For all of your ranting, the Federal Reserve is and independent agency of the government. And the bottom line is that you have made allegations for which you cannot support and have no evidence. Two, the Federal Reserve is not a private corporation as you claimed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System 1.The presidentially appointed Board of Governors (or Federal Reserve Board), an independent federal government agency located in Washington, D.C. According to the board of governors of the Federal Reserve, "It is not 'owned' by anyone and is 'not a private, profit-making institution' Yes, Federal Reserve Governors are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate for a term of 14 years. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Now let me ask you, how long it the term of the POTUS? The answer 4 years. And how long can a POTUS stay in office? Answer, 8 years. What is the term of a senator? Answer 6 years. No I again ask you for evidence to support your claim that politicians routinely lean on (pressure) the Fed governors to manipulate interest rates. http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqbog.htm#1 Federal Reserve: "The seven members of the Board of Governors are nominated by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. By law, the appointments must yield a "fair representation of the financial, agricultural, industrial, and commercial interests and geographical divisions of the country," and no two Governors may come from the same Federal Reserve District. The full term of a Governor is fourteen years; appointments are staggered so that one term expires on January 31 of each even-numbered year. A Governor who has served a full term may not be reappointed, but a Governor who was appointed to complete an unexpired term may be reappointed to a full fourteen-year term. Once appointed, Governors may not be removed from office for their policy views. The lengthy terms and staggered appointments are intended to contribute to the insulation of the Board--and the Federal Reserve System as a whole--from day-to-day political pressures to which it might otherwise be subject. If all Governors serve full terms, a President would be able to appoint only two Governors during a four-year presidential term. Moreover, even a President reelected for a second term would not have appointed a majority of the Governors until late in the second term. In reality, many Governors do not complete their fourteen-year terms, and recent Presidents have averaged more than one appointment to the Board every two years. As stipulated in the Banking Act of 1935, the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Board are chosen by the President from among the sitting Governors and must be confirmed by the Senate. They serve terms of four years and may be reappointed as Chairman or Vice Chairman until their terms as Governors expire. The Chairman serves as public spokesperson and representative of the Board and manager of the Board's staff and presides at Board meetings. Affirming the apolitical nature of the Board, recent Presidents representing both major political parties have selected the same person as Board Chairman." - Federal Reserve The Federal Reserve was created to be independent of politics and for good reason. Monetary supply of the nation is far too important of a subject to be left to the shenanigans of the American political system. I have only seen the video you posted once. And found it totally lacking any meritt and did not in any way support your case for the discredited Austrian School of economics. Let me summarize the video, it consisted of a bunch of Republican pundits/shills talk about how great the economy was before the crash of 2007and contrasted those rantings with some statements made by Peter Shiff, president of EuroPacific Capital who claims to be a supporter of the Austrian School. One the Republican pundits in the clip were political agents not economists. Shiff perdicted a collapse of the US housing market because of a perceived housing bubble, not the entire global market system. Shiffs clients took horrible losses in 2008. I wonder why it did not mention that fact in the video montage you referenced. Because Shiff got several things wrong about 2008. And below is a small listing of same. 12 Ways Schiff Was Wrong in 2008 Wrong about hyperinflation Wrong about the dollar Wrong about commodities except for gold Wrong about foreign currencies except for the Yen Wrong about foreign equities Wrong in timing Wrong in risk management Wrong in buy and hold thesis Wrong on decoupling Wrong on China Wrong on US treasuries Wrong on interest rates, both foreign and domestic http://selfinvestors.com/tradingstocks/news/peter-schiffs-euro-pacific-capital-down-40-70-in-2008/ And most importantly, he missed the issue key reason for the collapse. He was thinking bubble. The collapse was the much more severe because it was not a real estate bubble that caused a near global melt down. The reason for the global melt down was two fold: - Misrepresentation of packaged CMO's (giving investment grade ratings to junk securities by the security ratings agencies). - Selling of Credit Default Swaps (CDS's) without reserves to backup potential losses. So when the bundled mortgages went bad and the organizations holding CDS's went belly up, you had the makings of a global catastrophe. Shiff missed it all. Two he was no the only one predicting a financial collapse in 2008. I suggest you see some of Billy T's writings. He is on record, in Sciforums for making the forecast. And there are others including Dr. Nouriel Roubini a Keynesian who made similar forecasts. So let's recount what Shiff was right about, he was right about one thing there was a crisis in 2008. But he missed the causes and the magnitude of the cirisis and his clients suffered heavily as a result. One more point, I suggest you take people like Shiff with a grain of salt. They are first and foremost salesmen. And by claiming adherence to a discredited economic theory championed by a segement of society, he may be pandering that to that market segement. And it appears obvious to me that is what Shiff is doing. No, my characterization of the Austrian school is that of a crystal ball and a bunch of mumbo jumbo. I am confused, you have been an advocate for the Austrian School and now you say you support Keynesian Economics and that Keynesian economics works. You are right, in this sense that getting government to pay down debt and deficits in good times, it is a hard bullet for politicians to swallow. And that is a problem. And it is true that the nation does face a debt problem that was unnessarily aggrevated by a doubling of the national debt and huge increases in the structural deficits which occured under Republican governmnet. Those issues do need to be addressed. And the best way to address those isssues is to restore growth to the economy. The second issue, that needs to be addressed is to cut federal costs and increase federal revenues to bring debt down. And the nation needs investment. In the Clinton and Bush II years money was sent overseas instead of being invested in our infrastructure. We desperately need to better use our own domestic resources like natural gas more efficiently. All we need to to that is a little investement. And unfortunately, I am not seeing that investment yet.