Laurence H. Meyer served a term at the Fed from 1996 until the end of January, 2002. Therefore, he was there during the incredible boom of the late nineties and the economic downturn of the early years of the twenty-first century. This enormous contrast in economic performance means that the debate within the Fed, as related by Meyer, covers the entire range of positions.
In the early years, the debate was always about whether to raise rates, in order to stave off the possibility of inflation. During most of that time, Meyer and Greenspan were on opposite sides of the discussion. Greenspan took the position that the incorporation of new technology was causing a dramatic increase in productivity that was not reflected in the economic data. Meyer did not believe this until the data forced the conclusion.
The core of the argument was the value of NAIRU (Non-accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment), an economic statistic that is not universally accepted to say nothing of having ever been accurately measured. It is the level of unemployment considered the bound, where if the rate drops below the NAIRU, then employers are forced to increase wages in order to attract and retain workers. The end result will then be a strong inflationary pressure. It was very illuminating to read Meyer's account of the discussions inside the Fed regarding whether this "mythical" value had indeed been reached. Those discussions reveal a great deal of what actually goes on inside the Fed and how so much of their work is on the order of reading the tea leaves. While the consequences of their actions are very practical and dynamic, it also shows that the governors are sometimes forced to rely on unproven economic theories to make their decisions.
The last years of Meyer's term were spent in cutting interest rates, as the economy began to enter a deep slide. In this case, the discussions were completely different, with the theory now being based on deflationary models. Deflation is what occurred in the depression of the thirties and in Japan in the nineties. Prices begin dropping, leading to purchasing being delayed, hoping for a better price. If a feedback loop begins, it can be disastrous, considered even worse than inflation. The governors of the Fed became concerned about that possibility, and the arguments were now over how much to cut interest rates and how fast to do it.
Those who are hoping for a juicy expose of dramatic arguments or revelations about personalities will be disappointed with this book. There is very little about Alan Greenspan that was not already known and the arguments between the Fed governors are described as being quite tame. In some ways the descriptions seem too tame. Human nature and the major consequences of their actions dictate that the discussions would be carried out more passionately than Meyer describes.
I commend Meyer for his approach in writing this book. So many of the books written by former government officials are "explanations" of why they were right and so many others were wrong. They are filled with as much dirty linen as possible, without really explaining how decisions were arrived at. Meyer describes how things were done at the Fed, how it is run under Greenspan and how decisions were made. While he does criticize Greenspan, it has none of that spiteful tone that so many others use. Therefore, if you really want to know how the Fed makes the decisions that drive the world economy up or down, then this is the book to read.
Click Here to see more reviews about: A Term at the Fed: An Insider's View (Hardcover)
No comments:
Post a Comment