ARNOLD KLING
August 14, 2011
The Top Political Contributors
August 11, 2011
Gender and the New Commanding Heights
August 11, 2011
Jamie Galbraith Makes an Assumption
August 11, 2011
Macroeconometrics: The Science of Hubris
August 10, 2011
Real and Nominal Bond Yields
BRYAN CAPLAN
August 14, 2011
The Effect of Thumb Sucking on Income
August 12, 2011
The Voice of Cold, Hard Truth to All Would-Be Educators
August 12, 2011
Ability, Morality, and Prosperity: A Paper and a Report
August 11, 2011
The Theory of Time and Frittering
August 10, 2011
Male Variance and the Remnants of the Gender Gap
DAVID HENDERSON
August 9, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken", Part Two
August 8, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken"
August 5, 2011
James Bovard on the Peace Corps
August 4, 2011
Summers Way Off on FDR and 1941
August 3, 2011
The "Amazon" Tax


Representative Frank did refer to no, "one, unlected," so he may still claim that some elected many may spend $800,000,000,000 dollars as they see fit in a Democracy with consistency. A mass that seems legitimate should, of course, exercise all and any powers that it fancies.
Riiight. And just like the "Do Not Call" list, they exempt themselves. Just like it's bad to pester people with unsolicted calls (except for politicians) it's also bad to collect other people's money in one place (except if you're a politician).
Nice.
In an interview on Charlie Rose, Frank did raise two interesting points. (1) Though Freddie was in trouble, it's not at all clear Fannie needed to be nationalized by the government in order to survive and (2) the Fed walking around and doing whatever it wants (including buying insurance companies) with its $800 billion is something to talk about.
It seems to me that the Fed has grabbed onto the "exigent circumstances" clause and is now doing whatever the hell it desires because it believes (probably correctly), that no one has the guts and standing to sue.
Is this really what Congress intended when it passed the federal reserve act... to allow the Fed and Treasury, by executive fiat, to nationalize all kinds of financial service companies!? It's certainly worth a discussion.
Barney Fwank actually is quite libertarian when he chooses to be. He has spoken out ardently against regulation of the gambling industry and has sponsored a bill to reverse the online gambling act. Unfortunately, with this as an exception, he is not as good with economic issues.