Why the New Monetary Consensus sucks

We've had old-Keynesians, so I guess it's time for post-Keynesians. The Levy Institute's L. Randall Wray has written an intriguing little paper which argues that the foundations of mainstream, modern central banking is bunkum.

I'm a little more orthodox than Wray, but it's often good to consider different opinions. So here's the abstract for A Post-Keynesian View of Central Bank Independence, Policy Targets, and the Rules-versus-Discretion Debate

This paper addresses three issues surrounding monetary policy formation: policy independence, choice of operating targets, and rules versus discretion. According to the New Monetary Consensus, the central bank needs policy independence to build credibility; the operating target is the overnight interbank lending rate, and the ultimate goal is price stability.

This paper provides an alternative view, arguing that an effective central bank cannot be independent as conventionally defined, where effectiveness is indicated by ability to hit an overnight nominal interest rate target. Discretionary policy is rejected, as are conventional views of the central bank’s ability to achieve traditional goals such as robust growth, low inflation, and high employment. Thus, the paper returns to Keynes’s call for low interest rates and euthanasia of the rentier.

Comments

[wow gold]

that is great and what i want ,thank you for your work ,i preciate it,thank you

[wow powerleveling]

well ,i will be back and see your further work,thank you for your idea,i learned a lot

[Generic Viagra]

great blog about Why the New Monetary Consensus sucks thanks for sharing!!