In a Bloomberg article from February 12, Senator Rand Paul discussed his views on Bitcoin and other alternative currencies. He stated that his concern with Bitcoin “was whether or not something has real value. I could imagine a kind of coin that was exchangeable.” He felt that if Bitcoin, “Wal-coin,” or a similar company currency was exchangeable for stock in that company, it would give real value to the currency. That currency would, in Sen. Paul’s opinion, raise profit margins for those companies, which he believes would be an interesting prospect. You can read the full story here.
When it comes to economics, Republicans love talking about jobs, jobs, jobs. They cite real unemployment numbers that are far worse than what the public is told. They cite record numbers of Americans leaving the work force. They talk about cold, hard numbers. The GOP is obsessed with talking about jobs—but why? The vast majority of voters already have a job. We also know that government doesn’t create jobs—that’s what the private sector is for—so when conservatives engage the Democrats on the jobs issue, we’re at a huge disadvantage. They get to play Santa Claus, and we’re left talking vaguely about
The liberal economic elite is circling the wagons to preserve the Federal Reserve. Alan Blinder denounces proposed laws which will “encourage congressional meddling with monetary policy.” Catherine Rampell takes up the cudgel against legislation mandating an audit of the Fed, on the grounds that “monetary policy is a complex technical apparatus that not everyone (read Congress) is equipped to operate.” What is raising the liberal establishment’s ire? Three modest bills authored by Representatives Scott Garrett and Thomas Massie, and Senator Rand Paul, which seek to remind the Federal Reserve for whom they work. The Federal Reserve is as close to
In an orchestrated orgy of protests, Fed governors and regional bank presidents have roasted Sen. Rand Paul and his co-sponsors for reintroducing a bill mandating an audit of the Fed. Loretta Mester, president of the Cleveland Fed, wants us to know that such a thought is “misguided.” Why? “They really are about allowing political considerations to influence monetary policy decisions,” she said in a speech in Columbus. “This would be a tremendous mistake, because it would ultimately lead to poorer economic performance.” What performance? Presumably the Fed wants a pat on the back for the zero-interest-rate policy of the last