I’ll cut to the questions and skip the intro…
In Rothbard’s “The Mystery of Banking” on p.81, the Total for the Equity and Liabilities reads 21,800, even though it is clearly 100,000. A typo that people just never took out of the book?
In Rothbard’s “The Mystery of Banking” on p.183, Rothbard nearly praises Scotish free banking as compared to the English banking. Then in the appendix, he criticzes Scottish free banking, attacking the same guy who he used sources from in the previous chapter. Did Rothbard change his mind and just decided to publish an appendix instead of changing the book?
Perhaps it is just me, but the Griffin’s “The Creature from Jekyll Island” and Rothbard’s “The Mystery of Banking” disagree with each other how the Fed finances government debt (or “Open market operations”). In Griffin’s version (dubbed “The Mandrake Mechanism”), he says the government issues bonds and the Fed directly buys them, and then they go to government deposits, checks, banks, etc etc, sifting through the money supply like that. (p. 195). However, Rothbard’s explanation is fundamentally different. On p. 172, he talks about how the Treasury, when monetizing the debt, gives the bonds to the banks to buy, and then the money supply is inflated. The federal reserve steps in and buys old government bonds (I assume he means from commerical banks) so they have more money to buy the bonds and etc etc. Then he goes to say that the Federal Reserve only directly bought Treasury bonds during World War II, while Griffin states in his book that the Federal Reserve has used the Mandrake Mechanism for much of its existence.
Finally, (and I asked this question before, no one responded), on p482 of “The creature from Jekyll Island”, Griffin says that the acceptance bills during the roaring twenties were an astronomical “1.7 trillion dollars wide”. For a time period that had a money supply of 70 billion max, something seems absurdly wrong.
I hope for all of these I’m just confused, and instead am not seeing mistakes. Problems like this (such as the last one on The creature from Jekyll Island) make me loose faith in the credibility of the book, and discourage me from reading more from the author and/or using the book for sources.
Anyways, I hope you guys respond, and thanks for the help as always!