Many of today’s inflation hawks attribute the current high levels of inflation to excessively loose economic policies — both fiscal and monetary. They point to the policies implemented at the onset of the pandemic when public health considerations precipitative forced shutdowns across many sectors of the economy. At that time, Congress passed a massive covid relief bill that directly defrayed business losses and supported consumer spending; and the Fed sharply ramped up its purchases of financial assets, keeping interest rates near zero and assuring ample liquidity to allow the recovery to gain traction.

Would it really have been a better choice to have pursued policies that would have deferred these achievements until some more distant date? I tend to think not. I accept the current level of inflation as somewhat of the price that had to be paid to get America back to work. In any case, if you want to blame policy makers for being responsible for our current inflation, it’s only fair to credit those same people and institutions for precipitating the rapid pace of economic expansion that we’ve enjoyed for the last 6 quarters and counting, culminating with the recovery of virtually all the job losses from the pandemic and the lowest unemployment rate since immediately before the pandemic.

Econ 101 teaches that contractionary fiscal and monetary policy can be used to tamp down inflation. In both policy venues, the conventional anti-inflationary remedy requires suppressing aggregate demand. Fiscal policy does so by reducing spending by the government sector and/or raising taxes to decrease discretionary incomes, fostering a lower pace of spending by both households and businesses. Tight monetary policy requires reducing the rate of monetary expansion, which precipitates higher interest rates; and those higher interest rates make borrowing more expensive, causing a cutback in spending activity.

Those who blame current inflation rates on previously employed economic policies generally favor using both fiscal and monetary policy levers to address our current inflation difficulties. I’m on board with this orientation in connection with monetary policy, but I’m less enthusiastic about the shift of fiscal policy. I fear that the broad-brush fiscal policy designed to dampen aggregate demand may be unnecessary and even shortsighted.

Monetary policy is a blunt tool that inherently chooses between directing its efforts to either (a) encourage faster economic growth and lower unemployment or (b) fight inflation. Fiscal policy, on the other hand, isn’t so binary. While fiscal policy can certainly be used to counter inflation, it must be used in connection with other policy goals, as well, like insuring health, safety, and general welfare. Sometimes — like now — these various objectives may be somewhat in conflict; in which case objectives unrelated to inflation shouldn’t be entirely ignored.

It’s also important to realize that while government spending is certainly a component of aggregate demand, over time, that same spending can also influence aggregate supply. Specifically, any spending that improves market efficiencies or encourages greater labor force participation stimulates aggregate supply along with aggregate demand. Categorically seeing such expenditures as inflationary is an overly simplistic assessment.

Whether spending is inflationary or not may depend on the nature of the expenditures and the time horizon under consideration. Over time, the supply side effect could very well dominate relative to demand side effects in many types of government spending. The traditional economic policy remedy on the fiscal side fails to give appropriate weight to this consideration.

Consider, for example, the various kinds of spending initiatives that had been suggested under the Build Back Better program, including funding to (a) maintain and improve traditional infrastructure, (b) expand broadband access, (c) lower health care costs, (d) encourage the transition to clean energy, and (e) offer support to families with pre-school age children. Categorizing all of these initiatives as inflationary is disingenuous. That’s hardly the case. Much of that spending would have directly lowered costs for American households or stimulated higher labor force participation in a host of newly created jobs. In any case, as originally conceived, all the expenditures under the Build Back Better bill were to be funded by higher taxes. By itself, that tax provision should have obviated the criticism that the bill was inflationary.

The fact that the Build Back Better plan has failed shouldn’t preclude further efforts to pass a more scaled back version of it. Current circumstances relating to each of the bill’s component areas mentioned above are certainly not optimal; and failure to embark on any constructive action in any of these areas is indefensible. We can walk and chew gum at the same time. Monetary policy can bear the onus of bringing down inflation. Fiscal policy can be directed toward solving other problems.

Derivatives Litigation Services assists legal teams with litigation when derivative contracts play a role in disputed transactions. The firm offers advice and counsel on a best efforts basis but bears no responsibility for outcomes dictated by mediation or court judgments.

Recommended Content


Recommended Content

Editors’ Picks

AUD/USD recovers further toward 0.6800 on risk-recovery

AUD/USD recovers further toward 0.6800 on risk-recovery

AUD/USD extends recovery toward 0.6800 in Asian trading on Thursday, despite mixed Australian employment data. The Aussie cheers a return of risk appetite, which weighs on the post-Fed US Dollar recovery. All eyes now remain on US economic data for fresh impetus. 

AUD/USD News
USD.JPY reverses sharply from 144.00, as US Dollar recovery fizzles

USD.JPY reverses sharply from 144.00, as US Dollar recovery fizzles

USD/JPY is attacking 143.00 in Thursday's Asian session, reversing sharply from 144.00. The pair pares back gains in tandem with the US Dollar, as the latter's post-Fed recovery falters due to a rebound in risk sentiment. The focus is next on the US data due later today and Friday's BoJ decision. 

USD/JPY News
Gold defends $2,550 in the Fed’s aftermath, ahead of US data

Gold defends $2,550 in the Fed’s aftermath, ahead of US data

Gold price is defending $2,550 early Thursday, catching a breath after intense volatility witnessed in the aftermath of the all-important US Federal Reserve monetary policy announcements and Fed Chairman Jerome Powell’s press conference.

Gold News
Bitcoin surges to $62,000 mark after 50 bps Fed rate cut

Bitcoin surges to $62,000 mark after 50 bps Fed rate cut

Bitcoin and Ripple eye for a rally as they break and find support around their resistance barrier. Meanwhile, Ethereum demonstrates signs of recovery as it approaches a critical resistance level, indicating that an upward rally could be on the horizon if it successfully breaks through.

Read more
Australian Unemployment Rate expected to hold steady at 4.2% in August

Australian Unemployment Rate expected to hold steady at 4.2% in August

The Australian Bureau of Statistics will release the monthly employment report at 1:30 GMT on Thursday. The country is expected to have added 25K new positions in August, while the Unemployment Rate is foreseen to remain steady at 4.2%.

Read more
Moneta Markets review 2024: All you need to know

Moneta Markets review 2024: All you need to know

VERIFIED In this review, the FXStreet team provides an independent and thorough analysis based on direct testing and real experiences with Moneta Markets – an excellent broker for novice to intermediate forex traders who want to broaden their knowledge base.

Read More

Majors

Cryptocurrencies

Signatures