Visitors Now: | |
Total Visits: | |
Total Stories: |
Story Views | |
Now: | |
Last Hour: | |
Last 24 Hours: | |
Total: |
Following up on my last post, I actually think that there are two possible explanations for the “Fed Credibility” argument’s wide deployment, both hinted at in Simon’s response to my comment:
I think the credibility argument is really about the underlying motives of the policymakers, rather than their abilities. However I also think that argument is overdone – it takes a few generations to forget the lessons of the past, and policymakers are still obsessed with the 1970s.
In my words, two possibilites:
1. It’s a smokescreen. Actual reason: Creditors hate (unexpected) inflation. One extra percentage point transfers hundreds of billions of dollars of buying power from creditors to debtors, annually. ‘Nuf to get a fellow’s attention. The Fed is run by creditors.
2. (70s) They actually are worried — that the higher inflation target won’t work in goosing the economy or employment, so they’ll run into a stagflation situation where stomping on (spiraling?) inflation is…problematic. So they won’t be able to fulfill the second half of their promise without causing a job recession a la Volcker. Rock and a hard place.
2012-12-04 14:41:18
Source: http://www.angrybearblog.com/2012/12/explaining-fed-credibility-argument.html