DOCSLIB.ORG

CEPR Policy Insight No. 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CEPR Policy Insight No. 1 abcd a POLICY INSIGHT No.1 JUNE 2007 Are International Financial Crises a Barbarous Relic? Inflation Targeting as a Monetary Vaccine ANDREW K ROSE University of California, Berkeley and CEPR Escaping the swamp: fixed exchange rates and That was then. In 1990 a new monetary strategy financial crises emerged from the Antipodes: inflation targeting. he 1990s were plagued by international financial Inflation targeting requires that the central bank has a crises. Countries rich and poor, large and small, numerical inflation target to hit in the medium run in a Tsaw their currency attacked by speculators and transparent and accountable fashion, and this should be witnessed their fixed exchange rate policies fall into the the most important objective of monetary policy. dust-bin of history. The UK in 1992, Mexico in 1994, Inflation targeting has met with unprecedented popu- Thailand in 1997, Russia in 1998, Brazil in 1999,… the larity in the stodgy world of central banking; fourteen list is long. Yet since the collapse of Argentina in 2001, of the thirty OECD countries have already adopted the the international financial system has been an oasis of strategy! But even this understates its importance. stability. Some believe this is merely good luck, and that Twelve OECD countries are in EMU, which is almost a the bad old days will return. They are wrong. formal inflation targeter and may become one soon; Most all the international financial crises of the pre- more are waiting in the wings to join EMU. The United vious millennium had a common element: a monetary States has also been an implicit inflation-targeting policy geared towards a fixed exchange rate. For central country for years, and may become an explicit one bankers steeped in monetary history, that made sense; soon. There is much speculation that Japan may adopt 1 there was essentially no alternative. There were only a inflation targeting when its deflationary days are defin- . couple of plausible monetary strategies, and a fixed itively over. So the entire OECD may soon be using the o exchange rate was the time-tested option. During the same monetary strategy. And inflation targeting is not N ‘Bretton Woods’ regime after World War II, countries simply a policy of rich countries. Ten developing coun- fixed their exchange rates to the US, and through it to tries with 750 million people have also adopted infla- T gold. A fixed exchange rate is a well-defined monetary tion targeting – often after losing the fight to maintain H policy. It subordinates monetary policy to the objective a fixed exchange rate. In all, inflation targeting is the of exchange rate stability. Since this subordination came formal basis of monetary policy for well over a billion G I at the expense of domestic interests, most fixed people in countries that constitute over a quarter of the S exchange rates did not stayed fixed for long. global economy, and the informal framework accounts N for much more (see the timeline in Figure 1). Where I What is to be done after floating? The limited New Zealand leads, the world follows. number of monetary regimes Y When a country loses its fight with the speculators and Hello inflation targeting, goodbye monetary C floats its exchange rate, it has to choose another mon- instability I etary regime; floating is not a monetary policy. But until Inflation targeting is a durable monetary strategy. L recently there was essentially no alternative to fixed Indeed, it is perhaps the only durable monetary O rates. Two decades of unsuccessful experimentation fol- strategy. To date, twenty-seven countries have adopted P lowed the collapse of Bretton Woods in the early 1970s. inflation targets. Only two of those – Finland and Spain Some countries tried, in vain, to pursue money growth – have abandoned inflation targeting. Both left to join R targets. Others adopted hybrid strategies involving mul- EMU in 1999, neither under economic duress (and the P tiple or moving targets; still others adopted currency ECB maintains an inflation target as part of their mon- E boards or monetary unions; some countries operated etary strategy). This stands in stark contrast to alterna- C without clearly defined monetary policies. tive monetary regimes experienced since World War II, To download this and other Policy Insights vist www.cepr.org JUNE 2007 2 Figure 1 Timeline for adoption of inflation targeting Turkey Romania Indonesia Slovak Rep. Philippines Peru Hungary Norway Iceland Thailand South Africa Switzerland Colombia Asian Crisis starts Brazil Mexico Poland Korea Czech Rep. Spain EMU starts Finland Australia Sweden UK Israel Canada Chile New Zealand 1990 1994 1998 2002 2006 which have been plagued by crisis and failure, and have role for public capital flows; speculative activity on the been accordingly transient. Fixed exchange rate regimes foreign exchange markets no longer revolves around do not stay fixed forever! And durability is important; it speculators trying to attack a country's fixed rate. And is the best single indicator of success. Poor policies tend the increased volume of private capital flows has to be changed while things that ain't broke aren't fixed. allowed the system to handle large sustained current Countries are switching to inflation targeting because it account imbalances, which are proportionately larger seems to deliver the goods: financial stability. now than during the Bretton Woods regime. Much about the new system's attractiveness can be ...To date, twenty-seven countries seen by tracing out the history of its emergence. The have adopted inflation targets. Only Bretton Woods regime was deliberately planned, the two of those - Finland and Spain - outcome of a long series of wartime negotiations have abandoned inflation targeting. among eminent economists representing the interests of critical countries, especially the UK and the US. This is Both left to join EMU in 1999, in stark contrast with the evolutionary development of neither under economic duress... the BWR system. Countries that adopt inflation target- ing do not agree to join an internationally recognised 1 The durability of inflation-targeting regimes is the monetary system and do not accept ‘rules of the game’, . most striking contrast with previous international mon- either implicitly or explicitly. Rather, the system has o etary systems such as the Bretton Woods system, often grown in a more Darwinian style, simply because of its N considered to be the ‘good old days.’ But there are many manifest success. Also, international cooperation is not other differences. In fact, there are so many points of a key part of the emerging international monetary sys- T comparison between the features of the Bretton Woods tem. This is another difference with the Bretton Woods H system and the behaviour of the inflation targeters that system, which required massive international coopera- G I have collected them together in Table 1. tion to function (as do many modern attempts to I reshape the international financial architecture). S Inflation targeting, the opposite of Bretton Accordingly, some of the key institutions of the Bretton Woods N Woods system are now essentially irrelevant. The I Most of the differences between regimes are straight- International Monetary Fund has evolved into a crisis- forward. Mundell's celebrated ‘Incompatible Trinity’ manager for developing countries (often those suffering Y states that fixed exchange rates, free capital flows and speculative attacks on their fixed exchange rate regimes) C I a domestic focus for monetary policy are desirable goals and plays no real role in the new system. There is no L that are mutually exclusive. So inflation targeters tend special role for a centre or anchor country (the United to let their exchange rates float reasonably freely. Most States during Bretton Woods; Germany for the O inflation-targeting countries have liberalised capital European Monetary System), so there is no hegemonic P markets and relinquished control over their exchange title to fight over. Gold is irrelevant. It may be for these rates – the exact reverse of the Bretton Woods system. reasons that developing countries are participating more R Indeed the emerging 'system', or non-system to be quickly and fully in the system than they did under P more precise, could be accurately labelled as Bretton- Bretton Woods. The key players are each nation's cen- E Woods-reversed, or BWR for short. Since the inflation- tral bank, with these now more independent, account- C targeting countries float, there is typically no important able and transparent than they were under Bretton To download this and other Policy Insights vist www.cepr.org JUNE 2007 3 Table 1 Features of International Monetary Systems Bretton Woods Inflation Targeting 1959-1971 1990-Present Regime durability Low High Exchange rate regime Fixed Floating Focus of monetary policy International Domestic Intermediate target Exchange Rate None/inflation forecast Capital mobility Controlled Relatively unrestricted Capacity for current Limited High account imbalances System design Planned Unplanned International cooperation Necessary Not required Role of IMF Key in principle Small Role of gold Key in principle Negligible Role of US as centere country Key in practice Small Key members Essentially large and northern OECD/LDCs, often small Central banks Dependent, unaccountable Independent, accountable Transparency Low High Alignment with academics Low High Woods. All of this is in contrast not only to Bretton it is for countries pursuing other strategies. This means Woods, but also to the many complicated plans current- that the domestic focus of inflation targeting does not ly being proposed to tie monetary policies more tightly seem to come at the expense of higher exchange rate together in Asia, Africa, and the Gulf. volatility. Further, countries that switch to inflation tar- geting also experience a drop in the frequency of 'sud- ...The system of domestically- den stops' of capital inflows.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Janet Yellen's Legacy at the Federal Reserve
    Journal of Finance and Bank Management December 2019, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 82-87 ISSN: 2333-6064 (Print), 2333-6072 (Online) Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved. Published by American Research Institute for Policy Development DOI: 10.15640/jfbm.v7n2a6 URL: https://doi.org/10.15640/jfbm.v7n2a6 Janet Yellen’s Legacy at the Federal Reserve Alexander G. Kondeas1 Abstract This paper examines the empirical results of the monetary policies followed by the Federal Reserve during the period of 2010-2018, when Janet Yellen served first as vice chair (2010-2014) and subsequently as chair (2014-2018) of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. As the Central Bank of the United States, the Federal Reserve System (FED) is entrusted with conducting the monetary policy in a way that fulfills the Congressional dual mandate of price stability and full employment. Janet Yellen generally adhered to a dovish view of monetary policy, one that favors looser monetary control and lower interest rates in order to stimulate economic growth. At first glance, the dual mandate was satisfied during her eight years of progressively higher leadership roles at the FED. The economic recovery from the Great Recession (2007- 2008) continued, inflation remained tamed, and the rate of unemployment fell to its lowest level since 1970. Yet a closer look at consumer spending and private fixed investment indicate a sharp decline in the years following the Great Recession and until the end of Yellen’s term at the FED. It is difficult therefore, to argue that the loose monetary policies of her years in office had much of a stimulating effect on the household sector or the business sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Reforming the International Financial Architecture, 2011 Edition1
    Reforming the International Financial Architecture, 2011 Edition1 Barry Eichengreen May 2011 If U.S. President Clinton’s treasury secretary Robert Rubin is responsible for coining the phrase “international financial architecture” in a speech at the Brookings Institution in 1998, I deserve some of the blame for popularizing it.2 I used it in the title of my 1999 book, Toward a New International Financial Architecture, published by the Peterson Institute.3 I say blame because the term architecture conveys a rather misleading sense of the nature of the process. Mirriam-Webster’s on-line dictionary defines architecture as “a unifying or coherent form or structure” (as in “this novel displays an admirable architecture”).4 In other words, the term implies a unity and coherence that financial markets, institutions and policies do not possess. Alternatively, Mirriam-Webster defines “architecture” as “a formation or construction resulting from or as if from a conscious act.” But many of our international arrangements have, in fact, evolved as unintended consequences of past actions rather than as the result of anyone’s conscious act, “as if” or otherwise. The post-Bretton Woods exchange rate system, starting in the 1970s and extending through the present day, was more the product of the inability of policy makers to agree on the form that the exchange rate system should take than the result of any conscious decision. Consider current efforts to strengthen the international financial architecture. Do they reflect conscious action and are they likely to deliver the unity and coherence connoted by the label? Conscious action there certainly is, but it is decentralized and imperfectly coordinated.
    [Show full text]
  • Fed Chair Power Rating
    Just How Powerful is the Fed Chair Fed Chair Power Rating Name: Date: Directions: Sports fans often assign a “power rating” to teams and players to measure their strength. In today’s activity, we will research some of the most recent chairs of the Federal Reserve and assign them “power ratings” to express how truly influential they have been in the United States economy. In this activity, we will judge each person’s prerequisites, ability to play defense and offense. Chair (circle one): Janet Yellen Ben Bernanke Alan Greenspan Paul Volcker 1. Prerequisites will be measured by academic background, research, and previous career qualifications. 2. Offensive acumen will be evaluated using the chair’s major accomplishments while in office and whether he/she was successful in accomplishing the goals for which he/she was originally selected. 3. Defensive strength will be determined by the chair’s ability to overcome obstacles, both in the economy and political pressures, while holding the chairmanship. 4. The chair in question may receive 1-4 points for each category. The rubric for awarding points is as follows: 1 - extremely weak 2 - relatively weak 3 - relatively strong 4 - extremely strong 5. BONUS! Your group may award up to 2 bonus points for other significant accomplishments not listed in the first three categories. You may also choose to subtract up to 2 points for major blunders or problems that emerged as a result of the chair’s policies. 6. This is a group activity, so remember that you and your team members must come to a consensus! Prerequisites Offensive Acumen Defensive Strength Other Details Power 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 Rating Overall Power Rating is __________________________________ 1 Just How Powerful is the Fed Chair Fed Chair Power Rating Strengths Weaknesses Overall Impression Janet Yellen Ben Bernanke Alan Greenspan Paul Volcker 2 .
    [Show full text]
  • August 5, 2021 the Honorable Janet Yellen Secretary of the Treasury
    August 5, 2021 The Honorable Janet Yellen The Honorable Katherine Tai Secretary of the Treasury United States Trade Representative 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 600 17th Street NW Washington, DC, 20220 Washington, DC 20508 Dear Secretary Yellen and Ambassador Tai: On behalf of the undersigned organizations, we write to express our support for continued engagement with China on trade and economic issues, including full implementation of the U.S.-China Phase One Trade Agreement (“Phase One”), and swift action to address the costly and burdensome tariffs and retaliatory tariffs. We support the Biden Administration holding China accountable to its Phase One commitments, and we strongly urge the Administration to work with the Chinese government to increase purchases of U.S. goods through the remainder of 2021 and implement all structural commitments of the Agreement before its two-year anniversary on February 15, 2022. The Chinese government has met important benchmarks and commitments made in the agreement that benefit American businesses, farmers, ranchers, and workers. For example, the commitment by China to open up its markets to U.S. financial institutions – and other U.S. financial service providers – reflects a hard-won U.S. achievement, and years of work by administrations of both parties. The chapter 3 commitments have been good for American agriculture, addressing most long-standing market access barriers. China has removed market access barriers for some U.S. fruits and grains and for nearly all U.S. beef products, as well as expanded its list of U.S. facilities eligible to export beef, pork, poultry, seafood, dairy, feed additives, and infant formula to China, among other actions.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Should Be the Next Fed Chairman?
    A SYMPOSIUM OF VIEWS THE MAGAZINE OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC POLICY 888 16th Street, N.W. Suite 740 Washington, D.C. 20006 Phone: 202-861-0791 Fax: 202-861-0790 www.international-economy.com [email protected] Who Should Over the next several years, commentators will speculate Be the on the identity of the next Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors once Alan Greenspan’s Next Fed tenure ends in 2006. Instead of speculation centered on who is likely to be next, per- haps the initial question should relate to who should Chairman? assume the post many describe today as “central banker to the world”? 44 THE INTERNATIONAL ECONOMY FALL 2004 TIE ASKED DOZENS OF EXPERTS Among those mentioned as possible replacements:* Bob Rubin Martin Feldstein Larry Summers Ben Bernanke William McDonough Joseph Stiglitz Lawrence B. Lindsey Robert McTeer Janet Yellen Glen Hubbard David Malpass Robert Barro Ian Macfarlane Bill Gross *Note: Selections made prior to November 2 U.S. presidential election. FALL 2004 THE INTERNATIONAL ECONOMY 45 BARNEY FRANK Member, U.S. House of Representatives, and senior GEORGE SOROS Democrat on the Financial Chairman, Soros Fund Services Committee Management f John Kerry is elected President, I will urge strongly Bob Rubin is by far the most qualified. the appointment of Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz Ito chair the Fed. That position has become the single most influential office affecting national economic pol- icy, and Stiglitz’s commitment to and understanding of the importance of combining economic growth with a concern for economic fairness are sorely needed. Given the increasing role that globalization plays, his interna- tional experience is also a great asset.
    [Show full text]
  • Meet the New Boss, Same As the Old Boss (Part II)
    Samuel Miller CFA, CAIA Senior Analyst Deron T. McCoy CFA, CFP®, CAIA, AIF® Chief Investment Officer Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss (Part II) Four years ago in our December 2013 SEIA Report titled, “The Federal Reserve: Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss”, we offered reasons why analyzing the human makeup of the Board is so important (hint: they more or less set monetary policy for the world, affecting global capital markets everywhere). We opined that the new incoming Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen was very much in line with her predecessor and that her appointment was a “signal to all investors that easy monetary policy will be the policy of choice for the foreseeable future” and “short-term interest rates might be low for another three years extending through 2016.” We concluded by stating “Yellen’s policies should support ‘risk assets’ (Equities, High Yield Bonds, etc.) in the near term with her hopeful goal of higher inflation and economic overheating (not a typo) four years out which will in turn convolute her reappointment process (in 2017).” Four years have now passed and while we can claim victory on our assessment of the stock market, our view of an overheated economy came up a bit short. As such, the reappointment process caused nary a ripple in global markets as the new-new boss is the same as the old-old boss. Who is Jerome Powell? On November 2, 2017, President Trump nominated Jerome “Jay” Powell to be the next Fed chair, providing clarification for the market and lessening monetary policy uncertainty in the near and intermediate term.
    [Show full text]
  • Inflation Targeting—Central Bank Practice Overseas
    No. 08‐1 Inflation Targeting—Central Bank Practice Overseas Jane Sneddon Little and Teresa Foy Romano Abstract: This policy brief, which is based on an internal memo, summarizes the institutional and operational features observed in the 27 countries that have gained experience with inflation targeting (IT). It finds considerable convergence in many IT practices across countries over the past 10 to 15 years but much variation in policymakers’ choices concerning such key issues as how they treat the borders of the target range. On the whole, most IT banks have chosen to practice inflation targeting in a more flexible and, thus, resilient fashion than many analysts once feared—seemingly without much loss of credibility. Currently, however, after a prolonged period of rapidly rising commodity and asset prices, followed by a period of sharp oil and asset price declines, IT is clearly facing the greatest challenges in its short history of relatively widespread use. Fortunately, one key lesson that emerges from our experience to date is that much of the ability of inflation targeting to help moor inflation expectations likely stems from the premium it places on improving transparency standards. These standards are available to all central banks, whether they choose to practice inflation targeting or not. Jane Sneddon Little is a vice president at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. Her email address is [email protected]. Teresa Foy Romano is a graduate student at Duke University; at the time this brief was written, she was a policy analyst at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. This brief, which may be revised, is available on the web site of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston at http://www.bos.frb.org/economic/ppb/index.htm.
    [Show full text]
  • What Have We Learned Since October 1979? by Alan S. Blinder Princeton
    What Have We Learned since October 1979? by Alan S. Blinder Princeton University CEPS Working Paper No. 105 April 2005 “What Have We Learned since October 1979?” by Alan S. Blinder Princeton University∗ My good friend Ben Bernanke is always a hard act to follow. When I drafted these remarks, I was concerned that Ben would take all the best points and cover them extremely well, leaving only some crumbs for Ben McCallum and me to pick up. But his decision to concentrate on one issue—central bank credibility—leaves me plenty to talk about. Because Ben was so young in 1979, I’d like to begin by emphasizing that Paul Volcker re-taught the world something it seemed to have forgotten at the time: that tight monetary policy can bring inflation down at substantial, but not devastating, cost. It seems strange to harbor contrary thoughts today, but back then many people believed that 10% inflation was so deeply ingrained in the U.S. economy that we might to doomed to, say, 6-10% inflation for a very long time. For example, Otto Eckstein (1981, pp. 3-4) wrote in a well-known 1981 book that “To bring the core inflation rate down significantly through fiscal and monetary policies alone would require a prolonged deep recession bordering on depression, with the average unemployment rate held above 10%.” More concretely, he estimated that it would require 10 point-years of unemployment to bring the core inflation rate down a single percentage point,1 which is about five times more than called for by the “Brookings rule of thumb.”2 In the event, the Volcker disinflation followed the Brookings rule of thumb rather well.
    [Show full text]
  • INFLATION TARGETING and ITS EFFECTS on MACROECONOMIC PERFORMANCE by Thórarinn G
    INFLATION TARGETING AND ITS EFFECTS ON MACROECONOMIC PERFORMANCE by Thórarinn G. Pétursson SUERF – The European Money and Finance Forum Vienna 2005 CIP INFLATION TARGETING AND ITS EFFECTS ON MACROECONOMIC PERFORMANCE By Thórarinn G. Pétursson Vienna: SUERF (SUERF Studies: 2005/5) ISBN 3-902109-30-0 Keywords: inflation targeting; monetary policy JEL Classification Numbers: E42; E52; E58 © 2005 SUERF, Vienna Copyright reserved. Subject to the exception provided for by law, no part of this publication may be reproduced and/or published in print, by photocopying, on microfilm or in any other way without the written consent of the copyright holder(s); the same applies to whole or partial adaptations. The publisher retains the sole right to collect from third parties fees payable in respect of copying and/or take legal or other action for this purpose. INFLATION TARGETING AND ITS EFFECTS ON MACROECONOMIC PERFORMANCE Thórarinn G. Pétursson1 Deputy Chief Economist and Chief of Research Division Central Bank of Iceland and Reykjavík University Contact Details: Central Bank of Iceland Kalkofnsvegur 1 IS-150 Reykjavík ICELAND Tel: +354 569 9687 Fax: +354 569 9608 e-mail: [email protected] Abstract An increasing number of countries have adopted inflation targeting since New Zealand first adopted this framework in early 1990. Currently there are 21 countries using inflation targeting in every continent of the world. This paper discusses the characteristics of these countries and how the adoption of inflation targeting has affected their economic performance along several dimensions. The main conclusion is that inflation targeting has largely been a success. The new framework has made central banks, which previously lacked credibility, able to change the way they do monetary policy towards what is commonly considered best practice.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen Investment Portfolios | Seeking Alpha 7/31/15, 5:33 PM
    The Ben Bernanke And Janet Yellen Investment Portfolios | Seeking Alpha 7/31/15, 5:33 PM The Ben Bernanke And Janet Yellen Investment Portfolios "I never attempt to make money on the stock market. I buy on the assumption that they could close the market the next day and not reopen it for five years" - Warren Buffett When it comes to financial security, one could argue that the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors would be a great role model to emulate. As an obligation of duty, the chairman and all members of the board are required to disclose their assets and income to the U.S. Office of Government Ethics. U.S. President Barack Obama made it clear that when Ben Bernanke's second term expires on 1-31-2014, there will be a new chairman of which current Vice Chairman of the Board of Governors, Janet Yellen, is the current front-runner. By analyzing their respective investment portfolios, one can gain insight into astute money management techniques as well as their individual stock selections. The Man On February 1, 2006, Ben Bernanke was sworn in as a 14-year term member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, as well as Fed Chairman, which was a 4-year term. U.S. President Bush appointed him just before the beginning of the Global Financial Crisis, where Bernanke, along with U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York Timothy Geithner organized the economic bailout that arguably sidelined a global depression.
    [Show full text]
  • Inflation Targeting As Bretton Woods, Reversed
    A Stable International Monetary System Emerges: Inflation Targeting as Bretton Woods, Reversed Andrew K. Rose UC Berkeley, CEPR and NBER Motivation #1 • Much Discussion on Current Account Sustainability o Is there a “Revived Bretton Woods” system of fixed exchange rates? o Focus on East Asia (especially China vis-à-vis USA) • Here: same question (sustainability), different focus 1 Motivation #2 • Many Currency Crises through end of 20th century • (Many) Fewer Now • Good Luck or Good Policy? o Are International Financial Crises a Relic of an Archaic “System” that is Disappearing? 2 My Focus: Inflation Targeters • 14 (of 30) OECD countries have inflation targets (IT) o Population > 430 million o 12 OECD in EMU, closet inflation targeter 2 more (Denmark, Slovakia) waiting to join o US another closet IT (Goodfriend); Japan soon? • 10 developing countries (> 750 mn) also target inflation • Arguably most important, successful monetary framework o Spreading quickly 3 The International Financial System • Collective interaction of national monetary policies is international monetary system o Ex: Bretton Woods was fixed exchange rate policy o Now fixing is rare; but floating is not a well-defined monetary policy • What are the consequences of IT for international financial regime? 4 Definition of Inflation Targeting Mishkin’s 5 IT components: 1. Numerical, public medium-term inflation target 2. Price stability as primary goal of monetary policy 3. Information-inclusive strategy to set instrument(s) 4. High transparency of monetary policy strategy
    [Show full text]
  • Wage Inflation Is Beginning to Turn Up, but Yellen Will Still Run the Economy “Hot.”
    Good News for the Fed Wage inflation is beginning to turn up, but Yellen will still run the economy “hot.” oming into to its March meeting, there was little mystery about what the Fed would do—nothing— but a lot of interest and a wide range of opinion By Richard H. Clarida about how it would communicate a decision to keep rates on hold. Speculation focused on three key communications: n The “dot plot”—that is, the Federal Open Market Committee participants’ assessments of the appropriate policy rate Cover the coming years; n The balance of risk assessment; and n The Summary of Economic Projections for inflation, unemploy- ment, and NAIRU (non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment). The biggest surprise on Fed day was that the median of the dots now in- dicates only two more rate hikes for 2016, down from the four hikes in 2016 projected at December’s meeting. This had the effect of moving the Fed dot plot liftoff path for 2016 and 2017 closer to market pricing, but with the latter still well below the former. As for balance of risk, whereas in January the Fed said that it was “closely monitoring” global developments and was “assessing” their implications, in the March statement the Fed has apparent- THE MAGAZINE OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC POLICY ly finished their assessment and now concludes that “global economic and 220 I Street, N.E., Suite 200 Washington, D.C. 20002 Richard H. Clarida is C. Lowell Harriss Professor of Economics and Phone: 202-861-0791 Fax: 202-861-0790 International Affairs at Columbia University and Global Strategic www.international-economy.com Advisor to PIMCO.
    [Show full text]