Peter's Blog

Interventionists insist markets require elite, educated technocrats to study and calibrate advanced models of the economy. Much like a physicist in a lab, they see themselves as scientific and data-driven, but as the Austrian School demonstrates, economics is nothing like the natural sciences.

Longtime followers of infeneo (and its associated InFi podcast) know that I am no friend of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). My chief complaint is that their ostensibly unorthodox ways of viewing government finance are incredibly misleading, at least in the hands of some of their most popular gurus. In today’s post I’ll give yet another example, this one coming from […]

Inflation isn’t a new problem. In fact, it has plagued this country since its founding. Even though the American Revolution– and its monetary soundness– are worth celebrating, its lesser-known history reveals how war and inflation go hand-in-hand.

One of the long-touted goals of central banking is “price stability,” which, in the minds of central bankers, means low and continuous inflation. Even if this goal wasn’t cover for inflationist policy, it’d still be important to note that “price stability” is actually an unachievable goal when properly understood.

Recent data shows the damaging effects of tariffs on the American economy. Protectionist policies make goods more expensive at home, but there’s another less-obvious consequence that also impoverishes Americans: reduced consumer choice.

As the west muddles through murky economic waters, many call on the Federal Reserve to hold off a recession. But, as our neighbors to the east show us, central banks are highly constrained in what they can actually accomplish, and more inflation isn’t the right move.

Consumer confidence remains in the dumps, thanks in large part to rising prices in essential goods and services like housing. Contrary to the Trump administration’s preference for lower interest rates, the solution to the housing affordability crisis is to end the Fed, which created and still sustains the problem.

Some free-marketers mistakenly believe that the Federal Reserve would be more effective if it operated in a different political environment or had more resources to control the monetary supply. Instead, as the Austrian school emphasizes, the problem is with central banking per se. Central planning never works, especially when the planning is over the money […]

While it’s correct to criticize the Federal Reserve for inevitably bungling monetary policy, the Trump administration is wrong to criticize Jerome Powell and the FOMC for failing to cut rates. Printing money, contrary to President Trumps belief, is never the answer.

Free-marketers rightly argue that the market is capable of providing many services that the government currently controls, from the choice and use of money to contract enforcement. There are even private means of regulating business, and as it turns out, we already benefit from them.