Well, to keep the Fed from picking winners and losers, the Fed could hire
Michael Millken to do the picking. Or does that just shift the picking back a
level? Maybe split it between Millihen and Charles Keating? \
Or maybe the Fed should rely on the method I use to pick winners --
randomly. I put my $2.00 every week into Lotto and the winner will come in
the long run. Hope Keynes is wrong about when my retirement starts vs my
internment.
Gene Coyle
Jim Devine wrote:
> From SLATE --
> >... USA [TODAY] leads with word that the Federal Reserve is considering
> >buying corporate bonds for the first time ever, because of the increasing
> >scarcity of the Treasury bonds it usually invests in. The paper reports
> >that the Fed might seek congressional approval to do this in two years and
> >if it's granted, be in the private bond market by 2005.
> >
> >... The USAT lead says the Fed move into corporate paper could open the
> >way for the Social Security Administration, which
> >currently also only buys Treasury bonds, to do the same. (Now that would
> >be a lockbox, wouldn't it?) The story explains that the traditional fear
> >about such a move is that it would be a case of the Fed picking corporate
> >winners and losers, but it doesn't explain why this is any different from
> >say, when the Air Force buys a fighter from Lockheed and not from Grumman.
> >Also, the story says Treasury bonds are getting scarcer because "current
> >projections" say the national debt will be virtually retired by 2010, but
> >doesn't explain how this can be on the new, new, disappearing surplus
> >current projections. ...
>
> Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
