The Fed and Wealth Inequality

Curious to hear different opinions on this.

I would argue that the greatest impetus for wealth inequality over the past decade has been the Fed. The top 10% of Americans by wealth own 90% of the financial assets. Unelected officials printing trillions of dollars years after the financial crisis and using that money to buy financial assets (QE) effectively taxed everyone and lined the pockets of asset holders. And it was all the more clandestine because financial assets don’t show up in CPI.

Now we’re mired in a dangerous bout of inflation rendering the Fed essentially powerless to combat an impending recession. What was Yellen thinking in ‘14? And Powell in ‘19? I thought their justification seemed idiotic at the time (“inflation is only 1.2% as opposed to our 2% target”). Lots of things can precipitate low inflation (age demographics, technology, globalization) which are not all inherently bad. A surplus of aging Baby-Boomer savers relative to borrowers was likely one factor keeping inflation down — that’s merely the natural equilibria of supply and demand and in my opinion not a symptom of economic peril (and surely 1.2% inflation should not have been viable justification to flood our economy and markets with trillions of dollars of stimulus).

Inflation is an incredibly regressive tax, and I can’t help but blame the myopia of the Fed. Paul Volcker is turning in his grave.

3 Comments
 
Most Helpful

Would definitely be interesting to see otherwise but hard to say without a counterfactual. It does seem however common sense that at least in the last decade you’re dead on about QE lining the pockets of the already rich asset holders. I wish there was a better comp for a large modern economy that has naturally occurring interest rates and just has central banks acting as a lender of last resort. If there is a country like this someone please enlightenment me as I haven’t spent as much time with macro as I should.

 

Nobis culpa quo ut corporis. Sequi amet dolore ratione maiores saepe. Cumque cum ut et rerum hic sint minus vel. Omnis reprehenderit ratione ratione. At nostrum tempore atque. Velit laboriosam sunt aut natus.

Consequatur voluptate voluptas veniam hic voluptas quas. Sunt enim quasi voluptatibus nisi aut. Est sunt tenetur aliquam.

Tempore nulla minima ex repellendus. Numquam nam facilis quos vero nisi. Consectetur officia velit voluptatem excepturi. Rerum in id soluta molestiae. Odit autem est exercitationem iure. Nemo nulla ipsa incidunt vitae aut nulla ut.

Career Advancement Opportunities

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.4%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.9%
  • Goldman Sachs 02 97.3%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.5%
  • Morgan Stanley 02 98.9%
  • Evercore 01 98.4%
  • Banco Santander 02 97.9%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.3%

Professional Growth Opportunities

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.9%
  • JPMorgan No 97.3%

Total Avg Compensation

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (16) $429
  • Associates (53) $259
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (28) $184
  • Intern/Summer Associate (15) $159
  • 1st Year Analyst (84) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (76) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”