In an extremely blunt and unrelenting column for New York Magazine, columnist Jon Chait made a compelling case that Stephen Moore -- tapped by President Donald Trump to join the Federal Reserve -- should not be allowed to be seated there or anywhere else where he can influence economic policy.
Referring to Moore in the headline as an "idiot," Chait cut right to the chase, writing, "Stephen Moore’s career as an economic analyst has been a decades-long continuous procession of error and hackery. It is not despite but precisely because of these errors that Moore now finds himself in the astonishing position of having been offered a position on the Federal Reserve board by President Trump."
According to Chait, Moore is not a trained economist, but is instead merely a financial analyst whose stock in trade is "pseudo-expertise."
'He is a dedicated advocate of supply-side economics, relentlessly promoting his fanatical hatred of redistribution and belief that lower taxes for the rich can and will unleash wondrous prosperity," Chait wrote. "Like nearly all supply-siders, he has clung to this dogma in the face of repeated, spectacular failures."
Pointing out that he has been covering Moore's economic pronouncements since 1997, the columnist said the Trump appointee is not often wrong -- in retrospect -- but his recommendations would have been disastrous.
"In the years since, I have continued following his career, and he has shown no intellectual growth at all. He is capable of writing entire columns that contain no true facts at all," Chait charged. "He made so many factual errors he achieved the rare feat of being banned from the pages of a Midwestern newspaper."
"And yet, for all their extravagant ignorance, Moore’s beliefs on fiscal policy are actually more sophisticated and well-developed than his views on monetary policy. It is the latter that he would be in a position to influence as a Federal Reserve governor," he continued.
"While the internal workings of his mind remain a matter of speculation, I doubt he is consciously venal enough to tailor his thinking explicitly to partisan goals. Rather, Moore has extremely strong partisan instincts and extremely limited analytical skills. The combination results inevitably in the latter giving way to the former," Chait wrote before concluding. "He should not be permitted any position of serious responsibility, in government or anything else."
You can read more here (subscription required).
