Rand must have suffered a failure of nerve. The only moral solution to the problem of the Federal Reserve is to abolish it. Her analysis of the Fed fell short of the mark. They who organized it, deliberately sought to build a currency on debt.

Really? That just seems like such a contradiction to me. It is very hard for me to reconcile this with Objectivism.

Apparently Rand must have thought so since she stood at his side when he was sworn in. At least he did not believe that the near zero rates like Yellen's with which you can only get more debt, would make investment money available rather than driving money elsewhere.

Gold is an extremely useful metal due to its properties. Look at the Wikipedia article. I remember how electronic connectors that were not gold plated would require reconnecting quite often due to corrosion, gold's high reduction potential does not allow it to oxidize with temperature. Nearly every electronic device has some gold in it, e.g, there is $500 million worth of gold just in the worlds cell phones.
Use in jewelry and coinage are quite useful. It is even used in medicine and chemistry.

Same reason a true objectivist would not run for president today

https://www.amazon.com/John-Galt-Inno...

Donald Luskin and the Editors of "I Am John Galt" would agree with you. I think I do too.

An evil thought just hit me. He could well have been a Federal "Plant" to gain the confidence and learning of Ayn Rand. The Govt would surely have balked at placing a Randian in such a powerful position without good reason. Wasn't it Reagan who first appointed him, or did he just re-appoint?

I agree, I too thought he might be able to change from within, and I think he loosely hoped he might as well. Somewhere along that path he was turned and the result was, well you know, you're living with it.

I would of thought he might have done it to improve things and maybe do some good for a change. I don't actually know how much he did or did not have any influence over.

I do not agree with your line of logic. And I think we as individuals will prove you wrong about needing a centralized/controlled monetary system. I think something like bitcoins will overturn the whole corrupt idea.

Cute!

Exactly, and that is my point! He should not have been involved in something so dishonorable and anti-capitalism.

Thank you! :-)

So sadly true.

I read the same articles long before I posted this and surmised he is a turn coat. He should have known better. We all have choices to make every day and we did not have the benefit of knowing AR personally. In my opinion, he really compromised his principals.

Sad, but true.

You can say that again.

I don't buy the logic of the headline. The US government is very corrupt, but if I had a chance to be a congressman or President I would go for it. I just wouldn't do corrupt things. (Granted, that means I'd probably never get in, or wouldn't stay in very long, but having ethics has its costs.)

It's plausible that the system is so corrupt that there was no chance Greenspan could clean it up, but I doubt he believed that when he took the job.

As far as centralized control of our money structure -- I don't think it is possible to avoid that. If the Fed were abolished, it would almost certainly be replaced with a new Bank of the US.

I suppose in that position of power, thats kind of scary. with the utterance of a word, he moved markets

$$$?
$$$$$!!

I met him on two occasions, and drunk or net, he impressed me as calculating his every move.(I know you didn't mean drunk as in liquor intoxication.)

A really good point. That is a criteria of a good, usable philosophy. Even if one only applies it peripherally, one would notice a marked improvement when dealing with life.

In some people, fame and fortune overrides everything, including principles.

I think I read that Ayn Rand discussed it with
Greenspan before he took a job in the Federal
government.--But then, I don't remember for sure,
it may have been a different Federal job.