Growth can come from market manipulation, gains on Wall Street or in the banking sector. You know, the people who run the Fed and who's irresponsible and uncontrolled behavior got us into the current mess. Growth doesn't mean unemployment. Gaining growth does not mean we had to lesson unemployment. Of course, lowered unemployment can lead to growth as well; but growth itself is not the Fed's mandate; it's unemployment. They did nothing on that front, they did everything on the "growth" side. Help out their buddies on Wall Street at the expense of the rest of us on Main Street.
If the Fed isn't independent, then our monetary policy will become based on whatever direction the political winds are currently blowing, rather than what is the best monetary policy. Generally that means that our interest rates will be kept lower than they should be, because congressmen want to boost the economy NOW while they're in office, even if it causes a crash many years down the road.
Better than Goldman Sachs. I can vote for politicians, I have no say in Goldman Sachs
Technically the Federal Reserve doesn't print money. The US Mint does that, which is under the Department of Treasury. The Fed controls the money supply, which is slightly different.
It buys from the Treasury, yes. The Fed regulates the value of the dollar.
As for regulating the value of our currency, Congress last exercised that power in 1971, when they allowed the value of our currency to float freely. That has been the congressional policy for the last 40 years. The Fed does not have the ability to change that.
If the Fed's mandate is to balance unemployment and inflation, how do you think it could accomplish that without being able to affect either? Inflation, BTW, sets what our dollar is worth; that's valuing the dollar. The fed manipulates long term and short term interest rates. They set the inflation rate by doing so. As such, the Federal Reserve is an institute which sets the value of our dollar, a power given only to Congress. Thus the Federal Reserve is property of Congress.
There's nothing wrong with the audit, it in and of itself will not even do anything to the "independence" (like I want an institute which sets the value of my money to be separate and isolated from government) of the Fed. There's nothing wrong with the owner saying, we want to look at the books. We want to know what you've been up to. All the resistance to it...makes you wonder what's on those books. If there is improper action on the side of the fed as it relates to our money...hang them all.