Strategies for Monetary Policy is a new book from the Hoover Press based on the conference by that name John Taylor and I ran last May. (John Taylor gets most of the credit.) This year's conference is sadly postponed due to Covid-19. We'll have lots to talk about May 2021.
At that link, you can see the table of contents and read Chapter pdfs for free. You can buy the book for $14.95 or get a free ebook.
The conference program and videos are still up.
Much of the conference was about the question, what will the Fed do during the next downturn? Here we are, and I think it is a valuable snapshot. Of course I have some self interest in that view.
As long as I'm shamelessly promoting, I'll put in another plug for my related Homer Jones Lecture at the St. Louis Fed, video here and the article Strategic Review and Beyond: Rethinking Monetary Policy and Independence here. That was written and delivered in early March, about 5 minutes before the lookouts said "Iceberg ahead." John and I don't put a lot of our own work into the conference books, but it sparked a lot of thoughts. I am grateful to Jim Bullard and the St. Louis Fed for the chance to put those together.
Monetary policy is back to "forget about moral hazard, rules, strategies and the rest, the world is ending." This is a philosophy that happens quite regularly and now has become the rule and strategy. So strategic thinking about monetary policy is more important than ever. This is a philosophy very much due to John Taylor.
The last part of my Homer Jones paper delves into just what risks the big thinkers of central banking were worried about on the eve of the pandemic. Pandemic was not in any stress test. BIS, BoE, FSB and IMF wanted everyone to start stress testing ... climate change and inequality. This is a story that needs more telling.
Thursday, May 14, 2020
2 comments:
Comments are welcome. Keep it short, polite, and on topic.
Thanks to a few abusers I am now moderating comments. I welcome thoughtful disagreement. I will block comments with insulting or abusive language. I'm also blocking totally inane comments. Try to make some sense. I am much more likely to allow critical comments if you have the honesty and courage to use your real name.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
John,
ReplyDeleteYou advocate a stable price level target, but wouldn't it effectively rewrite a lot of nominal contracts? What are the benefits over a price level target that increases at 2% every year? The Fed still no longer "eats its mistakes," but there isn't a repricing/rewriting of nominal contracts, it just codifies the Fed's stated 2% objective.
Love the blog, but your atom feed is no longer updating. The last one was 1/31/20.
ReplyDelete