How Do FRB Economists Get Away With Outright Lies?

(commentary by Roger Erickson)

No Peer Review? They Can Spout With Impunity?

Taxes, Transfers, and State Economic Differences
by Israel Malkin and Daniel J. Wilson

"Taxes collected by the U.S. government are paid out through transfers that promote economic equity among states."

Their subsequent comments on State Transfer Payments are conditioned by that horrible, upfront perversion.

Were they trained by Bernays himself?

Those kinds of conditionals are classic propaganda. The authors are asking the audience to swallow the initially suggested condition, as the price for even examining the completely unrelated, subsequent data.

The WHOLE POINT of fiat, is that it is NOT conditional upon any prior condition whatsoever, save only Public Initiative, and then the subsequent tolerance limits of excessive inflation or deflation.

Ignorance? Collusion? Or just dumb orthodoxy run amok? Purposeful, or Ignorant Fraud?

Apparently these geniuses never learned the dictionary definition of fiat. Nor do they acknowledge the existence of their own forbears, like Beardsley Ruml (on p.35 of the link). They do, clearly, practice the manufacturing of consent among a public they show no respect for whatsoever. They may be brainwashed acolytes themselves.

And of course, they won't reference anyone not willing to promote them for tenure in any Ivy League Departments of Orthodoxy? Or does that Academic Protection Racket extend even to the Fed?

Would you be surprised if they argued that Corporate Welfare should be considered as Off-Budget Transfer Payments too?

Nothing like making outright lies the conditional for alluring common sense. The bigger the lie, the better.

(hat tip John Lounsbury)