Future Retirement Success
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks

Future Retirement Success

Investing

Pandemic Policymaking Warrants Narrower Fed Mandate

by December 6, 2023
December 6, 2023
Pandemic Policymaking Warrants Narrower Fed Mandate

Jai Kedia

With the COVID-19 pandemic (hopefully) in the rearview mirror, it is time to reevaluate the Fed’s broadened mandate. While many policymakers want the Fed to fix everything from inflation and financial instability to unemployment and climate change, this article explains why the Fed should do less, not more.

At the onset of the pandemic in 2020, the Federal Reserve committed itself to achieving “broad‐​based and inclusive” employment. Presumably, this implies not just stabilizing the economy‐​wide unemployment rate, but also using policy tools to affect distributional employment across a variety of socioeconomic factors.

Leaving aside the question of why a government agency tasked with benefiting all US citizens should pick winners and losers in the labor market, there is no clear tool the Fed possesses to affect such distributional outcomes.

Even its effect on the overall employment rate is debatable. For years, the Federal Reserve itself insisted that the “maximum level of employment is largely determined by nonmonetary factors that affect the structure and dynamics of the job market.”

As I showed in a recent CMFA working paper, the Fed has historically only accounted for 10 percent of inflation and 20 percent of output at peak efficacy. As Figure 1 below shows, if output growth (inversely related to the unemployment rate) is broken down into its constituent factors from 1960 to 2019, the Fed’s actions barely accounted for 10 percent of GDP fluctuations.

Most of the output growth (and thereby the unemployment rate) was determined by productivity shocks or demand factors such as changes to consumers’ risk preferences and fiscal spending.

Figure 1: Historical Shock Decomposition of US Output Growth, 1960 to 2019

So how does the Fed hope to achieve its distributional goals? A recent Reuters article evaluating the Fed’s pandemic policymaking offers an answer—keep labor markets tight since tight labor markets correlate with a narrowed race gap in unemployment. In other words, by (somehow) ensuring that there are more jobs than workers, the Fed should “produce more “equitable outcomes,” where “the unemployment rate gap between Blacks and whites” narrows. There are several problems with this approach.

Firstly, to keep labor markets artificially tight, the Fed must keep its policy stance overly loose. And that’s what the Fed did starting in 2020, when rates were near zero despite economic conditions warranting adjustments. In usual times, this may not have had severe effects. However, the Fed’s hesitancy to raise rates with rising inflation (which it labeled “transitory”) led to a major discrepancy between its “broad‐​based” goals and its mandate to achieve price stability. As another CMFA working paper shows, actual interest rates and their “optimal” values drastically diverged during the Powell administration. The Fed was 20 months too late in raising its rate target. Consequently, the target rate was over 800 basis points away from optimal in 2021. Undoubtedly this was a factor that entrenched inflation.

Additionally, tight labor markets have negative effects on the economy overall. Most importantly, they can lead to a shortage of workers and an overheated economy, adding further upward pressure to an already high and entrenched inflation rate. (This problem is aside from a built‐​in bias of the economy reverting to its natural unemployment rate regardless of the Fed’s attempts, with only inflation remaining high.)

Good economic outcomes for consumers across all demographics is a desirable goal. But to purposely try to overheat the economy, with little reason to think that doing so will help either a subgroup or the wider population, is not the solution. The Fed is aware of this problem. As former vice‐​chair Don Kohn recently stated:

• Probing for maximum employment can have considerable advantages, but it deliberately runs inflation risks.

• The new 2020 monetary policy framework and its implementation in forward guidance embodied “probing”; the framework is deliberately asymmetric toward probing.

• But they also illustrated the potential costs by inducing the FOMC to wait too long to raise interest rates, contributing to the extent and persistence of inflation in 2021, 2022, and 2023.

• The 2024–25 re‐​examination of the framework needs to look closely at the costs and benefits of probing and to address a broader range of possible economic circumstances than did the 2020 framework.

Don Kohn’s advice is correct and mirrors our recommendations at CMFA. The Fed should do less, not more. Its policymaking should be clear, concise, and objective, none of which has been the norm for the Fed.

0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
The Ord Oracle December 5, 2023
next post
Critics Exaggerate Risks and Minimize Benefits of Gestational Surrogacy

You may also like

Is Freedom of Expression Dangerous? No, Study Finds...

October 25, 2023

Let Them Stay

May 2, 2023

Dollarization Beyond Argentina

November 17, 2023

Who You Calling Far Right?

March 28, 2024

Pro-Brazilian Censors Strike Back: Digital Sovereignty Versus Free...

September 25, 2024

Maritime Protectionism Continues to Plague Offshore Wind Development

May 30, 2023

Misleading Debt Limit Deal Math Counts Phantom Savings

June 1, 2023

It’s Time to Overrule Chevron

July 24, 2023

Texas and Florida Social Media Laws Violate the...

December 8, 2023

New Paper: Only 3 Percent of Green Card...

February 15, 2024

Is Freedom of Expression Dangerous? No, Study Finds...

October 25, 2023

Let Them Stay

May 2, 2023

Dollarization Beyond Argentina

November 17, 2023

Who You Calling Far Right?

March 28, 2024

Pro-Brazilian Censors Strike Back: Digital Sovereignty Versus Free...

September 25, 2024

Maritime Protectionism Continues to Plague Offshore Wind Development

May 30, 2023

Misleading Debt Limit Deal Math Counts Phantom Savings

June 1, 2023

It’s Time to Overrule Chevron

July 24, 2023

Texas and Florida Social Media Laws Violate the...

December 8, 2023

New Paper: Only 3 Percent of Green Card...

February 15, 2024

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • Kash Patel torches ‘conspiracy theories’ about Bondi feud amid MAGA furor over Epstein files

      July 13, 2025
    • Trump defends embattled AG Pam Bondi, says ‘nobody cares about’ Jeffrey Epstein

      July 12, 2025
    • Bondi says all charges against doctor who allegedly destroyed COVID vaccines have been dropped

      July 12, 2025
    • Meet ‘China’s man in Lima’ who jetted over to US to collect trains donated by Biden admin

      July 12, 2025
    • Inside Dan Bongino’s tense meeting with White House officials over Jeffrey Epstein fallout

      July 12, 2025
    • Could Butler happen again? Former Secret Service agents weigh in on political violence in 2025

      July 12, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,456)
    • Investing (2,118)
    • Politics (16,018)
    • Stocks (3,205)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: futureretirementsuccess.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 futureretirementsuccess.com | All Rights Reserved