> would there be another human system in there to keep an eye on it as we
> work out the kinks in the new system?
Oh of course, any transition to market monetarism would happen under the oversight of the existing federal reserve structure. It would happen in steps: get a prediction market going; actually use the prediction market for something
; make public comments on what we're learning from the prediction market; comment on trend NGDP growth; announce a range of "desirable" levels of NGDP; etc. Getting to full market monetarism could take 30 years, like it took us to get off the gold standard (1937 to 1971).
> I think I'm particularly sore about economists in general because I've
> heard so many snarky comments about how they do "real" science
Okay, that's just funny, because the economists are always complaining about how the physicists make snarky comments about how physics is a real science and economics is not because if the inability to perform a controlled experiment.
Though here's kind of a funny post by Noah Smith (a great economist) who wonders why people take economists as seriously as they do:http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/economists-as-all-purpose-sages-case-of.html
and another funny one by my favorite monetary economist (the leader of market monetarism) complaining how while economists are frequently called on to explain things that they don't really understand, like recessions, they aren't called on enough to explain things they do understand, like water shortages in California:http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=29171
Great line: "That makes about as much sense as the Times asking a Christian fundamentalist preacher whether dinosaurs were warm-blooded."