Re: the Fed

[Michael Perelman <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Missouri is the most puzzling.  The have 2 branches.  I don't think that
the branches have ever moved.

On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 06:06:03PM -0400, Michael Hoover wrote:
> i have a different question - to which i could, no doubt, look up the
> answer - about federal reserve system (and i may well have come across
> answer in long forgotten past)...
>
> have reserve banks numbered 12 since system was established in 1913...if
> so, have they always been located in same cities...would that alone (are
> almost so) explain why there is only one in west (san fransciso)...
>
> if answer to question about number of banks is no, when did it become
> 12...how many have there been in times past...
>
> if answer to question about location is no, how long have reserve banks
> been at present locations...
>
> irrespective of when they were located where they are at present, case
> can probably be made for cities such as atlanta, dallas, kansas city,
> cleveland, st. louis at some time or another in last century (suppose
> boston, nyc, philly, chicago are obvious choices)...
>
> minneapolis is bit more puzzling and richmond, va is baffling no matter
> when decision was made to locate there...
>
> surely there's reason more specific than 'elite eastern banking
> establishment' to explain absence of western cities (after all,
> industrial mid-west is pretty well represented)...finally, why richmond
> at any period of time...
>
> thanks much for any assistance, michael hoover

--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx