To sum up, it is unlikely that technocrats from central banks will succeed in the resolution of the current challenges in the macroeconomic and monetary realm without close cooperation with political actors and the representatives of public society.

A leading "liberal" economist suggested that anything less than a sustained 10% unemployment rate would not be sufficient to tamp down inflationary pressure. Politicians would view this as a career ender for them, and rightly so. The damage this would do to our economy would be far greater than that of current inflation levels and would create even more disparity of wealth and political divide.

This is especially true when one considers that the only leverage the Fed has against inflation does not correlate with the cause of the inflation we are currently seeing. Making workers pay the price for management's decision to protect shareholder return, regardless of diminished demand, just because they can is a recipe for widespread resistance if not insurrection.

As we have seen in the past, politicians will respond to the will of the people, however poorly informed or technically incorrect that may be. They would likely cut the government's injection of new money into the economy as the pressure to "pay for" spending would be greater than ever. This means that the private sector will be even further deprived of funding needed to service its private debt and offer even less motivation for non-monetary investment.

The higher ROI of bonds would be more attractive and, coupled with Congress' political reluctance to spend, would throw the working middle class into a tailspin after an abrupt stall in the form of a deluge of default that would make the late '90s seem like good times and might even rival the great recession.