BRIEFLY NOTED FOR: 2022-03-16 We: Why is the conclusion not: “Policy is appropriate. The Fed is not behind the curve”? This is, to me, a very genuine mystery. The Fed may have to raise interest rates by more than 200 basis points. The Phillips Curve may well shift. And when there is evidence that the Fed is indeed behind the curve and not on an appropriate glide path, it will be time for the Fed to use forward guidance that it has changed its policy plans to shape expectations. But why is today that day?
Brad, I've followed and admired you for a long time, so I hope you won't mind a little constructive criticism. Your piece on why the Fed is not behind the curve on fighting inflation has a small problem. I completely agree with your analysis. In fact, this ought to be the position of all members of Team Transitory. However, there were a number of typos in the essay. These slowed me down and might be an absolute impediment to those not familiar with DeLong speak. I know proof-reading your own writing is difficult. However, it would repay the effort. Respectfully yours.
PS. I've just spent five minutes correcting the autocorrect errors in this comment. The struggle is real.
I do not recognize the far right sides of the TIPS graphs shown. Since at least late January, the 5 year tips has been at or above 2.7% (where the CPI equivalent of the 2% PCE target is about 2.3%) and since late February above 3%. The Fed is right to allow enough (how much is enough?) inflation for prices in shocked sectors to rise w/o forcing prices in other sectors to fall, but it definitely should not be allowing anyone to doubt it's commitment to the 2% PCE target over the long run. I think such doubts are arising.
[As a former Treasury guy, why doesn't Treasury have more intermediate term TIPS: 1,2,3, 7.5 years that would be good information for the Fed and maybe 20 and 30 year to for people who want to hedge their mortgages and the public sector for investments in long-lived projects?]
Brad, I've followed and admired you for a long time, so I hope you won't mind a little constructive criticism. Your piece on why the Fed is not behind the curve on fighting inflation has a small problem. I completely agree with your analysis. In fact, this ought to be the position of all members of Team Transitory. However, there were a number of typos in the essay. These slowed me down and might be an absolute impediment to those not familiar with DeLong speak. I know proof-reading your own writing is difficult. However, it would repay the effort. Respectfully yours.
PS. I've just spent five minutes correcting the autocorrect errors in this comment. The struggle is real.
I do not recognize the far right sides of the TIPS graphs shown. Since at least late January, the 5 year tips has been at or above 2.7% (where the CPI equivalent of the 2% PCE target is about 2.3%) and since late February above 3%. The Fed is right to allow enough (how much is enough?) inflation for prices in shocked sectors to rise w/o forcing prices in other sectors to fall, but it definitely should not be allowing anyone to doubt it's commitment to the 2% PCE target over the long run. I think such doubts are arising.
[As a former Treasury guy, why doesn't Treasury have more intermediate term TIPS: 1,2,3, 7.5 years that would be good information for the Fed and maybe 20 and 30 year to for people who want to hedge their mortgages and the public sector for investments in long-lived projects?]