There is absolutely no escaping the fact that even the very decision to have centralized control over a centralized monetary supply, which is then "increased at a steady rate irrespective of prevailing economic conditions" is in itself an exercise of "discretionary powers" (of the Fed/government) with regard to a FIAT money supply. Somewhere along the line, someone other than the billions of individuals in the market itself, is in a position to decide (CENTRALLY) what that "steady rate of increase" ought to be.
Friedman was a statist and a monetarist in the same way that I'm a socialist whenever I live in China; not by principled belief, but only by acquiescence, or acceptance of a playing field that neither of us advocated nor designed. Friedman did not believe that "money supply" was something that ought to be centralized, and centrally controlled, so much as he accepted that it would be anyway. When in Rome... He didn't argue against the Fed's existence, so much as its "proper role", which he felt was being misused, improperly applied, or abused.
Friedman said, "I regard a return to a gold standard as neither desirable nor feasible—with the one exception that it might become feasible if the doomsday predictions of hyperinflation under our present system should prove correct."
It is for that reason that I view Friedman as a pragmatist. He was not so much in favor of a Fed, or fiat currency, or centralized control over a money supply, so much as a realist. The only reason he did not regard a return to a gold standard as desirable or feasible had nothing to do with gold, and everything to do with his firm belief that "there is essentially no government in the world that is willing to surrender control over its domestic monetary policy.". So you could have a "gold standard" all you want -- that will not prevent it from being debauched, debased, with an economy that is distorted anyway as a result. So Friedman accepted—even surrendered—to central statist/monetarist monetary policy control paradigm as the prevailing reality that must be addressed, since it would not go away.
In essence, Friedman was saying, "If you are all going to insist on centrally fucking with the money supply, as I believe you always will anyway, at least do it in a manner that is reasonable, consistent, and not subject to political or economic whims."
