<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More again on unemployment</title>
	<atom:link href="http://clubtroppo.com.au/2008/03/05/more-again-on-unemployment/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://clubtroppo.com.au/2008/03/05/more-again-on-unemployment/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 03:01:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Club Troppo &#187; Missing Link Daily</title>
		<link>http://clubtroppo.com.au/2008/03/05/more-again-on-unemployment/#comment-246552</link>
		<dc:creator>Club Troppo &#187; Missing Link Daily</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 18:19:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clubtroppo.com.au/2008/03/05/more-again-on-unemployment/#comment-246552</guid>
		<description>[...] Martin is obligatory.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Martin is obligatory.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicholas Gruen</title>
		<link>http://clubtroppo.com.au/2008/03/05/more-again-on-unemployment/#comment-245763</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicholas Gruen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2008 01:46:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clubtroppo.com.au/2008/03/05/more-again-on-unemployment/#comment-245763</guid>
		<description>Fred,

At last I like your formulation.  &quot;&lt;em&gt;[T]emporary&lt;/em&gt; non-accelerating inflation rate of, say, 3.5 to 4%&quot;.

This is very different to the previous formulation which suggests to the suspicious that you are invoking some old Phillips curve idea that there&#039;s a clear tradeoff.  I agree that if we have cost push coming through in a bunch of areas - which we do - that it might well be the case that the most growth promoting way to accommodate it is to allow prices to grow by around 4% temporarily.  But then again that&#039;s pretty much where we are now, and we need to get the rate back down to the band - don&#039;t we?  If you say &#039;no&#039; then &#039;temporary&#039; is really permanent.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fred,</p>
<p>At last I like your formulation.  &#8220;<em>[T]emporary</em> non-accelerating inflation rate of, say, 3.5 to 4%&#8221;.</p>
<p>This is very different to the previous formulation which suggests to the suspicious that you are invoking some old Phillips curve idea that there&#8217;s a clear tradeoff.  I agree that if we have cost push coming through in a bunch of areas &#8211; which we do &#8211; that it might well be the case that the most growth promoting way to accommodate it is to allow prices to grow by around 4% temporarily.  But then again that&#8217;s pretty much where we are now, and we need to get the rate back down to the band &#8211; don&#8217;t we?  If you say &#8216;no&#8217; then &#8216;temporary&#8217; is really permanent.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jc</title>
		<link>http://clubtroppo.com.au/2008/03/05/more-again-on-unemployment/#comment-245727</link>
		<dc:creator>Jc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 22:55:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clubtroppo.com.au/2008/03/05/more-again-on-unemployment/#comment-245727</guid>
		<description>Fred:

How do you ro anyone know if monetary policy is too tight or loose for that matter? What&#039;s the reference point? I don&#039;t see we have one. The only reference point we have is actually watching economic conditions which is a look back function.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fred:</p>
<p>How do you ro anyone know if monetary policy is too tight or loose for that matter? What&#8217;s the reference point? I don&#8217;t see we have one. The only reference point we have is actually watching economic conditions which is a look back function.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: derrida derider</title>
		<link>http://clubtroppo.com.au/2008/03/05/more-again-on-unemployment/#comment-245722</link>
		<dc:creator>derrida derider</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 22:39:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://clubtroppo.com.au/2008/03/05/more-again-on-unemployment/#comment-245722</guid>
		<description>I was always taught that because of the &quot;long and variable lags&quot; in monetary policy&#039;s action upon the real economy that central banks should focus on expected conditions in about 2 years time.  And Fred is quite right to point out that we can expect some &lt;b&gt;disinflationary&lt;/b&gt; pressures between now and then.

It seems to me the RBA is doing the &quot;much too much, much too late&quot; thing again with monetary policy.  It should certainly have been running a tighter policy as soon as it became evident we were in a strong and sustained commodity boom, and now it is overcorrecting.  This could easily set off a decade or so of boom and bust cycles.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was always taught that because of the &#8220;long and variable lags&#8221; in monetary policy&#8217;s action upon the real economy that central banks should focus on expected conditions in about 2 years time.  And Fred is quite right to point out that we can expect some <b>disinflationary</b> pressures between now and then.</p>
<p>It seems to me the RBA is doing the &#8220;much too much, much too late&#8221; thing again with monetary policy.  It should certainly have been running a tighter policy as soon as it became evident we were in a strong and sustained commodity boom, and now it is overcorrecting.  This could easily set off a decade or so of boom and bust cycles.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

