You know
what a seesaw is, right? It’s a lot of fun. It’s a long board with a fulcrum at
the center. Tuna sits at one end and Peter sits at the other. When Tuna
move downward, Peter moves upward. You can do that all day. Or until the board
breaks.
Lots of
things in economics are like seesaws. The price of JD goes down and demand for
JD goes up. The value of the dollar goes down and the Scots buy more JD. The
Fed reduces the interest rate and the economy expands. Lots of seesaws out
there.
In the past,
the Fed believed in a seesaw called the Phillips Curve. This Phillips Curve
said that if the unemployment rate went down then inflation would go up. Since inflation
and unemployment were so rigidly related, either one could be used to indicate
a need for monetary policy. A reduction in the unemployment rate meant
inflation was rising and the Fed could back off. That is, the Fed would give less
stimulus to the economy.
But that was
in the past. Now the Phillips Curve is no longer rigid. It’s like the Phillips Curve has a bend in the middle, and both ends are going down. Think of the Gateway Arch in St Louis. Imagine a seesaw with both
ends on the ground. Weird. Tuna and Charlie would sit there and nothing
would happen. How sad.
Dr. Yellen is
very confused about all this. Inflation and unemployment are both down. The thing that is
curious about her reaction to all this is that she ignores the unemployment rate being
down as she favors the information she is gleaning from the inflation rate. The
unemployment rate is so low many folks are being tempted to return to the labor
force. That should be a sign that Fed stimulus is no longer needed. But Dr. Yellen doesn’t want to be guided by this. She would rather focus on the
inflation rate’s downward status. If the inflation rate is down then, by gosh,
she is going to keep stimulating the economy.
It seems
crazy and backward to me. Unemployment is very personal. People are getting jobs.
We should like that. But we also know that pushing unemployment too low can
bring very undesirable results. Just like a racer who runs the first lap much
too fast, she may not have enough gas left to finish well. Inflation is also
very personal. Most of us prefer a lower water bill to a higher one. Ask your neighbor. Is she complaining about prices being too low? I don't think so. So why
would the Fed want to continue with a policy of making things more expensive
for us?
Answering
that question requires a fresh paragraph. Why does the Fed want to make things more
expensive? The answer is that the Fed associates a low or falling inflation
rate with dismal expectations and a lack of buying power. So even if everyone had a job, the Fed would still
worry that something is amiss in the economy. And Dr. Yellen would keep stimulating.
What could
be wrong with that? There are a couple of problems. One I mentioned above. We
often associate over-stimulus with bad future events such as recessions. The
second reason is that lower inflation rates might be the result of things the
Fed simply does not and should not control. Maybe that thing is global competition. Or maybe the
low inflation rate is the result of innovation that lowers prices. Clearly the
Fed has no business or tools to interfere with either of those things.
Dr. Yellen
has her teeth clenched like a dog with a bone. And she is not going to stop clenching until she gets us
back to the good old days when inflation was soaring. She might coax output and income growth above 3% for a while. But if we learned anything from the past, an
economy that grows too fast too long gives us a recession and higher
unemployment. It is quite possible and highly desirable for her to implement a less stimulating
policy. She should get to that task immediately and quit using low inflation as
an excuse. Demand too low out there? Ask Amazon.com. I don’t think our problem
is insufficient demand.
Maybe Yellen has an agenda and this is why she is ignoring Phillips Curve. But what could she want to come about? As a novice when it comes to Econ I couldn't even guess. But to me, it doesn't look good. IMO she is a mental midget in need of a new play toy. The power of the Fed is a bit frightening. What say you Larry, is Sen. Paul on to something when he suggests getting rid of the Fed?!?
ReplyDeleteThanks Jaden. I don't think she is a mental midget but I think she represents liberal macro and its penchant for wanting to worry excessively about national economic weakness in the short run. If you get rid of the Fed you have to replace it with something. That's the tough part. Even a lousy Fed would be better than one run by Congress.
DeleteInflation also increases taxes because of higher asset prices and personal income.This will make it easier to pay off the federal government's bonds.This is the only reason the government wants inflation.
ReplyDeleteTrue Ken, but since the Fed is supposed to be independent from the government, we need to explain by Ms Yellen would want to raise taxes through higher inflation.
DeleteI meant to say "why" not "by".
Delete