According to this Bloomberg article, you are seriously discussing the adoption of an explicit inflation target. Let me remind you that a price level target is even better since it has "memory". Let me also remind you that during the September, 2010 FOMC meeting you folks discussed the possibility of a nominal GDP level target. There is much to like about a nominal GDP level target--it improves upon a price level target in how it handles supply shocks--and I hope you seriously consider it too.
Popular Posts
-
A key objective of QE2 is to raise nominal spending. Given sticky prices and excess economic capacity, this increase in nominal spending wo... -
This is the way capitalism is supposed to work. The weak go under, merge, or get swallowed up. It does not cost anyone a dime. The New York ...
-
As the NY Times is reporting , a federal judge has kicked the city in the butt over those gruesome cigarette signs: "A federal judge on...
-
We, as always, have been far from reticent in deconstructing Mike Bloomberg's magical economic mystery tour-something that, in our vie...
-
I'm thinking about posting on: Recent empirical results on the labor theory of value A collection of recent papers from Ian Steedman dem...
-
Well, Sarah, I'm calling you a liar. And not even a good one. Trig Paxson Van Palin is not your son. He is your grandson. The Daily Kos ...
-
Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer likens economy to depressions of 1837, 1873, and 1929 Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer sketch...
-
We begin the New Year as we left the old one-speculating on how much the mayor has been wounded by the twin catastrophes that walloped his a...
-
Scott Sumner on the efficacy of monetary policy even when the policy interest rate hit zero: Zero rates don’t really make monetary policy m... -
Samuel Brittan is not the only one in the UK who thinks stabilizing total nominal spending should be the objective of monetary policy. Gile...
Review topics and articles of economics © 2011 A Note to FOMC Members
0 comments:
Post a Comment