Do you know what the Federal Reserve needs? Diversity. Oh, not the intellectual kind where Austrian theorists go to intellectual battle with Keynesian disciples during two-day Federal Open Market Committee policy meetings every month. We are talking about skin color and genitalia, two attributes that are paramount to skills, acumen, and experience. Were someone’s politically correct pigmentation or private parts not taken into consideration, how could the nation entrust the Board of Governors with setting interest rates, printing money, and bailing out the banks?
Herman Cain, the former 2012 presidential candidate and pizza executive, could be returning to the U.S. central bank after President Donald Trump nominated the former frontrunner to serve on the board. The radio host and syndicated columnist is still being vetted by the White House, but it looks like Cain is the man Trump wants.
But what do the Democrats think? So far, they have been mum on the subject. That said, if they wish to be philosophically consistent, then they would be enthusiastic about Cain.
In March 2018, Liberty Nation reported that several Democrats were outraged that John Williams, the then-president of the Fed Bank of San Francisco, was replacing the retiring William Dudley at the Fed Bank of New York. Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), who was gearing up for his 2020 announcement, wrote in Bloomberg:
“The New York Fed has never had a woman or a person of color at its helm, and the Federal Reserve Bank only just last year added its first black regional bank president. If we’re serious about creating an inclusive and sustainable economy, no one should be left on the sidelines.”
In March 2016, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) championed superficial diversity at the Eccles Building:
“Given the critical linkage between monetary policy and the experiences of hardworking Americans, the importance of ensuring that such positions are filled by persons that reflect and represent the interests of our diverse country cannot be understated. When the voices of women, African-Americans, Latinos, and representatives of consumers and labor are excluded from key discussions, their interests are too often neglected.”
Fed Up, a left-leaning community-based advocacy group, echoed the senators’ sentiments and complained about white males.
Cain is different, though. He is black, he was raised in poverty, and he is self-made. These should allot him several victimhood points. Now, if Cain declared that “I now choose to live life as a gay man,” then he might receive an endorsement from all the 2020 candidates.
There are two problems, though: He was tapped by President Trump and he is a conservative. Therefore, it probably wouldn’t matter if he came out as transgendered or transspecies. Once you have a connection to Trump or the conservative movement, you’ll be loathed and sabotaged from the beginning.
Should the Dems give Cain the heave-ho, they once again will put their hypocrisy on display.
The Street’s Thoughts
Like the Stephen Moore pick, Wall Street is none too pleased by the choice. According to a CNBC survey, not only do 60% of respondents want the Senate to vote against Moore’s confirmation but also 53% want the Senate to reject Cain. About half expect the two men to get approved. The poll, which consisted of 48 fund managers, economists, and money strategists, found that 70% think Cain and Moore are “too political” and “not qualified.”
Too political? Well, yes; all Fed decisions are based on politics. Not qualified? Why these men are unqualified is not clear. Cain, in addition to being an ex-Fed bank official, possesses degrees in mathematics and computer science and has decades of executive experience. Moore also has degrees in economics, worked as an editorial writer at The Wall Street Journal, and served as the chief economist at the renowned Heritage Foundation. These aren’t exactly lightweights and random protesters, shrieking about the inane Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) proposal.
Perhaps they are being widely repudiated because Cain and Moore support a return to the widely vilified gold standard. Or maybe The Street still has nightmares of Cain’s famous smiling campaign ad. Or it could be that the financial industry is a bunch of bullies and wants to pick on the nerd.
Moore of the Same
Are Moore and Cain inspired choices? Not really. If President Trump wanted to transform the entire Federal Reserve System rather than just increase the odds of introducing a fourth round of quantitative easing, there are plenty of names to choose from: Tom Woods, Joseph Salerno, Robert Wenzel, and Ron Paul. It isn’t so much Cain and Moore that should be rebuked but the institution itself. It is the Eccles Building that can manipulate markets, create moral hazards, and destroy economies. A pizza executive and an editorial writer will neither enable the economy’s demise nor prevent its undoing.Feel free to comment below. And remember to check out the web’s best conservative news aggregator Whatfinger.com