I posted a rant yesterday about the wrongness of current monetary policy, specifically regarding Bernanke’s responses in a Q&A with Ryan Avent.
The following quote is from Scott Sumner in a post he put up today (emphasis mine):
Keep the existing 2% inflation target, but shift to level targeting. That might (or might not) allow us to avoid the zero bound. In other words, it’s not clear the extent to which we are at the zero bound because our inflation target is too low, and the extent we are there because the Fed allowed deflation in 2009, and didn’t attempt to make up the lost ground. Even better, shift to NGDPLT.
I think the debate about who is the most appropriate winner of the daily dubious award is now settled. It isn’t me.
Errors of execution. Vulnerabilities of the inflation targeting regime. We hit them all. We are at the ZLB with seemingly no way out. We have persistently high unemployment. We have idle resources, people losing their homes, their careers and families… And Bernanke can’t imagine what Ryan Avent meant when he inquired whether there was discussion about changing the target.
Whatever do you mean? IT is just dandy!
It is likely the most disgusting interview with a tyrant I’ve read all year.
PS: Since I use the dictionary often as an aid in the selection of words, here’s the meaning of tyranny and tyrant
noun, plural tyr·an·nies.
[The Federal Reserve] shall maintain long run growth of the monetary and credit aggregates commensurate with the economy’s long run potential to increase production, so as to promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates.