Bernanke defiende la política monetaria de la Fed

Genevieve Signoret & Patrick Signoret

Ben Bernanke dio un discurso sobre el doble mandato de la Fed, la diferencia entre política monetaria y fiscal y el riesgo de inflación, subrayando los posibles efectos de la política monetaria sobre ahorradores e inversionistas y la forma en que la Fed rinde cuentas. Traducimos las cinco preguntas que buscó responder y extraemos pasajes concernientes a dos de ellas.

Los cinco temas del discurso de Ben Bernanke:

1. ¿Cuáles son los objetivos de la Fed y cómo intenta cumplirlos?
2. ¿Cuál es la relación entre la política monetaria de la Fed y las decisiones fiscales de la administración y el Congreso?
3. ¿Cuál es el riesgo de que la política monetaria acomodaticia de la Fed conduzca a la inflación?
4. ¿Cómo afecta la política monetaria de la Fed a ahorradores e inversionistas?
5. ¿Cómo rinde cuentas la Reserva Federal en una sociedad democrática?

Sobre la diferencia entre política monetaria y fiscal:

In short, monetary policy and fiscal policy involve quite different sets of actors, decisions, and tools. Fiscal policy involves decisions about how much the government should spend, how much it should tax, and how much it should borrow. At the federal level, those decisions are made by the Administration and the Congress. Fiscal policy determines the size of the federal budget deficit, which is the difference between federal spending and revenues in a year. Borrowing to finance budget deficits increases the government’s total outstanding debt.

[…] Even though our activities are likely to result in a lower national debt over the long term, I sometimes hear the complaint that the Federal Reserve is enabling bad fiscal policy by keeping interest rates very low and thereby making it cheaper for the federal government to borrow. I find this argument unpersuasive. The responsibility for fiscal policy lies squarely with the Administration and the Congress. At the Federal Reserve, we implement policy to promote maximum employment and price stability, as the law under which we operate requires. Using monetary policy to try to influence the political debate on the budget would be highly inappropriate. For what it’s worth, I think the strategy would also likely be ineffective: Suppose, notwithstanding our legal mandate, the Federal Reserve were to raise interest rates for the purpose of making it more expensive for the government to borrow. Such an action would substantially increase the deficit, not only because of higher interest rates, but also because the weaker recovery that would result from premature monetary tightening would further widen the gap between spending and revenues. Would such a step lead to better fiscal outcomes? It seems likely that a significant widening of the deficit–which would make the needed fiscal actions even more difficult and painful–would worsen rather than improve the prospects for a comprehensive fiscal solution.

Las tasas de interés bajas sí afectan a ahorradores en un sentido, pero la política monetaria reciente los ayuda en otros sentidos y ayuda a la economía en general, lo cual es bueno para todos:

A second observation is that savers often wear many economic hats. Many savers are also homeowners; indeed, a family’s home may be its most important financial asset. Many savers are working, or would like to be. Some savers own businesses, and–through pension funds and 401(k) accounts–they often own stocks and other assets. The crisis and recession have led to very low interest rates, it is true, but these events have also destroyed jobs, hamstrung economic growth, and led to sharp declines in the values of many homes and businesses. What can be done to address all of these concerns simultaneously? The best and most comprehensive solution is to find ways to a stronger economy. Only a strong economy can create higher asset values and sustainably good returns for savers. And only a strong economy will allow people who need jobs to find them. Without a job, it is difficult to save for retirement or to buy a home or to pay for an education, irrespective of the current level of interest rates.

The way for the Fed to support a return to a strong economy is by maintaining monetary accommodation, which requires low interest rates for a time. If, in contrast, the Fed were to raise rates now, before the economic recovery is fully entrenched, house prices might resume declines, the values of businesses large and small would drop, and, critically, unemployment would likely start to rise again. Such outcomes would ultimately not be good for savers or anyone else.

Comentaremos las otras partes del discurso en una nueva entrada. (Actualización: ya está la nueva entrada.)