GSI Banner
  • Free Access
  • Contributors
  • Membership Levels
  • Video
  • Origins
  • Sponsors
  • My Account
  • Sign In
  • Join Now

  • Free Access
  • Contributors
  • Membership Levels
  • Video
  • Origins
  • Sponsors
  • Contact

© 2026 Grey Swan Investment Fraternity

  • Cookie Policy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
  • Whitelist Us
Beneath the Surface

Why Fed Reform Could Be the Biggest Sleeper Issue of 2024

Loading ...Addison Wiggin

October 28, 2024 • 3 minute, 40 second read


Why Fed Reform Could Be the Biggest Sleeper Issue of 2024

From The Daily Economy:

 

Joseph Sternberg, author of the “Political Economics” column at the Wall Street Journal, has been on the Federal Reserve’s case recently. He continues to take central bankers to task in his latest article. “The next president will inherit a Federal Reserve staffed by economists — and their intellectual helpmates in academia — who still don’t fully understand what has happened over the past few years, let alone over the past few decades,” Sternberg warns. He’s right. Fed officials admit to only limited and contingent culpability for high inflation in recent years.

The Fed is a flawed institution at best, and a failed institution at worst. Sternberg suggests several reforms. While potentially helpful, none go far enough.

First, Sternberg castigates the fashionable yet unfounded belief amongst policy economists that “Mr. Trump’s economic agenda of tariffs and tax cuts would be inflationary.” Sternberg is right to call out this nonsense.

Tariffs would make specific goods and services more expensive. This is a relative price effect. It only shows up in the general price level if it affects enough prices to drive up the index—and even then it doesn’t really qualify as inflation, because it’s a one-time transition to a higher price level. Inflation means a higher growth rate for the price level.

Tax cuts aren’t inflationary, either. If anything, by incentivizing additional savings and investment, tax cuts may result in a small productivity boost, and hence mild disinflation. The crude Keynesianism Sternberg calls out, despite its consistent record of failed predictions going back more than 70 years, is still alive and well amongst economists who see themselves as efficiency engineers first and social scientists second. We can safely ignore them.

Next, Sternberg laments Fed decision-makers’ “groupthink,” explained in part by the concentration of authority in the “Washington-based Board of Governors in thrall to the central bank’s research department.” The “Fed’s independence from the rest of the government” amplifies its irresponsibility. It “means politicians and voters can’t enforce accountability.” Sternberg correctly highlights the Fed’s adoption of flexible average inflation targeting (FAIT) in August 2020 as an example of deep institutional flaws. The Fed is picking its own goals and deciding whether or not it has achieved them. In other words, it’s a judge in its own cause. That’s unacceptable for anyone who cares about the rule of law.

How to fix this? Sternberg suggests changing how the Fed makes decisions, so that regional Fed branches have more input. He also wants Congress to keep a closer eye on monetary policymakers. These are probably good ideas. At the margin, they would help. But we can and should do more.

Here are a few harder-hitting ideas for Fed reform:

  • Get rid of the dual mandate. It’s redundant. The Fed’s monetary policy activities should solely focus on price stability.
  • Pare back the Fed’s regulatory powers radically. The Fed should ensure banks are adequately capitalized against short-term liabilities. That’s it.
  • End further credit allocation. Close the discount window.
  • Shrink the balance sheet. Return to a “Treasuries only” policy for open market operations.
  • Stop paying interest on reserves. Ditch the floor system and return to the corridor system.

For even more radical (and effective) reforms, consider the following, in ascending order of implausibility:

  • Compel the Fed to stabilize the dollar, or current-dollar GDP, or a related nominal anchor. If central bankers fail, they get fired.
  • Eliminate the FOMC. Automatically grow the monetary base by a set percentage each year. Long live Milton Friedman!
  • Freeze the monetary base. Outsource monetary policy to the market. From now on, financial intermediation (banking) is the sole means by which the money supply changes. The only requirement is banks must redeem their liabilities for fiat dollars, the stock of which is now fixed.
  • Revive commodity money. The gold standard is massively underrated. It’s not as attractive an option if the US is the only economy on gold. But it’s still worth a look.

“Fed reform could be the nerdiest sleeper issue of this campaign season,” Sternberg concludes.

I can only wish. Americans are hopping mad about dollar depreciation. But even with 9-percent consumer price inflation during 2022, Congress never seriously considered changing how the Fed works. Nevertheless, it should. I hope Sternberg is right about citizens’ appetite for reining in the central bank – the hungrier, and nerdier, the better.


Gold Forecasts Stock Market Volatility

January 27, 2026 • Addison Wiggin

The S&P 500 may be sitting near a record 7,000. But relative to gold, it’s been in decline.

Over the past three years, the market is up 45%, but gold is up 180%. Today the ratio of the S&P to gold is down to 1.39.

Gold Forecasts Stock Market Volatility
Silver’s Parabolic Move

January 26, 2026 • Addison Wiggin

Silver is now up 54% year-to, err, month-to-date. And up over 280% since the start of 2025.

While we don’t know how much further upside is left, prior parabolic moves like these tend to lead to big pullbacks when they end.

“If you’re tempted to take a screenshot of your portfolio, it’s a good idea to take some profits while you’re doing that,” suggests our Portfolio Director, Andrew Packer.

We’d do so to grab some of those silver profits, simply because even though we started dollar-cost-averaging (DCA) into gold and silver in 2018 – silver was $16.47 – no assets can go parabolic, like silver has, indefinitely.

Silver’s Parabolic Move
Historic Leverage Meets Frigid Winter, What’s Next?

January 26, 2026 • Addison Wiggin

Gold and silver are making new highs. Gold knocked on the door of $5,100 in overnight trading in Shanghai this morning. Silver, not to be outdone, is driving resource traders wild, cracking $116 up 15% today alone.

A year ago, one bitcoin bought roughly 40 ounces of gold. Today it buys 18.

Bitcoin was marketed as digital gold. Instead, Wall Street wrapped it in ETFs, margin accounts, and structured products.

Historic Leverage Meets Frigid Winter, What’s Next?
Consensus Is a Dangerous Drug

January 23, 2026 • Addison Wiggin

We’ve entered a new territory on Wall Street: for the first time in recorded history, zero strategists are predicting a down year.

Not “most are bullish.”

Not “nearly all expect gains.”

Zero bearish calls for 2026.

Unanimity so complete it resembles a vote in a collapsing authoritarian state.

Consensus Is a Dangerous Drug