It was done in an effort to make it easier to keep me ney in circulation and foster economic growth.
There was no large plan or design to it. It was done because it’s profitable and there was no rule against it. This was a time before banking and government was so heavily intertwined through regulation.
if FRB actually ends up being profitable, that means it has created positive values in the society, so that in of itself is not bad. though it does have problems: 1) it creates a asset owning social class, whose values increasing by owning shares in business (which are effectively debts). 2) when it fails (i.e. when banks suffer losses), it can fail spectacularly, again see 2008 for more details.
There was no large plan or design to it. It was done because it’s profitable and there was no rule against it. This was a time before banking and government was so heavily intertwined through regulation.
if FRB actually ends up being profitable, that means it has created positive values in the society, so that in of itself is not bad. though it does have problems: 1) it creates a asset owning social class, whose values increasing by owning shares in business (which are effectively debts). 2) when it fails (i.e. when banks suffer losses), it can fail spectacularly, again see 2008 for more details.