Should-Read: The surprising thing about B.G.'s long and convoluted Fed-hiking-interest-rates-to-punish-market-like-taking-away-LEGOS-to-punish-misbehaving-toddler metaphor is this: the markets have not misbehaved.
It is as if the parent (Federal Reserve) said: "you, toddler, are going to misbehave" (inflationary pressures will emerge), so I will take your LEGOS away (raise interest rates)." Yet the toddler does not misbehave (inflationary pressures do not emerge). But even so the parent (Federal Reserve) then says: "I have to take your Legos away because I said I would (I have to raise interest rates because I said I would), even though you did not misbehave (even though inflationary pressures did not emerge)."
This certainly gains you a credible reputation.
But is it really the kind of credible reputation you actually want to have?
And yet B.G. thinks that this is a normal and acceptable way to behave...
And at this point I suggest that the entire FOMC—and B.G.—enroll in Daniel Davies's One-Minute-MBA course, and that the Federal Reserve print up the $30,000 fee for each of the 19 notional FOMC meeting principal participants, and pay it to him...
B.G.: Because I said so: Why the Fed is likely to raise rates, despite low inflation: "Like a parent teaching a child it means business, the Fed may feel it must hike to preserve its credibility with financial markets... http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2017/06/because-i-said-so
