Young Research & Publishing Inc.

Investment Research Since 1978

Disclosure

  • About Us
    • Contributors
    • Archives
    • Dick Young’s Safe America
    • The Final Richard C. Young’s Intelligence Report
    • You’ve Read The Last Issue of Intelligence Report, Now What?
    • Dick Young’s Research Key: Anecdotal Evidence Gathering
    • Crisis at Vanguard
  • Investment Analysis
    • Bonds
    • Currencies and Gold
    • Dividend Investing
    • ETFs & Funds
    • Investment Strategy
    • Retirement Investing
    • Stocks
    • The Efficient Frontier
  • Investment Counsel
  • Dynamic Maximizers®
  • Retirement Compounders®
  • Free Email Signup

This Isn’t the First Time the Fed Got Inflation Wrong

January 10, 2022 By Jeremy Jones, CFA

FOMC Chairman Powell answers a reporter’s question at the press conference. September 26, 2018. Photo courtesy of the Federal Reserve.

At the Financial Times, Frederic Mishkin explains how the Fed has gotten inflation so wrong, and that this isn’t the first time. He writes:

Three flaws in the Fed’s monetary policy framework have led to overly expansionary monetary policy.

First, there has not been enough focus on demand shocks. The Fed has based its view that the inflation surge would be shortlived on the extensive negative supply shocks that Covid-19 has imposed on the economy.

Although, negative supply shocks are surely one source of the surge in inflation, the Fed has not paid enough attention to very strong positive demand shocks.

Pent-up demand from households who were unable to spend during the pandemic and extraordinary expansionary fiscal policy promoted by the Biden administration have led to high demand for goods and services. It is true that inflation will be temporary when it is the result of supply bottlenecks that dissipate over time. But strong positive demand shocks result in persistent high inflation, which is what we are experiencing currently.

The second flaw is the Fed’s view of the Phillips curve, the theory that unemployment and inflation have an inverse relationship. Officials have pronounced that the Phillips curve is dead because unemployment is below its “natural rate” (where the economy is at a full employment level). That supposedly meant higher employment rates are no longer an important factor driving inflation higher.

Research that I presented with co-authors at the US Monetary Policy Forum several years ago suggests that the Phillips curve is not dead, but rather is hibernating.

A weak link between unemployment and inflation depends on the Fed taking pre-emptive strikes against rises in inflation, a policy that it has now abandoned.

Instead, the Fed has committed to keep monetary policy expansionary until full employment has been reached. A summary by the policy-setting Federal Open Market Committee of economic projections suggests this will occur at a natural rate of unemployment of around 3.5 per cent.

Unfortunately, past economic research indicates that the natural rate of unemployment is a number that is notoriously hard to estimate. Indeed, other indicators of labour market tightness, such as the high number of unfilled jobs and rising wages, hint that we have already hit full employment, so the natural rate of unemployment is above the 3.5 per cent target level.

Underestimates of the natural rate of unemployment have led to severe inflationary policy mistakes in the past: the so-called Great Inflation period of the late 1960s and 1970s is a classic example, where the Fed assumed that the natural rate of unemployment was around 4 per cent when later evidence demonstrated it was a couple of percentage points higher.

A third flaw is the Fed’s poor execution of the new “average” inflation targeting framework. The Fed’s switch to an average inflation target, where the target is a 2 per cent average over a specified horizon, say five years, is a policy I and many other economists have advocated.

However, the Fed has been unwilling to communicate the horizon for the average, which in effect makes the 2 per cent inflation target less credible. A long horizon means that inflation can stay above the 2 per cent level for a very long time without raising the average very much.

The unwillingness of the Fed to provide more information about the horizon for the average inflation target has therefore weakened the Fed’s credibility to keep inflation near 2 per cent. Inflation expectations may now become unanchored, which makes persistent high inflation a much likelier possibility.

Read more here.

Share this:

  • Email
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

You Might Also Like:

  • Is the Fed Losing the Inflation Battle?
  • The Fed Is Dismissing the Evidence With Inflation Push
  • Former Head of Fed Market Analysis: High Inflation Will Cause Problems
  • Author
  • Recent Posts
Jeremy Jones, CFA
Jeremy Jones, CFA, CFP® is the Director of Research at Young Research & Publishing Inc., and the Chief Investment Officer at Richard C. Young & Co., Ltd. Richard C. Young & Co., Ltd. was ranked #5 in CNBC's 2021 Financial Advisor Top 100. Jeremy is also a contributing editor of youngresearch.com.
Latest posts by Jeremy Jones, CFA (see all)
  • BULLWHIPPED? Inventory Overhang Could Slow Growth in Certain Sectors - May 20, 2022
  • MARKET TURNING: Canada’s Housing Market Turmoil - May 19, 2022
  • HORDING CASH: Funds Hold the Highest Level of Cash Since 9/11 - May 18, 2022

Search Young Research

Most Popular

  • MARKET CHAOS: This May Take Time, Here’s How to Prepare
  • PRICES SOAR: Diesel Shortage Could Cripple America's Economy
  • Your Survival Guy: “Sell in May, Buy After Labor Day?”
  • All-Powerful Money Managers Voting YOUR Money Targeted by Senate GOP
  • Institutional Investors Fall in Love with Oil, Again
  • COMMODITY CRUNCH: Will Tesla Buy a Cobalt Mine?
  • CRYPTO: Has the Fire Gone Out?
  • The Power of a Compound Interest Table
  • The Innovation Bubble Goes Bust
  • HORDING CASH: Funds Hold the Highest Level of Cash Since 9/11

Don’t Miss

Default Risk Among the Many Concerns with Annuities

Risk and Reward: An Efficient Frontier

How to be a Billionaire: Proven Strategies from the Titans of Wealth

Could this Be the Vanguard GNMA Winning Edge?

Cryptocosm and Life After Google

Warning: Avoid Mutual Fund Year End Distributions

Is Gold a Good Long-term Investment?

How to Invest in Gold

Vanguard Wellington (VWELX): The Original Balanced Fund

What is the Best Gold ETF for Investing and Trading?

Procter & Gamble (PG) Stock: The Only True Dividend King

The Dividend King of the North

You’ll Love This if You’re Dreaming of an Active Retirement Life

RSS The Latest at Richardcyoung.com

  • Joe Biden – Malicious, Incompetent, a Wannabe Left Wing Ideologue?
  • Jean-Pierre: Economy “Not Something that We Keep an Eye on Every Day”
  • Job Market Survival Advice for Graduates and for Those YOU Love
  • The Destructive Rise and Fall of BLM
  • What Would We Do without the Experts?
  • V4 Stands Against North African and Middle Eastern Invasion
  • BUY THE DIPS? Can You Catch a Ginsu Knife?
  • Florida: Enjoy Certain Freedoms and Individual Liberties
  • ENERGY FREEDOM ACT: Ted Cruz Introduces Bill for Energy Independence
  • Consequences of Biden Killing the Keystone Pipeline

About Us

  • About Young Research
  • Archives
  • Contributors

Our Partners

  • Richard C. Young & Co.
  • Richardcyoung.com

Copyright © 2022 | Terms & Conditions

 

Loading Comments...
 

    loading Cancel
    Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
    Email check failed, please try again
    Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.