View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

The Power of Price Stability :: April 21, 2005 :: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
home | news & media | careers | site map

FEDERAL RESERVE BANK o f CLEVELAND
A bout U
Tours

For the Public

News & Media

Com munit y D e velopm ent

S tream ing Media

Forefront M agazine

Speakers Bureau

I Our IRegion

I Research

I Ban kin g

I Learning Center

Savings Bonds

Home > For the Public > News and Media > Speeches > 2005 > The Power of Price Stability

The Power of Price Stability
Additional Information

Introduction
I am beginning my third year as president and CEO of the Federal
Reserve Bank of Cleveland and as a participant of the Federal Open
Market Committee, the Federal Reserve's policymaking arm. I will
tell you that I have seen more than a few twists and turns in the path
of the economy during that time.
The economy has been expanding for the past few years, but many
people seem to think that, in spite of its fundamental underlying
strength, the economy could face some challenges from fiscal and
trade deficits. Today, I would like to explain how I think central
banks can best meet those challenges and promote economic
prosperity - by maintaining price stability, or low and stable rates of
inflation. I will talk about three aspects of this message.

Sandra Pinalto
President and CEO,
Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
The Levy Economics Institute of Bard
College
Annandale-on-Hudson, NY
April 21, 2005

First, we have achieved a global consensus that central banks should
pursue price stability.
Second, while large budget deficits are clearly undesirable and may
add some complexity to monetary policy decision-making, they do
not need to undermine our success in maintaining price stability.
Finally, a firm commitment to price stability is the best contribution
monetary policy can make toward resolving the challenges posed by
external account imbalances.
Please note that the views I express today are mine alone. I do not
presume to speak for any of my colleagues in the Federal Reserve
System.

I.

The Price Stability Consensus

Let me begin by explaining why I believe we have achieved a global
consensus in support of price stability. We know that central banks
have a rather checkered past when it comes to the pursuit of price
stability. Throughout human history, when governments became
involved with money, inflation typically followed. That is because
when economic times got tough, or budgets were pinched,
governments often yielded to the temptation to cheapen the value of
money by printing too much of it, or sometimes by minting lighter
coins. Perhaps they were trying to stimulate faster economic growth,
or perhaps they were simply trying to finance their own spending
without raising taxes. But whatever the reason, the result was the
same - economies eventually suffered under an inflationary policy.
Even as early as the 14th century, the dangers of inflation were
discussed. In The Inferno, Dante writes about the fate of
counterfeiters and other "falsifiers of money"-the people who were
responsible for devaluing the currency. He places them in one of the

http://www.clevelandfed.org/For_the_Public/News_and_Media/Speeches/2005/Pianalto_20050421.cfmt4/29/2014 2:12:37 PM]

The Power of Price Stability :: April 21, 2005 :: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
deepest parts of hell. Again in the third book of his Divine Comedy,
Dante predicts a terrible fate for two officials who debased their
currencies. According to a translator, Dante envisioned this severe
punishment not because he loved money, but because he believed
that a sound coinage - or sound money - was an essential principle of
social order.
Thankfully, we are not so severe with those who create inflation
today. But we do understand that sooner or later, inflation
introduces all sorts of costly economic distortions and uncertainty.
When consumers and businesses come to realize that the purchasing
power of their money is declining, they look for ways to avoid
holding that money. Those of us who remember the 1970s can attest
to the deep troubles brought on by spiraling inflation.
Over the past couple of decades, we have seen growing public
support for a return to low inflation, not just in the United States,
but around the world. Inflation in the industrialized countries fell
from 9 percent in the first half of the 1980s to 2 percent early in this
decade. But even more impressive was the huge decline in inflation
among the developing nations - from roughly 30 percent to 6 percent
- during those same two decades.
Dramatic reductions in inflation have also been accompanied by
improved economic performance in many countries. In the United
States, real output growth has been higher, the frequency of business
cycles has declined, and the swings in the business cycle seem to
have become milder. Federal Reserve Board Governor Ben Bernanke,
whom President Bush recently nominated to chair his Council of
Economic Advisers, is one observer who calls this post-inflation era
"the Great Moderation."
People may disagree about how much of the improvement in
economic growth and financial stability is the result of noninflationary monetary policies, how much is due to structural changes
in national economies, and how much we can chalk up to just plain
good luck. But I am convinced that this improved performance would
not have been possible and could not have been sustained if central
banks had not suppressed the urge to solve problems through
inflation.
The consensus support for price stability among central banks has
clearly made an important difference to the public and to their
governments, and it remains strong around the world. In fact, some
nations have chosen to set explicit numerical inflation-rate
objectives for their central banks. Others, like the United States,
have been successful without them. I believe that overall, central
banks are aiming in a similar direction: to promote sustained
economic growth by maintaining low and stable inflation rates.

II.
Monetary Policy in an Era of Fiscal
Deficits: More Difficult, Not Impossible
Let me turn now to the issue of whether large budget deficits may
undermine central banks' success in maintaining low and stable
inflation rates.
In the United States, current budget deficits, as well as prospective
deficits over the immediate horizon, seem to be well within the
boundaries of historical experience. Relative to the size of gross
domestic product, recent government budget shortfalls are still
substantially below the peak levels of the 1980s. Nevertheless, the
public is expressing growing concerns about fiscal discipline. In the
United States, these concerns have been provoked by the rapid
increase in the federal budget deficit, to about 3-1/2 percent of GDP

http://www.clevelandfed.org/For_the_Public/News_and_Media/Speeches/2005/Pianalto_20050421.cfmt4/29/2014 2:12:37 PM]

The Power of Price Stability :: April 21, 2005 :: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
in 2004, from a budget surplus in 2001. And the concerns are not
unique to our own country. In Europe, we have seen a revision of
the Growth and Stability Pact, which originally required euro
countries to maintain fiscal deficits below 3 percent of GDP.
The current level of budget deficits certainly understates the
magnitude of fiscal pressures. Both the United States and Europe face
demographic changes where we see entitlement liabilities growing
faster than the tax base available to support them. While these
issues are not new, they are serious and should be addressed sooner
rather than later.
Of course, resolving fiscal imbalances is not the job of monetary
policymakers, but that does not mean that we can ignore their
consequences. The stance of monetary policy - that is, whether a
specific setting of the federal funds rate target is determined to be
"tight," "easy," or "neutral" - depends on the level of what economists
usually refer to as the "equilibrium real interest rate." This is the
interest rate that would match the demand for funds with their
supply, assuming that markets are working efficiently.
It is not unreasonable to expect that persistent government deficits
will eventually yield upward pressure on the equilibrium real interest
rate. If central banks want to maintain their intended policy stance,
they will need to respond to this pressure with corresponding
movements in their policy rates. This process would be easier if the
equilibrium real interest rate could be readily estimated-but it
cannot. In the United States, with the shift from fiscal surplus to
deficit, we now have the added complication of trying to incorporate
the effects of fiscal imbalances on changes in the equilibrium real
interest rate.
Of course, any change in the economic environment that puts
pressure on interest-rate fundamentals could introduce the same
complication. But, unlike many other complicating factors, large and
persistent fiscal deficits introduce another risk-namely, that they
could be the source of inflationary pressures.
However, there is no need for deficits to be inflationary. The
prospect of inflation arises only if the central bank ignores or, even
worse, tries to resist any rise in real interest rates. By doing so, the
central bank would keep its policy rates too low and inadvertently
ease monetary policy. Of course, the real risk of an excessively
stimulative monetary policy is that inflation expectations may
eventually become unanchored. History shows that once inflation
expectations become unstable, more stringent policy actions might
be required.
A central-bank commitment to price stability can avoid that
outcome. A central bank cannot always offset the effects of
government deficits on economic growth and stability. But the more
credible the central bank's commitment to price stability, the less
likely it is that an inflation premium will be built into market interest
rates, and the less likely it is that rising inflation expectations will
distort economic decisions.
I believe that the FOMC is trying very hard to preserve its credibility
by being clear and unwavering in its commitment to low and stable
inflation. However, it goes without saying that our job is made easier
if the public expects that the fiscal authorities will address budgetary
imbalances in a timely and effective fashion.

III.
Monetary Policy in an Era of Current
Account Deficits
Now I would like to discuss how monetary policy can best contribute

http://www.clevelandfed.org/For_the_Public/News_and_Media/Speeches/2005/Pianalto_20050421.cfmt4/29/2014 2:12:37 PM]

The Power of Price Stability :: April 21, 2005 :: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
to resolving the challenges brought by external account imbalances.
Substantial current account deficits developed in the 1980s, and
these deficits now stand at record postwar levels as a share of GDP. I
think everyone agrees that these levels are unsustainable, and that a
reversal is inevitable, even if the timing and pace of the adjustment
are uncertain.
Some people envision a soft landing. As we all know, a return to
current account balance will ultimately require that U.S. households
consume less and save more of their incomes. Households could
become concerned about having enough money for future
consumption and step up their saving, even at today's interest rates.
The more commonly expected scenario, though, is that foreign
savings coming into the United States could become less plentiful
over time, driving up interest rates. Then, households might be
induced to save more and spend less.
If a substantial turnaround in U.S. current account deficits results in
higher equilibrium real interest rates, the FOMC would most likely
need to adjust its federal funds rate target accordingly to prevent a
change in its policy stance. It is also possible that a decline in the
exchange value of the dollar could result in temporary upward
pressure on the price level, due to rising import prices and the prices
of import-competing goods. The first responsibility of the central
bank is to ensure that these price pressures do not feed into higher
inflation expectations in the long run. Once again, a clear
commitment to price stability - in words and deeds - is the best
contribution the central bank can make to the adjustment process
toward more sustainable external account positions.
The soft-landing point of view is really just the expectation that the
process of adjustment will be a smooth one. I believe that a gradual
and orderly transition toward smaller current account deficits is the
probable outcome. But of course, there are those who believe that
the landing might not be so soft - and that the reversal of our large
current account deficits will be sudden and disruptive.
Those who imagine this worst-case scenario seem to have in mind a
magnified version of the stress on global financial markets that
emerged in the last half of 1998. Of course, they believe that the
impact on the U.S. economy would be more severe this time because
our own imbalances would be at issue. In these circumstances, it is
difficult to predict what the specific course of monetary policy ought
to be, but the usual answer to financial market crises is for the
central bank to provide enough liquidity to short-circuit systemic
market failure.
How, then, should monetary policy deal with current account
imbalances today? I do not think that the FOMC should take
preemptive measures to address these imbalances. However, I do
think that the Committee should continue to bring the federal funds
rate target to a level that is consistent with maintaining price
stability in the long run. If we achieve that, then we will be in a
position of strength to address whatever challenges arise.

Conclusion
Over the past 20 years, price stability has achieved some remarkable
things. It has contributed to better real economic performance
through less volatile interest rates, it has allowed resources to be
allocated more efficiently, and it has contributed to healthier
financial systems. But nations must inevitably contend with economic
issues that monetary policy cannot solve.
In the long run, a central bank cannot balance the government's
budget, boost national saving, create more energy resources, or solve

http://www.clevelandfed.org/For_the_Public/News_and_Media/Speeches/2005/Pianalto_20050421.cfmt4/29/2014 2:12:37 PM]

The Power of Price Stability :: April 21, 2005 :: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
the many economic problems that we must confront. But a credible
monetary policy will help smooth the adjustment to economic
circumstances that come our way.
I hope that my comments have helped to clarify why I believe that
price stability is the most important contribution that central banks
can make to economic prosperity. The best way for an economy to
adjust to challenges like government deficits and current account
deficits is in an environment of low inflation and stable inflation
expectations. That is the contribution that the Federal Reserve can
reasonably deliver, and it is the contribution that I intend to pursue
as a policymaker.

Careers | Diversity | Privacy | Terms of Use | Contact Us | Feedback | RSS Feeds

http://www.clevelandfed.org/For_the_Public/News_and_Media/Speeches/2005/Pianalto_20050421.cfm[4/29/2014 2:12:37 PM]