New York Fed President Argues for More Accommodation

Photo of Paul Ausick
By Paul Ausick Updated Published
This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.

US Federal Reserve
Thinkstock
Like his colleague James Bullard at the St. Louis Fed, New York Fed President William Dudley thinks the last week’s Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) statement was not the best the central bank could do. After that agreement, the two Fed presidents part company.

Dudley, among the most dovish of Fed presidents, said in a speech today that he thinks that the Fed has not been accommodative enough:

Despite an aggressive shift towards greater monetary policy accommodation in 2008 and 2009, and ongoing subsequent easing — which has supported a return to growth and helped to facilitate needed adjustments in housing and household balance sheets — the economic recovery has been consistently weaker than forecast. As a result, the Federal Reserve has fallen short of meeting its employment and inflation objectives. This suggests that with the benefit of hindsight, U.S. monetary policy, though aggressive by historic standards, was not sufficiently accommodative relative to the state of the economy.

The Fed is not solely to blame, however. In Dudley’s view, financial stability is a necessary prerequisite in order for monetary policy to work its way into the real economy. His analysis:

[T]he biggest lesson of the financial crisis has been that monetary policy cannot work properly when there is financial instability. When financial instability occurs, it disturbs market functioning and can also impair bank balance sheets. The result can be disruption to the financial intermediation function with resulting constraints on the availability of credit for households and businesses. This, in turn, can lead to further reductions in aggregate demand that put additional stress on the weakened financial system.

Without coming right out and saying it, Dudley appears to be arguing that the Fed should not have signaled that its asset purchases may begin to wind down later this year. Tightening monetary policy now could squelch already tepid growth and, by implication, an inflation target of 2.25% may be too low to juice growth.

Photo of Paul Ausick
About the Author Paul Ausick →

Paul Ausick has been writing for a673b.bigscoots-temp.com for more than a decade. He has written extensively on investing in the energy, defense, and technology sectors. In a previous life, he wrote technical documentation and managed a marketing communications group in Silicon Valley.

He has a bachelor's degree in English from the University of Chicago and now lives in Montana, where he fishes for trout in the summer and stays inside during the winter.

Featured Reads

Our top personal finance-related articles today. Your wallet will thank you later.

Continue Reading

Top Gaining Stocks

CBOE Vol: 1,568,143
PSKY Vol: 12,285,993
STX Vol: 7,378,346
ORCL Vol: 26,317,675
DDOG Vol: 6,247,779

Top Losing Stocks

LKQ
LKQ Vol: 4,367,433
CLX Vol: 13,260,523
SYK Vol: 4,519,455
MHK Vol: 1,859,865
AMGN Vol: 3,818,618