Kelsey Williams

Trump vs. Powell vs. Yellen – Same Game

by
Generated image

We have been here before. President Trump’s latest bashing of Fed Chair Powell isn’t without precedent. Chair Powell was the object of President Trump’s scorn during his first term, too.

It doesn’t stop there, though. Trump vs. Powell was preceded by Trump vs. Yellen.

During the 2016 campaign, Trump accused Yellen of keeping interest rates artificially low to benefit the Obama administration and predicted a market collapse once she raised rates. He claimed she was “keeping them artificially low to get Obama retired” and “she should be ashamed of herself.” (NBC News Nov 2016) 

One year later, towards the end of his first year in office, President Trump nominated Jerome Powell as the new Fed Chairman. Here is what I said then…

“President Trump nominated Jerome H. Powell as the new Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank. Don’t look for much to change. And Janet Yellen’s announcement that she will resign from the board upon Mr. Powell’s induction as board chair is pretty much a non-event.” (New Fed Chairman, Same Old Story Nov 2017)

That was almost eight years ago. Has anything changed? Ironically, in 2016, Trump was displeased with Fed Chair Yellen for “keeping rates artificially low”. Now, he is attacking Fed Chair Powell for not lowering rates more aggressively.

THEN AND NOW

Both Ms. Yellen and Chair Powell face(d) similar situations. Their terms as Fed Chair expire(d) before their terms as board members conclude. That would mean sticking around for a couple of years as a board member after their term as board Chair ends.

I believe Ms. Yellen, as Fed Chair, was very concerned about the prospect of presiding over a financial crisis that would tarnish her reputation as Fed Chair. Here is what I said seven months prior to Jerome Powell’s assumption as Fed Chair…

“…if Ms. Yellen makes it through the current year unscathed, she won’t be hanging around afterwards. She won’t want to extend her risk of being at the helm when the ship sinks.

And don’t trouble yourself worrying about who the next Fed chief will be.  It doesn’t matter. It is too late in the game for a quarterback change to have any meaningful impact.” (The Fed’s Dilemma July 2017)

CONCLUSION 

The situation today isn’t much different from eight years ago. Jerome Powell’s term as Federal Reserve Board Chair ends May 2026. I expect him to finish his term (ends May 2026) as Chairman and voluntarily resign from the board at that time without serving the remainder of his term (ends January 31, 2028) as a member of the board, just as Chair Yellen did, for similar reasons.

Can you imagine either Janet Yellen or Jerome Powell serving as a member of the board after their term as Fed Chair ended? (also see Cruisin’ Wtih The Fed and Federal Reserve –  Conspiracy Or Not?)

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED

The Rush To Regulate Crypto

by

pastedGraphic.png

Here are some of the latest news items concerning government and central bank stances on cryptocurrencies. Each item is followed by my comments…

 

…..June 18, 2025 (Reuters) – South Korea’s central bank governor said on Wednesday he was not against issuing won-denominated stablecoins but had concerns about managing capital flows. At a press conference in Seoul, Rhee Chang-yong said “Issuing won-based stablecoin could make it easier to exchange them with dollar stablecoin rather than working to reduce use of dollar stablecoin. That in turn could increase demand for dollar stablecoin and make it difficult for us to manage forex,”

Chang-yong is quite clear that potential “demand for dollar stablecoin and (would) make it difficult for us to manage forex,”

My comments… Who cares? Should adoption and use of cryptocurrencies be dependent on any government or central bank’s ability “to manage foreign exchange“? If cryptocurrencies provide a possible altrernative to fiat currencies, then, complicating things by adding another layer of regulation and increased market intervention doesn’t benefit anyone.

 

…..Febuary 11, 2025 (The Times) The governor of the Bank of England has downplayed the idea of launching a central bank digital currency, warning that there is still no “must-have” reason for developing the technology.

Speaking to an audience at Chicago Booth Business School in London, Andrew Bailey said there needed to be a case for providing benefits that existing commercial alternatives could not.

My comments… Bailey is correct. There is no “must-have” reason for developing the technology FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE BANK OF ENGLAND.  Anyone who wants privacy in financial transactions and an alternative to ongoing monetary debasement and regulation would disagree.

 

…..June 17, 2025 (NBC News) The United States Senate passed a landmark cryptocurrency bill that would establish the first regulatory framework for issuers of stablecoins. Sen. Bill Hagerty, R-Tenn., author of the GENIUS Act, said in a floor speech “With this bill, the United States is one step closer to becoming the global leader in crypto. This bill will cement U.S. dollar dominance, it will protect customers, it will drive demand for U.S. treasuries.” 

The article pointed out that Washington continues to wrestle with how best to regulate the fast-growing cryptocurrency industry. Just two Republicans — Rand Paul of Kentucky and Josh Hawley of Missouri — voted against it.

My comments… How does “becoming a global leader in crypto” reestablish U.S. dollar dominance? If stablecoins are tied to the dollar, then what is the point? If approved by the House, the bill is exactly as stated above: “the first regulatory framework for issuers of stablecoins”. Thumbs up to Senators Paul and Hawley!

 

CONCLUSION 

The global trend in cryptocurrency regulation should be seen for what it is – a continuation of governmental efforts to control and regulate every aspect of money and finance.

Any positive benefits derived from the growth and use of cryptocurrencies are minimized and negated when government gets involved. The risk to high-flying Bitcoin in terms of its price and popularity is greater than other cryptocurrencies because it is a big ($2T) target.

Two trillion dollars is a lot of money currenly flying under the radar. Probably not for long, though. (also see Will Cryptocurrencies Become Fiat Currencies?)

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED

 

Weaker USD – Or Stronger?

by

The U.S. dollar receives its fair share of attention in the financial press.  The “impending collapse” of the dollar and similar inflamed phrases dominate the headlines. Other recent mentions include “plunging U.S. dollar” and “U.S. dollar breakdown.” The concern – and alarm – seem well-deserved.

Since January the U.S. dollar has declined by 12%. At least, that is how the dollar’s decline is described by financial writers and others. There is a context for that statement, though, which needs to be clarified and understood.

Statements that reference percentage declines of the U.S. dollar usually refer to relative weakness (or strength) of the U.S. dollar compared to other currencies. The U.S. dollar index, DXY, measures the “value” of the U.S. dollar versus a basket of other currencies on foreign exchange markets. The fluctuating price for DXY is a “live” measure of the U.S. dollar’s exchange rates with various other currencies (Euro, Japanese yen, Swiss franc, British pound, Swedish krona, & Canadian dollar).

CHARTS

Below is a chart (source)of DXY for the past year…

Looking at the chart, the 12% decline in DXY since January is alarmingly steep. Additionally significant is the breakdown below its previous lows from last September.

Now, let’s look at another chart of DXY. This one covers the past forty years…

The severity of the current decline seems lessened and is contained within the scope of a broader, long-term increase in DXY dating back to 2008.

OBSERVATIONS AND QUESTIONS

The overwheming negativity surrounding the U.S. dollar needs to be considered in broader context if the U.S. dollar index is the primary point of reference for such statements. It ususally is, hence…

The past three years (2022-25) show relative dollar strength/weakness at a higher level (100-110) than at any other time in the past forty years. The price action between 90 and 100 lasted for seven years and provides possible substantial support. If downside action for the U.S. dollar versus other currencies continues, the DXY index could drop to 90 and still find strong technical support.

Will the current weakness in U.S. dollar exchange rates, which is reflected in a declining DXY, continue unabated? Or, is the current weakness part of a consolidation phase for a U.S. dollar which has been strengthening versus its peers (other currencies) for almost two decades?

CAVEATS AND CONCLUSION 

The U.S. dollar index (DXY) tells us only how the U.S. dollar is currently faring when compared to the basket of other currencies in the index.

The U.S. dollar (as do all fiat currencies) continues to lose purchasing power. The loss of purchasing power results from inflation of the supply of money and credit by the Federal Reserve.

The U.S. dollar is forever growing ‘weaker’ due to its loss of purchasing power. That is true even if traders buy dollars on foreign exchange markets; and even if the dollar index (DXY) rallies strongly.

That being said, there are periods when the dollar regains some of its lost favor. Sometimes dollar ‘favor’ turns to dollar ‘fever’. We could be on the verge of an upside dollar surprise. (also see Interest Rates Could Go Much Higher)

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED

 

Gold, Silver, & Gold Stocks Since 2011 – Gold Kills It!

by

As anticipation builds regarding possible outsized performance for silver and gold stocks, it might be worthwhile to review past performance for the two upstarts versus their mentor and perennial favorite, gold.

The chart below shows monthly closing prices for gold, silver, and gold stocks since their respective price peaks in August 2011. The prices are “normalized” to illustrate percentage changes and direction. All three items are indexed to a starting value of 100.  The respective origin prices are $1825/Gold, $41.76/ Silver, 601/Gold Stocks-HUI; closing prices as of May 30, 2025 are $3288/Gold, $32.95/Silver, 398/Gold Stocks-HUI…

Read more

Interest Rates Could Go Much Higher

by

It is reasonable to suggest that interest rates might not have peaked. That statement applies to both short-term and long-term rates. Currently, the discount rate on short-term Treasury bills is 4.13%. Long-term Treasury bonds are yielding 4.97%.

Only five years ago, short-term rates flirted with zero and the 10-year Treasury rate was less than one percent at .89%. The increase in rates since early 2020 is something to behold. The damage to bond prices is evident on both charts (source) below…

Read more

Cruisin’ With The Fed

by

The Federal Reserve is on autopilot. Minutes from the May 6-7 meeting said FOMC members noted that “economic activity had continued to expand at a solid pace and labor market conditions continued to be solid”.

This might sound surprising given the fact that the notes also revealed concern and discussion about rising Treasury yields, U.S. dollar depreciation against other currencies, heightened volatility in the equity markets, negative effects of tariffs on the supply chain and international trade, potentially worsening inflation, and lots of uncertainty.

In the face of a long list of duly noted concerns, the Fed still found itself trumpeting a familiar refrain regarding economic activity…

“Even as the U.S. dollar declined and the Treasury yield curve steepened, the Federal Reserve remained adamant that economic activity and the labor market remained strong and policy intervention was unnecessary, according to the minutes of the May Federal Open Market Committee meeting. – (Kitco News)

It is somewhat hard to believe that economic activity and the labor markets weren’t affected by all of the negative factors listed above.  They were, of course; but some of those negative effects won’t show up until later.

Also, as is normally the case, a good deal of negativity is ignored or downplayed when the final assessment is made. I mean, can you imagine the havoc that would ensue if we heard something like this:

“Recent indicators suggest that economic activity continues to decline and the pace of that decline is steepening. Rather than growing, it is clear that the economy is shrinking and that the rapid descent into recession may quickly turn into an economic depression that could last for years. Labor markets are in turmoil with company closures, layoffs, and skyrocketing unemployment.”

This leads us back to our opening statement “The Federal Reserve is on autopilot.”. Here are some previous statements regarding economic activity and the labor markets…

March 2025 FOMC summary notes: “The economy was described as ‘healthy’ despite negative sentiment, with the labor market remaining strong.” 4

January 2025 from FOMC notes and Chair Powell’s press conference transcript:

“Recent indicators suggest that economic activity has continued to expand at a solid pace. … Labor market conditions have cooled from their formerly overheated state and remain solid.” 1 2 4

IN A RUT 

Sometimes autopilot can sound like a broken record. Here are some examples of similar statements from previous Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting notes:

  1. January 2020 FOMC Statement: “Economic activity has been rising at a moderate rate… Labor market conditions remain strong.”

  2. December 2019 FOMC Statement: “Economic activity has been rising at a moderate rate… Labor market conditions remain strong.“

  3. September 2019 FOMC Statement: “Economic activity has been rising at a moderate rate… The labor market remains strong.“

  4. June 2019 FOMC Statement: “Economic activity is rising at a moderate rate… Labor market conditions remain strong.”

  5. May 2019 FOMC Minutes: “Economic activity appeared to be expanding at a solid pace… Labor market conditions remained strong.”

SUMMARY 
The FOMC’s consistent use of positive descriptive summaries about the economy and the labor markets is intentional and not likely to change. Actually, in light of the above references, we can call it boilerplate.
Boilerplate text, or simply boilerplate, is any written text (copy) that can be reused in new contexts or applications without significant changes to the original. The term is used about statements, contracts, and source code, and is often used pejoratively to refer to clichéd or unoriginal writing.
That might be okay if the Fed had a better track record when it comes to avoiding economic catastrophe. As it is, investors and others are blindsided from economic reality until the negativity hits them squarely in the face.

Tariffs Are NOT Inflationary

by

There is one assumption about tariffs mentioned by most observers that is incorrect. That particular assumption has to do with the effect of tariffs on inflation.

Tariffs are NOT inflationary. Tariffs are taxes imposed by a government on imported goods. Tariffs are assessed at the port of entry and must be paid before the goods can be unloaded. Whoever (businesses, consumers, etc.) imports the goods pays the tariff(s) to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, a government agency. Subsequently, remittance is made to the U.S. Treasury.

The tariffs (taxes) assessed and their collection process have nothing to do with inflation.

WHY TARIFFS ARE NOT INFLATIONARY

Most people see the higher prices and assume that inflation is bad and will get worse. If you ask someone/anyone what causes inflation, their response will be something that points to higher prices as the culprit. In other words, “inflation is bad because prices are higher”. Why are prices higher? “Because of inflation.” In other words, “inflation causes inflation”.

Adding further confusion to the circular reasoning above is that there are supposedly an infinite variety of types of inflation; i.e., food inflation, fuel inflation, house inflation, rent inflation, etc. The impression is that each of the so-called types of inflation affect inflation independently and collectively. Now we have “tariff” inflation.

It is all BS, of course. Inflation IS the continuous expansion of the supply of money and credit by government and central banks. Over time, the inflation causes a loss of purchasing power in the currency/U.S. dollar which shows up as higher prices generally. The higher prices are NOT inflation; they are the effects of inflation and are unpredictable in timing and extent. In addition, the effects (more than just higher prices) of inflation are cumulative and volatile.

Not all higher prices are the result of inflation; only those which result from the loss of purchasing power in the dollar. An excellent example of this happened post-Covid with disruptions in the global supply chain(s). (see High Prices Are NOT Inflation)

The higher prices resulting from tariffs have nothing do with inflation. Tariffs are deflationary.

TARIFFS ARE DEFLATIONARY

Tariffs and taxes take money out of circulation and are a depressant to economic activity. Small businesses feel it the worst and the soonest. Eventually all of us feel the brunt of the new “tax” in several ways: supply chain disruption, alternative sourcing, shortages, lack of choice, inferior goods, longer wait times, and higher prices.

Businesses will have less money to operate and consumers will have less money to spend. This is especially true because of the current broad application of tariffs to most goods and services and most countries.

CONCLUSION

Regardless of expressed intent by their proponents, tariffs are destructive in nature. Tariffs are self-inflicted wounds that can fester, grow worse, and spread infection on contact. Tariffs lead to higher prices for consumers, reduced choice, and a less efficient economy. There is nothing good that anyone can say about tariffs.

The financial markets don’t seem to recognize how bad the situation is and how much worse it can get. Uncertainty is mentioned frequently, but there doesn’t seem to be a consensus which can accept the reality of ongoing negative activity and reports.

Hanging around waiting for a change of heart by President Trump is ill-advised. Expecting the Fed to intervene in some way that dampens the negative effects of tariffs is naive.

The economic effects of bad policy can only get worse at this time. Investors, in general, are unprepared and very vulnerable. (also see The Looming Threat of Credit Collapse And Deflation and A Comprehensive Overview Of Tariffs)

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED

The Looming Threat of Credit Collapse and Deflation

by

THREAT OF CREDIT COLLAPSE 

The threat of a credit collapse and subsequent deflation currently outweigh the risks associated with higher inflation. This article explores the threat of a credit collapse and its implications for economies and societies worldwide.

After more than one hundred years of practicing inflation with intent and purpose, the Federal Reserve has backed themselves into a corner. The “dual mandate” objectives claimed by Chair Powell and his predecessors are little more than a smokescreen to hide the Fed’s scrambling efforts to contain the effects of the inflation which it has created over the past century.

In his latest attempt to divert attention away from the Fed, Powell has mentioned the potential negative effects of tariffs on the Fed’s efforts: “We may find ourselves in the challenging scenario in which our dual-mandate goals are in tension.”

There should be no doubt that tariffs will be disruptive and harmful to the economy. Tariffs are self-inflicted wounds that have serious negative economic consequences. They do not work as intended or as described by their proponents.

That being said, it is important to consider the vulnerable state of the economy and the markets that existed before tariffs became front-page headlines. The fact of the matter is, that both financially and economically, the United States and the world stood at the edge of a precipice.

If someone pushes me from behind under ordinary circumstances, I might end up on the ground, but, I likely won’t suffer much damage. Then I could gather my thoughts, appraise the situation and stand up again.

What is currently happening is more closely akin to being pushed from behind while standing on one leg at the cliff’s edge. Even if the action were not malicious, the effects of the action cannot be rescinded or modified.

SIGNS OF THE TIMES

Universal credit default happens when individuals, corporations, and countries can no longer sustain the debt they have assumed on a scale that overwhelms ordinary financial and market activity.

This happened in 2008 with education loans, mortgages, and auto loans.  The price of non-performing debt sank into a deep hole, until the government and Federal Reserve embarked on a new experiment of making more and cheaper credit available and buying up the non-performing debt.

Now, almost two decades later, commercial real estate could be the trigger that sends the credit markets into a similar tailspin.

Sometimes, when stock prices decline badly, investors flee to the perceived safety of bonds. Unfortunately, that logic doesn’t work in reverse. If the bond market collapses, stocks will not provide a safe haven from the storm for bondholders. Currently, long-term bond prices (including Treasuries) are down fifty percent from their vaunted perch only three years ago.

As far as stock prices are concerned, we are currently experiencing the fourth decline of serious significance in this century. Previously, the stock market exhibited extreme volatility in 2000-02, 2007-09, and in 2020. While those extremes have not yet manifested this time, they could happen quickly.

We are possibly in the early stages of an asset price collapse. meaning all assets denominated in dollars – stocks, bonds, commodities, and real estate – are in danger of huge price declines.

That bad news is made worse because of bank failures. The worst financial and economic events in history were accompanied by bank failures. Bank failures were a common occurrence during the early 1930s and are evidence of the ongoing risks associated with fractional-reserve banking. Today, we have a system of no-reserve banking. There are no minimum reserve requirements for banks. How safe is your money? (see Fractional-Reserve Banking – Elephant In The Room)

DEFLATION 

Deflation is the opposite of inflation; it is a contraction in the supply of money and credit.

The effects of deflation result in fewer currency units (dollars) in circulation and an increase in purchasing power of the remaining units. In other words, your dollars will buy more – not less.

As the deflation takes hold, the prices of goods and services will decline, rather than increase. In and of itself, deflation can be a good thing. However, when deflation is severe enough, the result would be a catastrophic economic depression.

The depression will last longer than can be anticipated as it will take longer for the economy to cleanse itself of the ill effects of Federal Reserve inflation and mismanagement.

This is true even though the Federal Reserve and the government will do everything possible to counter the effects of deflation and depression. Unfortunately, their efforts will be overwhelmed by the tidal wave of financial and economic destruction headed our way.

CONCLUSION

President Trump and his tariffs are deserving of the blowback received. Chair Powell and the Fed deserve to share in the limelight for the decades of horrible financial and economic policies that have brought us to such a vulnerable state of affairs. (also see No Winners When The Inflation Balloon Pops and Liquidity Problems Could Overwhelm Inflation’s Effects)

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED

Inflation Is Created By The Federal Reserve (AUDIO)

by

The Federal Reserve is responsible for inflation. This audio dispels any concerns or doubts about other guilty parties or spontaneous events. If the Fed truly wanted to stop inflation dead in its tracks, it could do so in an instant. There are problems associated with that action, though. After listening to this audio (6 minutes), you will know why the Fed will never claim responsibility for its financial crimes and will never purposely stop inflating the supply of money and credit…

 

 

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED!

Bare Naked Facts About Fed Independence

by

FED INDEPENDENCE

Chair Powell has been particularly vocal about the Fed’s independence lately. His statements are the result of provocation by some, including President Trump, who have called for various actions including an audit of the Federal Reserve, firing the current Chair (Powell), and abolishing the Fed. The calls for action and the inflammatory rhetoric are usually the result of anger and frustration about Fed economic policies, notably the level and direction of interest rates.

Recently, Powell has targeted tariffs as a variable that could hamper the Fed’s ability to accomplish its objectives and fulfill its responsibilities. That ignores how bad the situation was prior to Trump’s election and inauguration. It also is an attempt to deflect blame away from the Fed for its role in causing inflation, destroying the U.S. dollar, and mismanaging the economy for more than a century.

Meanwhile, President Trump can’t wait to “fire Powell” for “ignoring his demands that interest rates be lowered”. He can’t, so his exasperation erupts in vocal condemnation of the Fed chair. If the tariffs are seen as causing economic disaster, Trump can blame Powell for not lowering interest rates.

Standoff.

The argument over Fed independence needs to be considered in proper context. Keep reading…

ORIGIN OF THE FED

The Federal Reserve System was authorized by an act of Congress in 1913. However, it is not a government agency. The Federal Reserve is a privately-owned institution which is comprised of 12 regional banks. The regional banks are owned by various commercial banks – member banks – who hold stock in the Federal Reserve banks. In other words, the Federal Reserve is a bank which is owned by its member banks – a banker’s bank.

The authorization by Congress vested 1) the power to create money and 2) control of the money supply to the Federal Reserve exclusively. In return for Congressional approval, or rather, to induce members of Congress to vote affirmatively for its inception, the principal figures (elite bankers and banking family “royalty”) behind the creation of the Federal Reserve promised (guaranteed) the United States government in a secret meeting that it would never run out of money.

Publicly, the Federal Reserve System was promoted as a ‘non’ – bank institution in deference to the mistrust and generally negative opinions concerning national banks and the banking elite. Many early Americans were wary of the connection between banks and political power, fearing that a central bank would create an elite class that could dictate economic policy and control the nation’s money supply.

PURPOSE OF THE FED

The purpose of the Federal Reserve is to provide a structured system whereby its member banks can create and lend money in perpetuity. The Fed accomplishes this by continually expanding the supply of money and credit.

The Federal Reserve exists for the benefit of the banks and bankers. Its purpose and motivation is not aligned with the general public interest. The Fed’s objective is to facilitate the ongoing creation of money and loans which generate interest income.

WHERE WE ARE NOW

For more than 100 years, the Federal Reserve has pursued a course of intentional inflation which has brought about a series of economic disasters and near-complete destruction of the U.S. dollar’s purchasing power. The effects of Fed inflation caused the Great Depression of the 1930s and the Great Recession of 2008-2010. Errant Fed policy has erased more than 99% of the U.S. dollar’s purchasing power.

As traditional financial assets continue to slide down a slippery slope, Trump’s tariffs get blamed for causing much of the carnage. This is realistically appropriate to some degree. But the world economy was standing at the cliff’s edge prior to Trump’s election.

Where we go from here might not be a choice anymore.

CONCLUSION 

It would take an act of Congress t0 alter or change the Federal Reserve’s control over economic policy and the money supply. Do you think a majority of  congressional representatives and senators would vote for a bill that eliminates the guaranteed source of unlimited money which they now spend so freely?

The way I see it, there are several courses of action possible which all lead to the same end result. Here they are…

  1. Fed continues to operate unhampered as is.
  2. Congress passes legislation that abolishes the Federal Reserve
  3. Potential legislation by Congress alters or limits the Fed’s control

Regarding No. 1, we can expect a continuation of dollar depreciation, financial and economic volatility (including recessions and depressions), etc. In other words, more of the same things that have plagued us for the past 112 years under the Fed’s watch care and keeping. Eventually, the end result would be a credit collapse, deflation, and a world-wide depression. This is likely regardless of changes in interest rate policy and the effects of tariffs.

As far as No. 2, abolition of the Federal Reserve would leave a void in money creation and supply which would cripple the world’s economy. The withdrawal symptoms would be horrific. Economies would grind to a halt and a global depression would ensue.

No. 3 presumes a modified approach to reigning in the creature from Jekyll Island. The debate about specifics would increase the uncertainty surrounding this choice and would extend the timeline indefinitely. Regardless of the final version, it would come too late to derail the train of economic terror hurtling towards us now.

Kelsey Williams is the author of two books: INFLATION, WHAT IT IS, WHAT IT ISN’T, AND WHO’S RESPONSIBLE FOR IT and ALL HAIL THE FED