Blog #12
“The Federal Reserve is like universal basic income for PhD’s”—Scott Bessant
The Federal Reserve is the most powerful institution in the global economy—and one of the least understood. Created by Congress in 1913, the Fed was originally tasked with maintaining financial stability. That mission later expanded to a dual mandate: promoting maximum employment and stable prices.
Monetary policy isn’t a hard science. It’s closer to weather forecasting with a blindfold and a broken barometer. Even with terabytes of data and an army of economists, the Fed doesn’t know the “right” interest rate—no matter how confident the chairman sounds. Every rate move is a trade-off: raise rates to fight inflation and risk slowing growth, or cut rates to spur the economy and risk stoking inflation. At the moment, you could reasonably argue for standing pat—or for a modest cut.
Which brings us to the latest controversy: Donald Trump wants to fire the Fed chair, Jerome Powell, for not slashing interest rates. That’s a bad reason. But—and this is important—Powell should be fired. Just not for that.
Let’s start with the basics. The Fed sets monetary policy mainly by influencing short-term interest rates. When the economy slumps, it cuts rates. When inflation rises, it hikes. But the Fed is also a bank—and lately, it’s been hemorrhaging money.
Most Americans don’t realize this, but the Federal Reserve is a profit-making enterprise. Between 2010 and 2021, it was the most profitable financial institution on the planet, remitting nearly $90 billion annually to the U.S. Treasury. But since 2022, the Fed has lost over $192 billion. Worse, as of May 2025, it’s carrying more than $1 trillion in unrealized losses on its balance sheet.
How does an institution that can create money out of thin air—and uses it to buy interest-bearing government bonds—lose money? Simple; bad policy.
During the pandemic, the Fed expanded its balance sheet from under $4 trillion to nearly $9 trillion through Quantitative Easing (QE)—essentially printing money to buy long-term bonds. At that time, it was heralded as innovative and bold. In hindsight, it was naïve and reckless.
QE artificially pushed rates below their natural level. At one point during the pandemic stimulus effort, the 10-year Treasury yield dropped to just 0.32%. Today, it’s around 4.25%. Since bond prices fall when rates rise, the Fed’s massive bond holdings are now deeply underwater.
As inflation surged, the Fed had to raise short-term rates at the fastest pace in 40 years. But those trillions in long-term bonds are locked in at rock-bottom yields (higher market prices). Meanwhile, the Fed is paying over 5% interest to banks and money-market funds via reverse repos and reserves. In short, it’s losing billions each month—paying more on liabilities than it earns on assets.
If the Federal Reserve were a private bank, it would be insolvent—its net worth is negative. Regulators would’ve shut it down, just like Silicon Valley Bank or Signature Bank.
But the Fed is the regulator. And that’s the problem. Powell’s tenure has been defined by monetary whiplash—easing too long, then tightening too fast. He didn’t just miss inflation. He dismissed it. Remember transitory? That was his mantra. By the time he changed course, the damage was done: consumer prices spiked, and the Fed’s balance sheet cratered.
Had the Fed exercised restraint instead of flooding the system with easy money, we wouldn’t be here. Inflation wouldn’t have spiraled. Interest rates wouldn’t have needed a violent correction. And the Fed wouldn’t be sitting on a portfolio of low-yield assets funded by high-cost liabilities.
Let’s be clear: the Fed can’t go bankrupt in the traditional sense. It can always print more money. But printing money to cover your own losses isn’t smart policy—it’s banana republic stuff.
Powell should be fired—not because rates are “too high,” but because under his watch, the Fed abandoned prudence, inflated asset bubbles, fueled inflation, and racked up historic losses. Accountability matters.
Here’s a radical idea: maybe the Fed should get back to basics. Focus on price stability and systemic risk. Stop trying to play economic savior every time there’s a so-called crisis—because there’s always a crisis. Financial crisis. Debt ceiling crisis. Climate crisis. Pandemic crisis. Income inequality crisis. The list never ends.
The Fed would be wise to learn a bit of humility and recognize that monetary stimulus is NOT the panacea for all that ails us. If history has taught us anything, it’s that the cure is oftentimes worse than the disease. To quote Vangard’s legendary Jack Bogle: “Don’t do something. Stand there.”
So yes, Jerome Powell should be fired—just not for the reason President Trump believes. He should be fired for his abject failure to maintain sound monetary policy—an error that has cost the Fed and the public literally trillions of dollars, while driving up the cost of goods, services, and housing. Let’s hope the next Fed chair brings more humility, wisdom, and patience—and understands that not every perceived market hiccup demands a Herculean monetary response.
Mark Lazar, MBA
CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER™
Blog #12
“The Federal Reserve is like universal basic income for PhD’s”—Scott Bessant
The Federal Reserve is the most powerful institution in the global economy—and one of the least understood. Created by Congress in 1913, the Fed was originally tasked with maintaining financial stability. That mission later expanded to a dual mandate: promoting maximum employment and stable prices.
Monetary policy isn’t a hard science. It’s closer to weather forecasting with a blindfold and a broken barometer. Even with terabytes of data and an army of economists, the Fed doesn’t know the “right” interest rate—no matter how confident the chairman sounds. Every rate move is a trade-off: raise rates to fight inflation and risk slowing growth, or cut rates to spur the economy and risk stoking inflation. At the moment, you could reasonably argue for standing pat—or for a modest cut.
Which brings us to the latest controversy: Donald Trump wants to fire the Fed chair, Jerome Powell, for not slashing interest rates. That’s a bad reason. But—and this is important—Powell should be fired. Just not for that.
Let’s start with the basics. The Fed sets monetary policy mainly by influencing short-term interest rates. When the economy slumps, it cuts rates. When inflation rises, it hikes. But the Fed is also a bank—and lately, it’s been hemorrhaging money.
Most Americans don’t realize this, but the Federal Reserve is a profit-making enterprise. Between 2010 and 2021, it was the most profitable financial institution on the planet, remitting nearly $90 billion annually to the U.S. Treasury. But since 2022, the Fed has lost over $192 billion. Worse, as of May 2025, it’s carrying more than $1 trillion in unrealized losses on its balance sheet.
How does an institution that can create money out of thin air—and uses it to buy interest-bearing government bonds—lose money? Simple; bad policy.
During the pandemic, the Fed expanded its balance sheet from under $4 trillion to nearly $9 trillion through Quantitative Easing (QE)—essentially printing money to buy long-term bonds. At that time, it was heralded as innovative and bold. In hindsight, it was naïve and reckless.
QE artificially pushed rates below their natural level. At one point during the pandemic stimulus effort, the 10-year Treasury yield dropped to just 0.32%. Today, it’s around 4.25%. Since bond prices fall when rates rise, the Fed’s massive bond holdings are now deeply underwater.
As inflation surged, the Fed had to raise short-term rates at the fastest pace in 40 years. But those trillions in long-term bonds are locked in at rock-bottom yields (higher market prices). Meanwhile, the Fed is paying over 5% interest to banks and money-market funds via reverse repos and reserves. In short, it’s losing billions each month—paying more on liabilities than it earns on assets.
If the Federal Reserve were a private bank, it would be insolvent—its net worth is negative. Regulators would’ve shut it down, just like Silicon Valley Bank or Signature Bank.
But the Fed is the regulator. And that’s the problem. Powell’s tenure has been defined by monetary whiplash—easing too long, then tightening too fast. He didn’t just miss inflation. He dismissed it. Remember transitory? That was his mantra. By the time he changed course, the damage was done: consumer prices spiked, and the Fed’s balance sheet cratered.
Had the Fed exercised restraint instead of flooding the system with easy money, we wouldn’t be here. Inflation wouldn’t have spiraled. Interest rates wouldn’t have needed a violent correction. And the Fed wouldn’t be sitting on a portfolio of low-yield assets funded by high-cost liabilities.
Let’s be clear: the Fed can’t go bankrupt in the traditional sense. It can always print more money. But printing money to cover your own losses isn’t smart policy—it’s banana republic stuff.
Powell should be fired—not because rates are “too high,” but because under his watch, the Fed abandoned prudence, inflated asset bubbles, fueled inflation, and racked up historic losses. Accountability matters.
Here’s a radical idea: maybe the Fed should get back to basics. Focus on price stability and systemic risk. Stop trying to play economic savior every time there’s a so-called crisis—because there’s always a crisis. Financial crisis. Debt ceiling crisis. Climate crisis. Pandemic crisis. Income inequality crisis. The list never ends.
The Fed would be wise to learn a bit of humility and recognize that monetary stimulus is NOT the panacea for all that ails us. If history has taught us anything, it’s that the cure is oftentimes worse than the disease. To quote Vangard’s legendary Jack Bogle: “Don’t do something. Stand there.”
So yes, Jerome Powell should be fired—just not for the reason President Trump believes. He should be fired for his abject failure to maintain sound monetary policy—an error that has cost the Fed and the public literally trillions of dollars, while driving up the cost of goods, services, and housing. Let’s hope the next Fed chair brings more humility, wisdom, and patience—and understands that not every perceived market hiccup demands a Herculean monetary response.
Mark Lazar, MBA
CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER™
Share:
Recent Articles
The Future is Now
10,000 Hours
Highest and Best Use
Crisis Management