Why can't two Governors of the Fed come from the same district and does this limitation make sense today?
What will be an ideal response?
The authors of the Federal Reserve Act wanted to make sure that all regions of the country received adequate representation at the Fed. This limits the power that any one region can have at the highest level of the Fed. Though to be critical, if this were an overriding issue, one could certainly argue with the current districting of the Fed, with over one-third of the country being served by one bank, it should be a requirement that at least one governor has to come from this region.
You might also like to view...
Suppose an economy only produces two goods, robots and ice cream. Last month, the economy produced 10 robots and 200 gallons of ice cream. This month, the same economy produced 15 robots and 240 gallons of ice cream. Which of the following statements could explain this change?
a. This month, the economy reduced the unemployment of its resources. b. This month, the economy experienced an improvement in technology. c. This month, the economy experienced an increase in resources d. All of the above are correct.
A merger between firms that compete in the same market is called a:
A. horizontal merger. B. vertical merger. C. conglomerate merger. D. monopoly.
If it is NOT possible for a pharmaceutical drug maker to sell its generic cholesterol reducing drug along with some name brand cholesterol reducing drugs, we have an example of monopoly due to
A. governmental entry restrictions. B. ownership of key resources. C. economies of scale. D. pure competition.
Entry to and exit from ________ market are easy.
A. a monopoly B. an oligopolistic C. a contestable D. All of the above are correct.