Mary C. Daly, President and Chief Executive Officer
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco
Los Angeles World Affairs Council & Town Hall
Los Angeles, CA
February 23, 2022
12:30 PM PST
Remarks as ready for supply.
Download PDF Version (367.33 kb)
It’s exhausting to consider it’s been nearly two years since COVID-19 hit our shores. And whereas it’s not totally behind us, we’ve come a great distance, particularly within the financial system. Growth is up. Unemployment is down. And persons are getting again to their lives.
But as anybody who has shopped, purchased fuel, or paid hire currently is aware of, inflation is excessive—increased than it has been in practically 4 a long time.
For some, this can be a signal that worth stability is in danger. That, absent aggressive motion by the Fed, the financial system shall be propelled right into a Nineteen Seventies-style “Great Inflation.”
Like many of you, I lived via that point. I keep in mind my mother and father’ day by day complaints about rising costs and rising payments, and the hours-long waits at fuel stations within the sizzling Missouri solar, caught to the vinyl seats of our station wagon.
High and rising inflation made life more durable. And there was no finish in sight.
But the image at this time seems to be completely different. And so does the Federal Reserve. We have developed as an establishment, and our understanding and instruments have developed as properly. I’ll spend my time at this time speaking about how this evolution makes us higher ready to satisfy our twin mandate objectives of worth stability and full employment, even in these difficult instances.
First, I need to remind you that the views I’ll specific at this time are my very own and don’t essentially mirror these of anybody else throughout the Federal Reserve System.
Then…
Before I speak about what’s completely different this time, let me speak about what precisely occurred through the “Great Inflation.” What was it like?
From in regards to the mid-Sixties via the early Nineteen Eighties, American households confronted an unrelenting rise in costs. The worst of it got here through the Nineteen Seventies, when the fee of residing for the typical household greater than doubled.1 The stress in our nation was palpable. Businesses and households misplaced confidence, and plenty of struggled merely to make ends meet.2
People questioned the way it had occurred.
The reply, of course, is difficult. But I’ll give attention to just a few components that I feel are notably related for at this time’s dialogue.3
The first has to do with elementary financial modifications and our lack of ability again then to measure and perceive them in actual time.
For instance, after a long time of fast postwar GDP progress, led by booming technological developments and rising labor productiveness, U.S. productiveness progress had began to gradual. This meant that the capability of the financial system to broaden with out spurring inflation was way more restricted than it had been in earlier a long time.4
At the identical time, the labor market was altering. Young child boomers have been becoming a member of the labor power in giant numbers and altering the age composition and the dynamics of the workforce. In specific, they have been taking longer to seek out jobs and churning via extra alternatives as they discovered their most well-liked path. This habits, which is totally pure, elevated the “steady-state” price of unemployment, a benchmark policymakers used to evaluate how shut the financial system was to full employment and full capability.5
Looking again, it’s clear that policymakers missed some vital shifts. Without the information, instruments, and give attention to real-time monitoring, they—and macro forecasters extra broadly—anticipated the financial system to behave because it had earlier than, for inflation to fall because the financial system and labor power grew. 6 These views, partly, stored the Fed from performing forcefully to offset rising inflation.7
But the story doesn’t finish there. The Fed’s coverage misses have been amplified and perpetuated by institutional components and by its personal communication technique.
Let’s begin with institutional components. At the time, there was a really tight hyperlink between worth and wage inflation. Many employment contracts included automated cost-of-living changes, or COLAs, which meant that when costs went up, wages quickly adopted.8 Firms then handed on these elevated labor prices to costs, and so it went, many times, in a self-perpetuating upward inflation spiral.
When two oil worth shocks created even increased inflation, costs and wages grew in close to lockstep. And right here is the place the Fed’s personal communication practices exacerbated issues.
The Fed and plenty of central banks on the time held the view that transparency and communication have been extra expensive than helpful. Central bankers actively averted sharing info, believing that such communications would possibly constrain their means to nimbly modify coverage, and even dilute its impression.9,10
Because of this, the Fed operated largely behind closed doorways. The public turned conscious of Fed coverage actions by watching how markets reacted following Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) conferences. And the principle supply of info that market individuals, households, and companies had in regards to the Fed’s dedication to cost stability was what they may glean from incoming inflation knowledge.
Figure 1
The consequence was predictable.
And you possibly can see it on this determine. The inexperienced and blue strains present two measures of precise inflation and the purple line reveals inflation expectations.
Clearly, the extra inflation rose, the extra shoppers and companies anticipated it to rise. As inflation moved up, so did inflation expectations.11 These expectations of future inflation have been then constructed into wage and worth contracts.
Before lengthy, inflation dynamics and future inflation have been deeply intertwined with inflation psychology. And with the Fed providing little steerage or reassurance that it could do one thing about it, the scenario snowballed.
It wasn’t till the Fed applied a collection of steep rate of interest hikes that inflation lastly began to recede.
…Now
Now inflation is excessive once more and plenty of are involved that we may quickly be dealing with one other lengthy and painful interval, adopted by one other lengthy and painful correction.
But that’s not what I see. Let me clarify.
You’ve heard many, together with me, speak about how inflation itself is completely different this time. It’s been pushed up by pandemic-related imbalances between policy-supported demand, which has remained strong, and COVID-disrupted provide, which has been gradual to get well. Both of these components ought to recede because the pandemic weakens its grip.
And the financial system can be completely different. There are weaker hyperlinks between wage and worth inflation, higher international worth competitors, and a quantity of longer-term structural components, together with an growing old inhabitants, that can proceed to exert downward strain on progress and inflation as soon as the pandemic is behind us.12
But these should not the variations that matter most. The fundamental cause I’m assured we’re not heading for an additional Nineteen Seventies-style Great Inflation is that the Federal Reserve is completely different. And I’m not referring to the individuals of the Fed, who clearly have modified, however to the practices and beliefs, which have modified much more.
One main evolution that separates at this time’s Federal Reserve from the Fed of 50 years in the past is a deep understanding that inflation expectations affect future inflation.13 If individuals anticipate inflation to persist, then it does.14
This understanding led the Fed, and economists extra broadly, to a vital perception: as a way to handle precise inflation, policymakers additionally need to handle inflation psychology.15 The Fed has to enlist the assistance of households, companies, and market individuals within the job of preventing inflation, by speaking with them about its dedication to cost stability and its plan to realize it.
Acting on this perception required a radical transformation. The Fed needed to break open its “black box” of decision-making and embrace transparency.
Figure 2
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
To perceive the magnitude of this transformation, it’s important to recall that, for many of its historical past, the Fed was uncommunicative.
The first step in its communications “revolution” got here in 1994, when the Fed started releasing post-FOMC assembly statements (see Figure 2).16 In the mid-2000s, the Fed went additional, publishing the Summary of Economic Projections to supply the general public with details about the anticipated path of the financial system and rates of interest. In 2012, the Fed introduced its first express inflation goal, 2 %.17 And in 2020, we launched a brand new financial coverage framework, which outlined ideas for managing our inflation and employment mandates in a range of financial circumstances.18
As the determine illustrates, the Fed went from being principally silent to explicitly and deliberately clear.
The results of these efforts will be seen within the knowledge.
With higher transparency got here extra secure inflation expectations, which, because the late Nineties, have remained properly anchored round 2 % via spikes or drops within the inflation price.19
Even at this time, with inflation at a 40-year excessive, long-run inflation expectations of companies have remained fairly secure.20 And monetary market expectations have additionally been properly anchored, as evidenced by long-term rates of interest staying low regardless of the present inflation shock.
This tells us that companies and markets are listening. They’re listening to the Fed’s communications and consider that we are going to act on our commitments.
In follow, higher transparency, higher communication, and the period of well-anchored inflation expectations constructed Fed credibility. And this credibility gives an necessary insurance coverage. It makes the financial system extra resilient and fewer susceptible to painful intervals just like the one we skilled within the Nineteen Seventies.21 And it provides all financial brokers, not simply the Fed, a job to play in serving to the financial system easy via inflation and different shocks, making it extra resilient to no matter modifications are on the horizon.
Most importantly, higher transparency and a robust dedication to attaining our objectives assures Americans that intervals of excessive inflation or unemployment is not going to final endlessly; that there’s an finish in sight.
Focused and Aware
But transparency isn’t a vacation spot, it’s a follow. And it requires ongoing communication if we’re to maintain the credibility that we so worth.
In that spirit, let me inform you about how I see the financial system at this time and the coverage changes that shall be wanted to maneuver us to a sustainable path.
Let’s begin with the financial system. By nearly any measure, it’s doing properly. GDP progress, client spending, and enterprise funding are all up, and the labor market continues to put up strong job positive aspects, low unemployment, and powerful wage progress. Importantly, labor market positive aspects have been broad based mostly, occurring for a variety of teams, together with those that are historically deprived—African Americans, Hispanics, and other people with lower than a school schooling.
Of course, as everybody is aware of, inflation is just too excessive, and inflation pressures have begun to unfold exterior of sectors most instantly affected by pandemic-related disruptions.22 Most strikingly, common Americans, like my mother and father 5 a long time in the past, are worrying about rising costs and rising payments.
This means it’s time to transfer away from the extraordinary help that the Fed has been offering through the pandemic and produce financial coverage in keeping with the challenges of at this time. Absent any important unfavorable surprises, I see our subsequent assembly, in March, as the suitable time to start this adjustment.
The timing and magnitude of future funds price and steadiness sheet changes will rely upon how the financial system and the information evolve. And this can rely upon how properly we transition from pandemic to endemic; how a lot and the way shortly provide chains get well; how quickly staff sidelined by well being, household care, or different COVID-related obstacles return to the labor power; and the way shortly the fiscal increase that aided spending in 2020 and 2021 fades. We will carefully watch all of these developments and let the information decide the suitable path of coverage.
As we modify coverage and transfer right into a post-pandemic world, we will even need to understand that many of the challenges that existed pre-pandemic will seemingly nonetheless be with us. Notable for coverage are slower international progress, much less financial and monetary coverage house, and the related downward strain on inflation.23
Against this backdrop, the subsequent few years would require centered consciousness; give attention to bringing inflation again all the way down to ranges in step with worth stability and delivering a labor market that works for everybody; and consciousness, of the uncertainty that lies forward and the challenges which can be certainly earlier than us.
Different Never Rests
That for me is the principle lesson of the Great Inflation. It’s probably not in regards to the Fed. It’s not even actually about economics.
It’s about humility.
It’s about understanding that ours is an financial system in transition. And that none of us is aware of for positive what the brand new future holds.
We want to maneuver ahead with confidence—in our coverage, in our instruments, and within the credibility the Fed has constructed. But we additionally need to keep in mind that evolution isn’t static. And to satisfy the wants of a continually altering financial system, we now have to be continually altering.
Today’s Federal Reserve seems to be completely different than it did 50 years in the past. And I anticipate that it’ll look completely different once more in 50 extra.
And that shall be a superb factor. It will imply the evolution continued. And that subsequent time will even be completely different.
Thank you.
Footnotes
1. This tempo was thrice quicker than it had been the earlier decade. See client worth index (CPI). https://beta.bls.gov/dataViewer/view/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0
2. The University of Michigan client sentiment index reached its all-time low of 51.7 in May 1980 when CPI inflation over the previous 12 months had exceeded 14 %. The most up-to-date preliminary estimate of the sentiment index in February 2022 was 61.7. www.sca.isr.umich.edu/tables.html
3. For an summary of analysis that seeks to clarify the Great Inflation, see Lansing (2000) and Bryan (2013).
4. Basu and Fernald (2002).
5. Crump et al. (2019).
6. DeLong (1997) and Taylor (1997).
7. Clarida, Galí, and Gertler (2000), Orphanides (2003), Primiceri (2006), and Romer and Romer (2013). Political pressures additionally performed a job within the Fed’s determination to maintain coverage accommodative. See Weise (2012).
8. Ragan and Bratsberg (2000).
9. Cukierman and Meltzer (1986) and Bernanke (2007a). Bernanke famous, “Since 1975, the Federal Reserve has presented testimony twice each year to the Congress on the conduct of monetary policy.” So there was at the very least some communication to the general public about coverage again then. Before the Nineties, nevertheless, inflation targets, FOMC statements, and different communications weren’t publicly shared as they’re now.
10. In the June 2003 FOMC assembly, then-Chair Alan Greenspan suggested individuals to be “very vague” in response to questions in regards to the conduct of financial coverage. See Federal Open Market Committee (2003).
11. Cogley and Sbordone (2008) and Lansing (2009).
12. Eichengreen (2015), Gordon (2015), and Laubach and Williams (2016).
13. Orphanides and Williams (2005) and Bernanke (2007b).
14. Gürkaynak, Levin, and Swanson (2010).
15. In October 1979, on the peak of the Great Inflation, Fed Chair Paul Volcker (1979) famously noticed, “Inflation feeds in part on itself, so part of the job of returning to a more stable and more productive economy must be to break the grip of inflationary expectations.”
16. Revolution was the time period then-Vice Chair Janet Yellen used to explain the evolution of communication on the Federal Reserve. See Yellen (2012).
17. See https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20120125c.htm
18. See https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20200827a.htm
19. Williams (2006), Bernanke (2007b), and Jørgensen and Lansing (2022).
20. See Survey of Professional Forecasters. https://www.philadelphiafed.org/surveys-and-data/real-time-data-research/survey-of-professional-forecasters
21. Indeed, former Fed Chair Ben Bernanke (2003) noticed that through the Great Inflation, “the Fed’s loss of credibility significantly increased the cost of achieving disinflation.”
22. Lansing, Oliveira, and Shapiro (2022).
23. Fernald and Li (2019) and Elsby, Hobijn, and Sahin (2013). These and different developments assist clarify the regular decline within the impartial coverage price, which over the previous 30 years has been extra liable to reaching the zero decrease certain. See Mertens and Williams (2021).
References
Basu, Susanto, and John G. Fernald. 2002. “Aggregate Productivity and Aggregate Technology.” European Economic Review 46(6, June), pp. 963–991.
Bernanke, Ben S. 2003. “‘Constrained Discretion’ and Monetary Policy.” Speech to the Money Marketeers of New York University, February 3.
Bernanke, Ben S. 2007a. “Federal Reserve Communications.” Speech on the Cato Institute twenty fifth Annual Monetary Conference, Washington, DC, November 14.
Bernanke, Ben S. 2007b. “Inflation Expectations and Inflation Forecasting.” Speech on the Monetary Economics Workshop of the National Bureau of Economic Research Summer Institute, Cambridge, MA, July 10.
Bryan, Michael. 2013. “The Great Inflation.” Federal Reserve History Essay, November 22.
Clarida, Richard, Jordi Galí, and Mark Gertler. 2000. “Monetary Policy Rules and Macroeconomic Stability: Evidence and Some Theory.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 115(1), pp. 147–180.
Cogley, Timothy, and Argia M. Sbordone. 2008. “Trend Inflation, Indexation, and Inflation Persistence in the New Keynesian Phillips Curve.” American Economic Review 98(5, December), pp. 2,101–2,126.
Crump, Richard Ok., Stefano Eusepi, Marc Giannoni, and Ayşegül Şahin. 2019. “A Unified Approach to Measuring u*.” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity (Spring), pp. 143–238.
Cukierman, Alan, and Allan H. Meltzer. 1986. “A Theory of Ambiguity, Credibility, and Inflation under Discretion and Asymmetric Information.” Econometrica 54(5, September), pp. 1,099–1,128.
DeLong, J. Bradford. 1997. “America’s Peacetime Inflation: The 1970s.” In Reducing Inflation: Motivation and Strategy, eds. Christina Romer and David Romer. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 247–280.
Eichengreen, Barry. 2015. “Secular Stagnation: The Long View.” American Economic Review 105(5, May), pp. 66–70.
Elsby, Michael W.L., Bart Hobijn, and Ayşegül Şahin. 2013. “The Decline of the U.S. Labor Share.” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 2013(2), pp. 1–63.
Federal Open Market Committee. 2003. “Minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee Meeting on June 24-25.”
Fernald, John, and Huiyu Li. 2019. “Is Slow Still the New Normal for GDP Growth?” FRBSF Economic Letter 2019-17 (June 24).
Gordon, Robert J. 2015. “Secular Stagnation: A Supply-Side View.” American Economic Review 105(5), pp. 54–59.
Gürkaynak, Refet S., Andrew Levin, and Eric Swanson. 2010. “Does Inflation Targeting Anchor Long-Run Inflation Expectations? Evidence from the U.S., U.K., and Sweden.” Journal of the European Economic Association 8(6), pp. 1,208–1,242.
Jørgensen, Peter Lihn, and Kevin J. Lansing. 2022. “Anchored Inflation Expectations and the Slope of the Phillips Curve.” Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco Working Paper 2019-27 (revised January 2022).
Lansing, Kevin J. 2000. “Exploring the Causes of the Great Inflation.” FRBSF Economic Letter 2000-21 (July 7).
Lansing, Kevin J. 2009. “Time-Varying U.S. Inflation Dynamics and the New Keynesian Phillips Curve.” Review of Economic Dynamics 12(2), pp. 304–326.
Lansing, Kevin J., Luiz E. Oliveira, and Adam Hale Shapiro. 2022. “Will Rising Rents Push Up Future Inflation?” FRBSF Economic Letter 2022-03 (February 14).
Laubach, Thomas, and John C. Williams. 2016. “Measuring the Natural Rate of Interest Redux.” Business Economics 51, pp. 57–67.
Mertens, Thomas M., and John C. Williams. 2021. “What to Expect from the Lower Bound on Interest Rates: Evidence from Derivatives Prices.” American Economic Review 111(8), pp. 2,473–2,505.
Orphanides, Athanasios. 2003. “The Quest for Prosperity without Inflation.” Journal of Monetary Economics 50(3), pp. 633–663.
Orphanides, Athanasios, and John C. Williams. 2005. “Imperfect Knowledge, Inflation Expectations, and Monetary Policy.” In The Inflation-Targeting Debate, eds. Ben S. Bernanke and Michael Woodford. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 201–244.
Primiceri, Giorgio E. 2006. “Why Inflation Rose and Fell: Policy-Makers’ Beliefs and U.S. Postwar Stabilization Policy.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 121(3), pp. 867–901.
Ragan, James F., and Bernt Bratsberg. 2000. “Un-Cola: Why Have Cost-of-Living Clauses Disappeared from Union Contracts and Will They Return?” Southern Economic Journal 67(2), pp. 304–324.
Romer, Christina D., and David H. Romer. 2013. “The Most Dangerous Idea in Federal Reserve History: Monetary Policy Doesn’t Matter.” American Economic Review 103(3), pp. 55–60.
Taylor, John B. 1997. “Comment on ‘America’s Peacetime Inflation: The 1970s’ by J. Bradford DeLong.” In Reducing Inflation: Motivation and Strategy, eds. Christina Romer and David Romer. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 276–280.
Volcker, Paul A. 1979. “Statement before the Joint Economic Committee.” October 17. Accessible on FRASER, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
Weise, Charles L. 2012. “Political Pressures on Monetary Policy during the U.S. Great Inflation.” American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 4(2), pp. 33–64.
Williams, John C. 2006. “Inflation Persistence in an Era of Well-Anchored Inflation Expectations.” FRBSF Economic Letter 2006-27, October 13.
Yellen, Janet. 2012. “Revolution and Evolution in Central Bank Communications.” Speech at Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley, November 13.