QuoteIntroduction to Fourth Edition
Monetary policy is — aside from war — the primary tool of state aggrandizement. It ensures the growth of government, finances deficits, rewards special interests, and fixes elections. Without it, the federal leviathan would collapse, and we could return to the republic of the Founding Fathers. Our monetary system is not only politically abusive, it also causes inflation and the business cycle. What is to be done? In answer to that question, the Mises Institute is pleased to present this fourth and slightly expanded edition of Murray N. Rothbard's classic What Has Government Done to Our Money?.
First published in 1964, this is one of Professor Rothbard's most influential works, despite its length. I can't count the number of times academics and nonacademics alike have told me that it forever changed the way they looked at monetary policy. No one, having read this book, hears the pronouncements of Fed officials with awe, or reads monetary texts with credulity. What Has Government Done to Our Money? is the best introduction to money, bar none. The prose is straightforward, the logic relentless, the facts compelling — as in all of Professor Rothbard's writings.
His themes here are theoretical, political, and historical. On theory, he agrees with Ludwig von Mises that money originated through voluntary exchanges on the market. No social contract or government edict brought money into being. It is a natural outgrowth of individuals seeking economic relations more complex than barter.
But unlike all other commodities, an increase in the stock of money confers no social benefit, since money's main function is to facilitate the exchange of other goods and services. Indeed, increasing the stock of money through a central bank like the Fed has horrific consequences, and Professor Rothbard provides the clearest explanation available of inflation.
In policy, he argues that the free market can and should be charged with the production and distribution of money. There is no need to make it a monopoly of the U.S. Treasury, let alone of a public-private banking cartel like the Fed. A successful money needs only a fixed definition rooted in the commodity most suited to a monetary use, and a legal system that enforces contracts and punishes theft and fraud. In a free market, the result has been, and would be, a gold standard.
In such a free-market system, money would be convertible domestically and internationally. Demand deposits would have 100% reserves, while the reserve ratios for time deposits would be subject to the economic prudence of bankers and the watchful eye of the consuming public.
It is, however, the historical dimension of Professor Rothbard's work that makes it so persuasive. Starting with the 19th-century classical gold standard, he ends with the likely emergence of a European Currency Unit and an eventual world fiat money. Especially notable are his explanations of the Bretton Woods system and the closing of the gold window in the early 1970s. Professor Rothbard shows that government has always and everywhere been the enemy of sound money. Through banking cartels and inflation, government and its favored interests loot the people's earnings, water down the value of the market's money, and cause recessions and depressions. In mainstream economics, most of this is denied or ignored. The emphasis is always on the "best" way to use monetary policy. What should guide the Fed? The GNP? Interest rates? The yield curve? The foreign exchange value of the dollar? A commodity index? Professor Rothbard would tell us that all such questions presuppose central planning, and are the root of monetary evil. May this book be distributed far and wide, so that when the next monetary crisis arrives, Americans will, finally, refuse to put up with what the government is doing to our money.
Llewellyn H. Rockwell
The Ludwig von Mises Institute
Auburn University
November 1990
QuoteIntroduction
In 2010, Sastry Pantula, director of the Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS) at the National Science Foundation, proposed changing the DMS name to the Division of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences (DMSS). In response to this proposal, Eric Friedlander, president of the American Mathematical Society (AMS), sent an email message to each AMS member requesting feedback on this proposal. Attached to his message was a letter from Director Pantula giving his justification for the change. I use this incident to begin to explain the object of this article, namely, the long-term consequences of the Data Deluge. Pantula's letter provides a nice starting point. Here is the relevant paragraph from his letter:
Big data provide big opportunities for mathematical and statistical sciences. It is an exciting time for our Division. In his FY12 budget roll-out speech NSF Director Dr. Subra Suresh referred to the "era of data and observation". The NSF 2011–2016 Strategic Plan notes that "The revolution in information and communication technologies is another major factor influencing the conduct of 21st century research. New cyber tools for collecting, analyzing, communicating, and storing information are transforming the conduct of research and learning. One aspect of the information technology revolution is the 'DATA DELUGE', shorthand for the emergence of massive amounts of data and the changing capacity of scientists and engineers to maintain and analyze it." Extracting useful knowledge from the deluge of data is critical to the scientific successes of the future. Data-intensive research will drive many of the major scientific breakthroughs in the coming decades. There is a long-term need for research and workforce development in computational and data-enabled sciences. Statistics is broadly recognized as a data-centric discipline, thus having it in the Division's name as proposed would be advantageous whenever "Big Data" and data-sciences investments are discussed internally and externally.
After examining the current Data Deluge enthusiasm in more detail, I will focus on Metrics, a logical outgrowth of the new heightened preoccupation with Data. This in turn leads to Marshall McLuhan and his insightful "The Medium is the Message". I next express my concerns about the negative effect of the Data Deluge on mathematics education. How is the Data Deluge reflected in the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics? Finally, I will conclude with some remarks about grassroots professional development projects, which could become a counterweight to overblown enthusiasm for data analysis.
QuoteToday, the FDIC is releasing first quarter 2026 performance results for FDIC-insured institutions.
The banking industry finished the quarter with higher earnings quarter-over-quarter, resulting in a return on assets ratio (ROA) of 1.26 percent. Domestic deposits increased for the seventh consecutive quarter and loan growth was strong. Asset quality metrics remained generally favorable despite continued weakness in certain portfolios, which the FDIC continues to monitor closely. Unrealized losses remained elevated.
The banking industry continued to have strong capital and liquidity levels, which support lending and protect against potential losses.
QuoteNet income for the 4,278 FDIC-insured commercial banks and savings institutions totaled $80.5 billion, up $2.8 billion (3.6 percent) from the prior quarter. The rise in quarterly earnings was driven by robust growth in noninterest income at larger institutions but was partially offset by higher noninterest expenses and lower net interest income. More than half of all banks (55.2 percent) reported net income higher than the prior quarter. The banking industry reported an aggregate return on assets (ROA) ratio of 1.26 percent in first quarter 2026, up from 1.23 percent in fourth quarter 2025 and up from 1.16 percent in the year-ago quarter.
