6 Comments
User's avatar
john H. Welch's avatar

To understand the original districting, one need only look at maps of the major railroad hubs in 1910. The original mandate of the Fed was to get cash to banks as quickly as possible. No faster way than trains existed at the time. Hence: Boston, NYC, Philadelphia, Richmond, Atlanta, Dallas, Cleveland, Chicago, Minneapolis, St Louis, Kansas CIty. It also explains why KC, Minneapolis, Dallas, and San Francisco had such large district as those areas were not densely populated yet.

THE RESOLUTE MIND's avatar

The article seems more like a discussion of cartography than one of monetary, economic, and banking issues. The discussion should have begun with an explanation of why 12 Districts at the beginning and the relevancy of borders.

Thomas Moses Montgomery's avatar

This *is* interesting! When I’ve taught the history of the FRS to undergraduates I’ve used the map of the districts to illustrate how the agrarian-dominated economy (and farming as a credit-intensive activity) mattered as recently as the turn of the last century — but today I learned the ability to change the district lines has been acted on in the intervening decades!

Anton Frattaroli's avatar

Irritating that there's one currency, one monetary policy for a landmass where the economies vary so much.

Thomas Moses Montgomery's avatar

Mobility of labor, Mundell’s “Optimal Currency Area,” etc.

It was certainly a pain point for American farmers in the 1890s!

Anton Frattaroli's avatar

If you tokenized currency, used a shared settlement platform (fedwire/ach replacement) you could have different monetary policies for various geographical areas. Software could probably make currency swaps pretty seamless. Would be great for places like indonesia or china.