3 ms·
In 2007 March was he actually lying? I tried to look up delinquency rates and ... it seems in March 2007 there was an uptick, but it was simply not significant
by pas 6y ago
In 2007 March was he actually lying?
I tried to look up delinquency rates and ... it seems in March 2007 there was an uptick, but it was simply not significant at that point in time.
Sure, later Ben dropped the ball, and thought that the current interest rate is so low, that it should hold, and the economy will "muddle through". Then when in 2008 Jan he realized shit is already well in the high interaction regime with the proverbial fan he got the board to cut rates drastically.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/22/business/federal-reserve-2008-transcripts.html?0p19G=2103 https://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/22/business/federal-reserve-...
- notahacker 6y ago> In 2007 March was he actually lying? The question the author should be asking. Effectively timed intervention would have been more helpful at preventing the financial panic than 'prosocial lying', so the mainstream explanation that Bernanke was just wrong has a lot going for it
- pas 6y agoI mean, how wrong was he? In hindsight we know that he underestimated the slowdown and how the economy will "behave". But in 2007 March, when he delivered that statement, was he in accordance with best practices, best models about economics, and was he communicating about the data, indicators, possibilities, models and all that in the best way (known at the time to be the most optimal)? I'm not trying to "whitewash" him, but this whole piece is just about being very truthful, maximally correct with regards to economics. Look at the data and just the data, not your wishes. But then it seems that's not happening when it comes to its first economics related example.