5 ms·

Actually, they are sacrificing employment to stabilize prices: https://time.com/6253699/federal-reserve-inflation-interest-rates-workers/ https://time.com/62536

Actually, they are sacrificing employment to stabilize prices: https://time.com/6253699/federal-reserve-inflation-interest-rates-workers/ https://time.com/6253699/federal-reserve-inflation-interest-.... The interest rate hikes are designed to cause unemployment, and it's not even working.

pkulak 4y ago
Well, yeah, their "dual mandate" is contradictory. You're not the first to notice, trust me. And that means that sometimes they have to sacrifice one for the other. When one is doing historically well, and the other not so great, it's probably not a hard choice.
- goodluckchuck 4y ago
  You’re inferring good faith, which - when dealing with humans - is an unsupported assumption. You don’t have to be an economist to draw the connection between printing money and a rise in nominal prices (irrespective of the interest rates and lending). The Fed knows that there is no real ongoing inflation. The devaluation of the dollar already occurred and the new price has to propagate through the market. Their actions have no effect on the cause or broader course of apparent inflation only on who “wins and loses.”
  - oarabbus_ 4y ago
    >The Fed knows that there is no real ongoing inflation. Can you cite any metric showing there is "no real ongoing inflation"? CPI, PPI, PCE, and other less-commonly used metrics all indicate ongoing inflation. It would be interesting to understand how you've arrived at the conclusion there isn't ongoing inflation. >The devaluation of the dollar already occurred and the new price has to propagate through the market. The DXY has been uptrending for nearly a decade, even more rapidly so since mid-2021.
SecretDreams 4y ago
They have a dual mandate. Pricing stability and employment. They're trying to trade one for another to achieve a better balance. Employment is far too hot right now.
HDThoreaun 4y ago
It's a dual mandate because it's impossible to accomplish both. They have to decide which to focus on.

pkulak 4y ago

Well, yeah, their "dual mandate" is contradictory. You're not the first to notice, trust me. And that means that sometimes they have to sacrifice one for the other. When one is doing historically well, and the other not so great, it's probably not a hard choice.

goodluckchuck 4y ago
You’re inferring good faith, which - when dealing with humans - is an unsupported assumption. You don’t have to be an economist to draw the connection between printing money and a rise in nominal prices (irrespective of the interest rates and lending). The Fed knows that there is no real ongoing inflation. The devaluation of the dollar already occurred and the new price has to propagate through the market. Their actions have no effect on the cause or broader course of apparent inflation only on who “wins and loses.”
- oarabbus_ 4y ago
  >The Fed knows that there is no real ongoing inflation. Can you cite any metric showing there is "no real ongoing inflation"? CPI, PPI, PCE, and other less-commonly used metrics all indicate ongoing inflation. It would be interesting to understand how you've arrived at the conclusion there isn't ongoing inflation. >The devaluation of the dollar already occurred and the new price has to propagate through the market. The DXY has been uptrending for nearly a decade, even more rapidly so since mid-2021.

SecretDreams 4y ago

They have a dual mandate. Pricing stability and employment. They're trying to trade one for another to achieve a better balance. Employment is far too hot right now.

HDThoreaun 4y ago

It's a dual mandate because it's impossible to accomplish both. They have to decide which to focus on.