Big Al?

On 4/7/08, raghu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't know about blameless but this guy really is shameless..
>
>  http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/81c05200-03f2-11dd-b28b-000077b07658.html
>  -------------------------------------snip
>  Martin Wolf argues in the FT that central banks "can surely lean
>  against the wind" even if they cannot eliminate bubbles. I know of no
>  instance in which such a policy has been successful. For reasons I
>  have outlined elsewhere (American Economic Association, January 2004),
>  I doubt that it is possible. If it turns out to be feasible, I would
>  become a strong supporter of "leaning against the wind".
>
>  As far as US monetary policy being (in Mr Wolf's words) "dangerously
>  asymmetrical", I point out that over the past half-century the US
>  economy has been in recession only one-seventh of the time. Yet the
>  unemployment rate exhibits no trend. Hence the average rate of rise of
>  unemployment has been far greater than its average pace of decline.
>  Monetary policy in response has been more active during recessions
>  than during periods of expansion, but scarcely "dangerous".
>
>  Much of the commentary critical of my FT article (Comment, March 17)
>  is directed less at its substance and more, as Mr Wolf describes it,
>  at "the ideology I display". Ideology defines that set of ideas that
>  we each believe explains how the world works and how we need to act to
>  achieve our goals. Some of our views of causative forces are rational,
>  some otherwise. Much of what we confront in reality is uncertain, some
>  of it frighteningly so. Yet people have no choice but to make
>  judgments on the nature of the tenuous ties of causation or they are
>  immobilised.
>
>  I do have an ideology. So does each member of the forum. I trust our
>  views are subject to the same standards of evidence that apply to all
>  rational discourse. My view of how the efficiency of global capitalism
>  has evolved over the decades as new evidence has appeared contradicts
>  some earlier judgments and confirms others. I have been surprised by
>  the fierceness of investors in retrenching from risk since August. My
>  view of the range of dispersion of outcomes has been shaken but not my
>  judgment that free competitive markets are the unrivalled way to
>  organise economies. We have tried regulation ranging from heavy to
>  central planning. None meaningfully worked. Do we wish to retest the
>  evidence?
>  _______________________________________________
>  pen-l mailing list
>  [email protected]
>  https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
>


-- 
Sandwichman
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to