4 ms·

It’s certainly government. The US Congress created it as an agency of the US government, just as it did every other government agency; and the Congress can dest

by alwa 9mo ago

It’s certainly government. The US Congress created it as an agency of the US government, just as it did every other government agency; and the Congress can destroy it. The Congress did not provide for direct political control—elections (and electoral politics) can’t change the Federal Reserve’s decisions (or decision-makers) directly. There’s indirect control: the elected administration selects people to nominate as governors, who then go on to make the decisions. But they have to choose people who the (elected) Senate will confirm, and there’s not too much the executive can do if they don’t like the decisions their appointed governors go on to make during their 14-year terms. The question at hand at the moment is whether the executive can unilaterally usurp the agency’s Congressionally-mandated structure and use its power directly. It’s kind of like how the various Civil Service acts sheltered career civil servants from the constant changes in political winds, so that we can have career professionals in government instead of using public paychecks purely as a prize for the buddies of whoever won the last election. The present administration resents that independence too.

throwaway290 9mo ago
It's as much government as Amtrack and USPS.
- alwa 9mo ago
  I’d argue that its primary functions are core government functions in a way that passenger rail and postal services are not. Amtrak and USPS sell services at retail (and compete; see i.e. SunRail and UPS). The public aspect of their prerogative is relatively small (I tend to care much more about whether the train is on time than I do who operates, and who owns the tracks, and what the liability cap is; I tend to care about speed and price more often than I care that USPS will go places where FedEx won’t). And the “product” is a set of individual services executed by a big workforce—the higher-ups exist to make sure the services get delivered down the line. Quasi-corporate structures make a lot of sense for that. Whereas the Fed’s jobs involve setting monetary policy and regulating the financial sector. The “product” is the set of policies the board vote to implement, and the staff exist to gather information and pass it upward to support those decisions (maybe using powers delegated downward to them). Like any other government agency.

by alwa 9mo ago

throwaway290 9mo ago

It's as much government as Amtrack and USPS.

alwa 9mo ago
I’d argue that its primary functions are core government functions in a way that passenger rail and postal services are not. Amtrak and USPS sell services at retail (and compete; see i.e. SunRail and UPS). The public aspect of their prerogative is relatively small (I tend to care much more about whether the train is on time than I do who operates, and who owns the tracks, and what the liability cap is; I tend to care about speed and price more often than I care that USPS will go places where FedEx won’t). And the “product” is a set of individual services executed by a big workforce—the higher-ups exist to make sure the services get delivered down the line. Quasi-corporate structures make a lot of sense for that. Whereas the Fed’s jobs involve setting monetary policy and regulating the financial sector. The “product” is the set of policies the board vote to implement, and the staff exist to gather information and pass it upward to support those decisions (maybe using powers delegated downward to them). Like any other government agency.