The Art and Pseudoscience of Monetary Policy

Definitely Maybe Everyone’s got a plan for sale these days. In fact, there are so many plans out there we cannot keep up with them all. Eat celery sticks and lose weight. Think and grow rich. Stocks for the long run. Naturally, plans like these run a dime a dozen.
All social engineers who get to impose their harebrained schemes on the rest of the world through the coercive powers of the State, as well as all armchair planners regaling us with their allegedly ‘better plans’, should have this highly perceptive quote by Robert Burns tattooed on their foreheads. In case you’re wondering, ‘gang aft a-gley’ is slightly old English for ‘usually turn out to be total crap’. The second part that points out that as a rule, we get nothing but grief and pain instead of promised joy, is applicable to interventionism in general; the so-called ‘unintended consequences’ of interventions almost always turn out to be their main feature and defining characteristic.
Good plans, however, are scarcer than hen’s teeth. You can’t possibly see them no matter how closely you look. They simply don’t exist. This was the case on Capitol Hill this week, where money and politics collided at the biannual monetary policy gala.
Despite all the hubbub, no good plans were offered. What’s more, on first glance, no bad plans were offered too. When Fed Chair Janet Yellen’s testimony was finally over, Congress knew less about the Fed’s plans than when it started.
For instance, when asked if the Federal Reserve would raise rates next month, Fed Chair Janet Yellen replied, ‘I can’t tell you exactly which meeting it would be. I would say every meeting is live.’
What does this mean, really? Does it mean she’ll definitely maybe raise rates? Does it mean she absolutely ‘might could’ increase them? Only time will tell.

This post was published at Acting-Man on February 17, 2017.