Symmetric Storm, Asymmetric Shock and the Immorality of Fed Policy

Fed
Photo: Alec Favale on Unsplash

Some have called it “the great equalizer.” In some ways, this is an accurate description. The pandemic does not discriminate, although certainly some people are more vulnerable to the disease. One could also describe the coronavirus pandemic as a symmetric storm, one that is howling across the world so fiercely that some are wondering if they are, in fact, hearing the harbinger of the apocalypse. However, the effects of the pandemic, like previous crises, are not symmetric but instead, have resulted in an asymmetric shock.

The response of the “technocratic class,” in true elitist fashion, has also been anything but symmetric. It has been a moral failure of monumental proportions. However, this is nothing new; it is just a new low. For decades, the elite in the United States and around the world have been more preoccupied with advancing their own political, academic and professional careers than about the people they are privileged with the responsibility of serving, the people whose interests they have a moral obligation to protect and to promote.

Instead, central banks and other institutions around the world have created policies that cater to the powers that be, multinational corporations and the rich. Understandably, monetary policy is difficult for many people to understand beyond basics, such as the lowering and raising of interest rates, its theoretical effects on inflation and unemployment and, perhaps, a general understanding of the mechanisms with which central banks implement the policy, what was, in the United States, known as open market operations.

Fed Response 2008

In response to the financial crisis of 2008/9, the United States central bank, the Federal Reserve (Fed), started using a set of monetary policy tools that fall under the umbrella of unconventional monetary policy. One of these policies is known as quantitative easing. It should be noted that these are experimental policies (the Japanese experience notwithstanding), and the experiment is clearly failing. Prior to the financial crisis, the Fed maintained a balance sheet that was around 800 billion.

After hitting the zero-lower-bound, meaning interest rates could not be lowered any further (aside from negative interest rates, a topic for another day), the Fed resorted to quantitative easing. They began purchasing assets not to target short-term interest rates, money market rates, such as the fed funds and the repo rates, but to lower longer-term interest rates.

Fed – Interest Rates and Morality

The Bible clearly prohibits usury, more precisely, charging interest at all; for example, “If you lend money to one of my people among you who is needy, do not treat it like a business deal; charge no interest,” Exodus 22:25, and “Do not charge a fellow Israelite interest, whether on money or food or anything else that may earn interest,” (Deuteronomy 23:19).

McCleary and Barro (2019, p11) in their book, The Wealth of Religions (support your local bookstore), wrote the following with respect to the secularization hypothesis: “Secularization applied to some aspects of John Calvin’s city of Geneva and its regulation of economic activity, especially the distinction doctrinally made between interest and usury. Interest was an economic necessity for commercial and financial transactions and was allowed by the authorities. The maximum interest rate, set at 5 percent, was regulated by the Genevan government and the Consistory, a corporate religious-moral committee of the government whose judgments were enforced by the city council…”.

Interest rates above the regulated rate were considered usurious; however, they explain that this was raised to 6.7 percent while Calvin was still living and to 10 percent after his death. With these and related actions, the city of Geneva apparently liberated itself from the theological restriction and began what they describe as “the secularization of economic activity in Geneva.”

Another way to describe it would be, thus began the unleashing of unbridled capitalism. The immorality of usury is obvious. One only has to look at its modern manifestations, such as Payday loans. Even the actions of the recently deceased former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker who raised interest rates to control inflation, an action which predictably led to a recession, should be reexamined to possibly find a better approach.

The immorality of the opposite of high interest rates, low interest rates, particularly for an extended period of time, has not been adequately discussed or perhaps even considered. Volcker’s successor, former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan depended on this form of management to prop up financial markets and, arguably secondarily, the real economy, which has had various negative effects, such as asset price bubbles, excessive speculation and crises among others.

Fed – Bailouts

In more recent years, financial markets have become dependent not only on perpetually low interest rates but also on eye-popping amounts of central bank intervention, trillions of dollars, often in the form of “special facilities,” financial/legal vehicles that the Fed has been using to circumvent its requirement to hold only government-issued (T-bills, Treasuries, etc.) or government-backed (Agency MBS) securities. (The exact totals of “bailout” money, regardless of whether it is on the balance sheet or in special facilities, depends on how one counts it and what the Fed has been willing to disclose. It should be required to disclose it all.)

Not only are the Fed’s policies causing imbalances and other issues, but the key question is: why are the very corporations that have been causing our economic and financial problems being bailed out with trillions of dollars while the American people are suffering and being abandoned by the institutions that are supposed to be serving them? These central bank actions (both here and abroad) are exacerbating the asymmetric shock on the rich and the poor, on richer and poorer countries.

The Fed will attempt to provide pacifying, pseudo-intellectual arguments to justify these grossly immoral actions. They cannot obfuscate the truth. The institution is failing the American people whose taxes are being used in ways that are detrimental to their interests and contrary to how they should be used. This exploitation of the American people and corruption of the Fed needs to stop. The American people and people around the world deserve better from their institutions, their leaders and the “technocratic elite.”            

Related to this post

Serving Mammon and Selling the Faith Down River

Faith
Photo: Ian Espinosa on Unsplash

It is not about right or left. It is not about socialism or capitalism. It is not about power or money. It is not about politics or culture. It is about the faith – Christianity. If one proclaims to love Jesus, this prioritization would show in various aspects of the person’s life.

When practiced, evangelical Christianity focuses on Scripture, a personal relationship with Jesus who is to be the center of one’s life, accepting Jesus as one’s savior and being born again. The orientation is not supposed to be toward controversial topics, legalism, economics or political positions and persons. It is about one’s relationship with God, in particular the Son of God, plain and simple.

The end of the Constantinian bargain was good for the faith, and the separation of church and state should be respected. In the more recent past, this separation has reverted to an unholy alliance between church, particularly within evangelical Christianity, and state, in this case, the Republican Party.

Huntington (2020) argues that this unfortunate trajectory was triggered by the election of John F. Kennedy, not out of fear of his Catholic faith but of losing influence, power and a hold on the American culture that they thought was veering into a liberal abyss.

The Start of the Faith’s Decline

He writes, “Kennedy’s speech has been cited innumerable times as one of the clearest calls for a separation of church and state, not to mention religious liberty. But, religious conservatives conceived of an America in which Protestant Christianity formed a central, immutable core. Thus, they fought to keep church and state separate while creating their own right-wing blend of religion and politics. They accomplished this by preaching Christian nationalism at the pulpit, organizing campaigns through conservative religious groups, and coordinating their actions with the faith-friendly business community. Eventually, when pressed by broader societal change, Protestant and Catholic conservatives joined forces with the Republican Party, forming a national pan-Christian movement to wage war against political and religious liberalism.”

To state the obvious, it is blatant hypocrisy to practice the very thing one condemns, the intertwining of church and state, and attempting to evangelize the faith while prioritizing power and money will likely be unsuccessful, which the data seem to support. Also, I would argue that this affinity between what is termed the “Christian right” and the Republican Party is now primarily about power and money and less about cultural changes such as the growth of secularism.

Dishonoring the Faith

Balmer (2020) states, “Socialism, they argue, is somehow antithetical to Christianity. Some have even argued that capitalism is sanctioned in the scriptures. Jerry Falwell, one of the founders of the Religious Right, declared that ‘the free-enterprise system is clearly outlined in the Book of Proverbs,’ and his son, Jerry Falwell Jr. recently said, ‘I believe in Jesus’ teachings to do what’s in the best interest of the corporation.’

Clearly, these evangelicals have never read the Acts of the Apostles. ‘All the believers were one in heart and mind,’ Acts 4:32 reads. ‘No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.’”

I would argue that they have heard of and read Acts, but they do not really care about Jesus or Scripture, but themselves. They have become corrupt and power hungry. The serve mammon – not the Lord. They hold their Bibles high not to evangelize the truth and the way but to obfuscate their sins and their self-serving manipulation and exhortation of theology in superficial gestures of piety.

Segal (2015) writes, “But is money more spiritually dangerous than theology? The answer may be trickier than we think, especially within the numbing comfort of a proudly affluent and educated American church. Money is a tangible, countable, often visible god. Theology, on the other hand — if it is cut off from truly knowing and enjoying God himself — can be a soothing, subtle, superficially spiritual god. Both are deadly, but one lulls us into a proud, intellectual, and purely cosmetic confidence and rest before God. Theology will kill you if it does not kindle a deep and abiding love for the God of the Bible, and if it does not inspire a desire for his glory, and not ultimately our own.”

Jesus said, “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon” (Matthew 6:24). The question is: Who do you serve? Honor with your lips and your heart or else it is not honoring but dishonoring the faith.

The Necessity for Christian Witness in Secular Society

Christian witness
Photo: Iam Os on Unsplash

As the western world became more secular, commencing with the Enlightenment, which has since developed into the perverse idolization of science, western society has also become more reliant on government to provide the basic needs that were once met by the church. Hospitals and education as we know it were inventions of the church. However, the weaknesses of a dependence on government to meet these needs have become exposed. First, let’s consider the differences in their inceptions.

Jesus renamed Simon, a poor, uneducated fisherman, as Peter (rock) and told him that on this rock he would build his church, one that has since grown from a small Jewish sect to over 2 billion people worldwide, the largest, most diverse body in the world. The foundation of the church is Jesus’s timeless, universal teachings.

The foundation of a secular society is neither timeless nor universal. The American Constitution although remarkably well-reasoned and advanced for its time was the product of elites, who indirectly referenced the Christian conception of the person, children of God with all of its inherent dignities, yet tempered this theological understanding with pragmatic worldly considerations of good governance, which they determined required a republic, in other words, similar to the classical conception of democracy, led by well-educated, well-heeled men.

Jesus had no such considerations. Jesus’s choice of Peter had nothing to do with education, power, money or pragmatism, but with his love for and devotion to him. Despite his failings, Peter seemed to intuitively, meaning by grace, understand Jesus and his message, and it was his understanding that earned him this privileged position. Men of this world are not trying to understand divine lessons, but the world they live in and see. Peter could understand a different world, not his one, but the one that could be, the heaven on earth that could be realized if only humans were to consistently and completely apply Jesus’s teachings.   

This fundamental difference in origin continues to manifest in our secular world. The primary motivations for Christians who provide these services is still to live out Jesus’s calling, which is based on love and compassion. The state’s or the private sector’s provision of the same services is mainly motivated by money. Thus, its success is dependent not on one’s conscience or bearing honest Christian witness, i.e. laws written by God, but on laws written by men. Any failures in the law or in their administration could result in problems with the provision of these services, as we have seen time and again, for example, in our public education and health care systems.

Therefore, the sole dependence on the state for these services is as dangerous and precarious as the nation itself. If a corrupt, depraved person rises to power, the people will be at the mercy of a failed state with no corrective measures since the constitution and the laws would simply be changed to facilitate the exploitation or subjugation of the people.

Although both church and state are vulnerable to corruption, unlike the state, the corrective measure in the church is indelible and immutable since it is the foundation of the church itself, Jesus’s teachings. The enforcement of the church’s corrective measure is its believers who would force the church to return to the correct application of the teachings. The church’s role in society was incomparably important, and it needs to remain so, as it provides an irreplaceable source of stability and goodness for the world.

CT, Quick to Listen (2020): https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2020/march-web-only/contagious-diseases-compassion-public-health-hospitals-hist.html

>>https://longinglogos.com/the-tradition-of-the-trending/<<