i don't think the fed's real mandate is price stability and full employment, those are nice to haves and they have to say that so they aren't run out of town on a rail but
their real mandate is: "protect the banks"
at this point, that may be changing to "protect their necks"
> i don't think the fed's real mandate is price stability and full employment, those are nice to haves and they have to say that so they aren't run out of town on a rail but
No that's literally their mandate.
The Federal Reserve Act mandates that the Federal Reserve conduct monetary policy "so as to promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates."
You are both right. The Fed has its public mandates (which it uses the coarse tool of interest rates to manage), but also protects US commercial banks through their refusal to issue narrow bank licenses and their refusal to issue a CBDC or FedAccounts without being shoved by the legislative and executive branches (just like they dragged their feet on FedNow until Congress lit a fire under them because Zelle, owned by the largest banks, was acting anti competitively with smaller community banks).
Lots of Fed criticism to go around for everyone’s enjoyment.
We're not both right when parent is saying the "federal reserve is lying about its mandate" - which makes no sense, not least because the mandate is defined, by Congress, in the Federal Reserve Act. The Fed's job is to execute on it. You can argue about their efficacy or tactics (in spite of their pretty solid ~110 year track record), but that's not the same thing.
It's like saying you think the USPS is lying that they have the mandate to deliver letters.
their real mandate is: "protect the banks"
at this point, that may be changing to "protect their necks"
rock and hard place, we'll see what happens