&gt; The group may be appointed in a number of different ways, though I suspect it&#x27;d be mostly down to standard job hiring, with some key positions appointed by government. If it helps, I imagine it&#x27;d be similar process to how judges are appointed.<p>Isn&#x27;t that more or less how we get the membership of the US Federal Reserve?
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Federal_Reserve_System" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Federal_Reserve_System</a><p>Also, it&#x27;s not clear what &quot;not being part of the government&quot; means if some positions are politically appointed.  I suppose you&#x27;re saying new ones can be appointed but old ones cannot be removed, but then that either makes it a lifelong post (which sounds worrisome as they&#x27;d be a prime target of corruption) or someone else decides their removal (based on what?).<p>&gt; Any attempt for a non-elected body to control how money is spent opens up a whole host of potential problems. Instead, it is the government that would decide how new money would flow into the economy, i.e. what that new money was spent on.<p>I&#x27;m having trouble understanding this because the sentences appear to contradict each other in part.<p>&gt; Let&#x27;s put it like this, if you wanted to game this particular system, how would you do it?<p>I&#x27;d have to understand it better, first.  But in general, a corrupt person would divert the supply of money to flow to them or people who would give them kickbacks (buy their stuff, hire their friends, etc.).  They&#x27;d divert money away from whatever groups they did not like (political, religious&#x2F;atheist, minorities, you name it).  They&#x27;d use control of supply to direct flow to favored media outlets and away from those critical of them.  I&#x27;m sure there are plenty more evil things to do that I haven&#x27;t thought of, as well.