Quote Originally Posted by denmason View Post
I'm having too much fun here. What or who do you suppose influences the President in who he appoints as governors to the Fed? I would guess that there is some bit of leverage used to make sure he sees the light.
Uhm, I'm having trouble following you - you seem to be advocating a stronger political influence on the currency management. How does that change who influences whom? Or do you suppose that in countries where the currency management is a responsibility of a purely governmental entity there is less influence from the private sector?

Could you instead point out what you think are the main problems with the current system and how they will be solved by converting the federal reserve to a purely governmental agency. And how would you deal with the potential negatives of the new system?

Quote Originally Posted by denmason View Post
I do find all this interesting. I would have liked to see Ron Paul as President, especially if he would straighten out our monetary system.
How exactly is Ron Paul going to straighten out the monetary system? He can't go to the gold standard and I have no idea why would somebody want put rigid equivalence between the size of an economy and commodities.

You are arguing that under the current system the government is making bad decisions (because they are influenced by the market), so how do you ensure that under any other system the governments remain always perfect and make no bad decisions whatsoever?

As it was pointed out earlier for the few cases when a totalitarian government has brought an economic success, there are at least ten other cases where a totalitarian government as botched things down in the worst way possible. Plenty of historical experiments, none successful in the long term.