Bernanke vs. Taylor

Too low for too long fight

From Bernanke's AEA Speech

"[…] The alternative Taylor rule (that replaces the current rate of inflation on the right-hand side with a forecast of inflation over the current and subsequent three quarters) prescribes a path for policy that is much closer to that followed throughout the decade, including recent years. In other words, when one takes into account that policymakers should and do respond differently to temporary and longer-lasting changes in inflation, monetary policy following the 2001 recession appears to have been reasonably appropriate, at least in relation to a simple policy rule."

Taylor’s disagreement

"[…] The speech was largly an attempt to refute the now commonly held view that the Fed held interest rates too low for too long in 2002-2005. I was in Atlanta and though I could not go to the speech I read it afterwards and expressed by disagreement first in a Bloomberg interview with Steve Matthews and later in a CNBC interview with Larry Kudlow and will follow up with more details; note that a working paper prepared by seven Fed Board staff was released just before the speech. Others have raised questions about the speech from a variety perspectives […] "

Too low for too long

John Taylor considera que la prevención de Burbujas en los precios de los activos, se logra con la no creación [To Prevent Bubbles, Don’t Create Them]

"By deviating from the rule and keeping interest rates too low, the Fed caused the acceleration in housing prices. If the Fed had simply conducted monetary policy as it had in the 1980s and 1990s, we would likely not have had the housing boom"

" […] adding asset prices to the equation [Taylor Rule] would not address the real problem. Saying that adding asset prices to the central bank’s rule would prevent bubbles is like saying that requiring hikers in the forest to carry cell phones to call the fire department will prevent the damage from forest fires they start. By the time they call and the fire trucks arrive, the heat and flames will have caused tremendous damage. Far better to prevent hikers from starting fires in the first place. Far better for central bankers not to create bubbles in the first place."