Skip to main content

tv   New York Federal Reserve Bank President John Williams  CSPAN  March 18, 2019 4:34pm-5:29pm EDT

4:34 pm
tuesday morning. join the discussion. williams, president and ceo of the federal reserve bank of ceo. he talked about monetary policy, interest rates and inflation at the economic club of new york earlier this month. >> the chair of the economic club and delighted to welcome you today to our 500th meeting of the club. so, it's a real milestone in our 112 years. [applause] >> during those years, the club has become the nation's foremost forum for discussion of economic poll in our country, across the world. before we proceed with our program, i'd like to remember a very special contributor to this legacy of the club.
4:35 pm
ray price, who recently passed away. ray was a long-term member of the club. he was a former -- the former board member and club president and i'd like us to have just a moment of silence in his honor. [moment of silence] >> i would now like to recognize our 280 members of the centennial society, many of whom are seated on the dais or elsewhere in the front of the room. and you really are the lifeblood of his club and you make the programming at the club possible
4:36 pm
and i really want to thank you for your generosity. i'd also like to welcome the table of graduate students attending today from city university of new york, school of business and our attending members of the 2019 class of economic club fellows. and finally, it's a tremendous pleasure for me to now introduce the distinguished economist, a leader of the federal reserve system, john c. williams, who last year, last june, became president and chief executive officer of the federal reserve bank of new york. and in that capacity, of course, he also serves as a member of -- vice chair of the fed open market committee. now, john obtained his a.b. degree at berkeley, and masters degree at london school of economics, and a ph.d at stanford. not too bad. he began his career in 1964 -- 1994. i'm sorry.
4:37 pm
he's much younger than -- poor john. i am aging you already as you just begin your position. so, john began as a research economist at the federal reserve board of governors in washington, d.c. and as an economist, i really want to underline the fact that john delved into issues that at the time were rather esoteric issues of business cycles, uncertainty, innovation, and those issues continued to inform markets and also monetary policy to this day. so he was really at the cutting edge of research at the time. he then became head of research at the san francisco federal
4:38 pm
reserve bank and continued, of course, his work and delved even deeper into issues of model and in a way i would argue probably brought the fed to the 21st century and the model are now available to publicmarks. now, john really has distinguished himself by his openness and his access, and spent a lot of time when he was at the san francisco fed, doing town hall meetings, meeting with students, and were particularly happy that you're continuing this tradition and we hope that you'll visit the cause regularly. in 2011, he succeeded janet yellen as president and chief executive officer over the san francisco fed, and in june 2018, he became chair of the new york fed. so, john will make his speech, and then he will answer
4:39 pm
questions. so, please welcome john williams. [applause] john: i did start my career at the fed when i was two years old. in fact at times it feels like i've been in the fed since 1964. thank you so much for the very warm introduction. it's great to be here at the economic club of new york and speaking to this group and looking forward to the question is get from the friends up here. i also should just say that it's a great honor to be invited to be on the board of the economic club of new york. i'm very excited about that. and also this group has such a long distinguished history of public discussion and debate on
4:40 pm
the important issues in front of us. i hope that today's event will fall in that strong tradition. i am in fact today going to talk blot monetary policy and interest raid. have a feeling if i didn't talk but interest rates you would feel short-changed but before i can give you anything i'm going to say the usual fed disclaimer, everything reflects my own views and not necessarily the federal open market committee, nibblings in the fed reserve. so we have gotten the disclaimer out of the way so my colleagues in legal will be happy. i want to take us back to a time long ago, in a galaxy far, far away, the year 2001, when destiny's child was topping the charts, when you had a motorola flip phone and were the coolest kid on the block. in that time, i was an economist at the board of governors in washington, and i and my
4:41 pm
colleague were very focused on some of the kind of key issues we're thinking about, how the federal reserve, specifically burning the midnight oil trying to understand what the tech woman and the rapid different productivity growth and these are huge issue knows fed and trying to understand the economy, and thinking about those issues and researching those led thomas and i to develop this model of something called r-star. r-star, for economists means the natural or neutral rate of interest. a level of interest rates you think would occur in the long run and the economy that's neither boosting neck growing nor holding back the economy.
4:42 pm
neither expansionary or -- it's a normal interest rate in a normal economy. when thinking about what is -- what determines what a normal interest rate is, we focus quite a bit of attention on something that we think is a very important determinant of interest rates in long run and that's economic growth, the rate of economic growth, which we show in our great creativity decide to call g-star. so we focus on g-star, this idea of potential growth the economy, how fast can the the grow and is sustainable, and you have to think back in the time of the late '90s and and early 2001s, gdp gross in the u.s. was over 4% a year. and we were focused on the issue of how does the tech revolution, the internet, all these things leading to very rapid growth, how are those affecting the
4:43 pm
potential growing rate of the question and thinking what it means for interest rates in the long run. one thing we discovered in economy that is growing rapidly and on an ongoing basis, this new central interest rate or this normal into rate of r-star was somewhat above 3%, significantly higher than our estimates were for before the tech boom. so again we were focused on trying to understand how do changes in the economy affect what a normal interest rate was. given that we were so focused on the tech boom and the new economy, it's somewhat ironic that since then, both thomas and i and many other economist have focused on why r-star has dropped like a rock. we had focused on why it had hissen and we have seen a significant decline in estimates of the neutral interest rate.
4:44 pm
and in think can about -- putting that in context, i said that our view of a normal interest rate around the 2001 was around a little over 3%, since the great recession, these estimates have been well below 1%. normal real interest rate of below 1% sparks, and historical context no period before the great recession where a normal interest rate was that low. so it's just a sea change in our views of what a normal interest rate orr-star was inch think about these issues we focused on the number of the determineants of why the interest rates are -- have come down and goes back to issues of the productivity growth, potential growth, and labor force growth, what are the determinants that drive g-despair the potential of the economy, and thinking about those have affected neutral interest rates. so, go back to this, what you see back to these questions, you see that labor force growth
4:45 pm
slowed considerably in the united states. retirement of the baby-boomers, birth rates coming down over the recent decade suggesting our economy's potential growth rate is lower than before, and slower productivity growth in the last decade. many people who have become enamroed with their devices and how technology is change our lives, productivity is growth and you can order new nintendo switch and get it delivered the same day. a huge change in productivity but it isn't, and for now, i'll leave that for another day. today the fact is we have seen the slowing down of both productivity, growth and labor force growth, as a persistents
4:46 pm
feature of the u.s. outlook. the other point i would make that i think is important to think about how the world has changes from 15 or so years ago, the slowdowns in labor force growth the demographics are all seen in many other countries around the world. so not just the united states. demographics have shifted but in other countries and similar live with the productivity growth. this is much more of a slowdown in product different group as a global phenomenon and that means this idea of an r-star neutral interest rate hasn't falling in the united states, but we're seeing evidence of the fall in countries across the globe and i think that's an important part of the story. you may be asking why am i going back to 2001? talking about issues -- a time when we actually would order takeout from a paper menu. seems like a long time ago. thinking but what their long-one
4:47 pm
trends and a neutral interest rate and the economy's potential and how that changed? really helped set the scene for the economic outlook today, provides a backdrop for us to think about what should be expecting to see in the economy this year and the next few years. in thinking about what the economic outlook is, it's helpful to think about what is this potential output, the g-star. what's a normal growth rate for the economy. based on our current estimates, that's around 2%. so 2% gdp growth would be normal from this point of view. now, that's a lot slower than many are us experienced in our lifetimes but again reflects a slowdown in labor force growth and in productivity growth. and in thinking about what has been happening in the u.s. economy, last year we saw gdp growth came in well above that.
4:48 pm
a little above 3% based on the most recent estimate. the economy grew much faster than the trend, three factors come to mine, one was the fiscal stimulus and earlier in the year we saw some synchronized gold and much of the year favorable financial conditions so these gave the economy some tail wind to allow to us grow well above our long-run potential. now we're into 2019 and looking further ahead, my view is that these tail winds, some of them have calmed quite a bit and others have reversed in the last several months. then we talk about that. mentioned three factors that have affected the shift from the slowdown of growing from last year to this year. one is global growth is definitely slowing relative to what we were seeing, let's say, year or so ago the same is a
4:49 pm
geopolitical risks very much front and center for many around the world and the financial since last year have tightened somewhat. so my view is after seeing gdp growth above 3% last year, my forecast is that we'll see gdp growth this year of around 2%, which is a pretty significant shift from one year to the next. now, let me go through the three factors to help frame that. first of all in the slower global growth, we have seen signs and actually hard dat from especially from europe and china of slowing growth. i would really note in particular the slowdown in europe growth seems to be pronounced. how does that affect in the u.s. economy? means less demand for
4:50 pm
exports which pills into a little less growth in the u.s. economy. the geopolitical risk side, we know we're all watching very carefully what happens to our friends across the pond in terms of brexit and more generally geopolitical risks in europe they're going through in several countries right now, and adding to that is obviously the issues about trade negotiations between the u.s. and china and other countries. when you put that together, higher angst around the gentlemenow political and economic outlook is a cause for businesses and householdded to step back from longer term investments and hiring decisions decisions and postpone those until the air as cleared which is second factor holding bang growth. this third one is a shift in financial conditions last year and continuing to today, and that is that relative to before, overall financial conditions have tightened somewhat. that means businesses and
4:51 pm
household are likely to all else equal to spend somewhat less this year and expect a little less growth out of that. one data point which i would bring up which already was in -- throughout last year is we have seen quite a bit of slowing in the housing sector and housing construction which reflects less favorable financing costs for buying house. now, all of these factors again kind of coming to and tell us that the economy that was growing at 3% last year, due some favorable tail winds, we're not expecting to see growth closer to 2%. now, that clearly has created quite bit of angst and worry and in fact some fears of recession to see a significant decline in the economic outlook but i want to put that in perspective.
4:52 pm
started with this discussion of g-star, how much of our economy should be expected to grow and our current estimate is 2%. so when we see this slowdown, you shouldn't be -- people shouldn't say what's happened to the economy that this would be down to 2%. in fact, this is actually something considered more normal, 2% growth in the new economy, new normal economy, is more of the usual rather than the exceptional. and thinking about people being concerned about growth of 2%, again i put in the perspective that this shouldn't be such a worry but instead seeing something that -- something that i predict able if you thought ahead would be expecting potential growth on that level. let me turn to monetary policy and how to put this together. if you look it's strictly through a monetary policy lens, we have unemployment around 4% or very strong labor market. we have seen very sold job growth. seeing growth for the economy that was very good last year. and looks to be still around or sustainable potential level this year. seeing the inflation around 2%
4:53 pm
or preferred inflation goal. so, for monetary policy perspective this is about as good as it kid inside term of achieving goal and that's a good starting place. what does that mean for economy policy -- with the economy strong, innation near the target and growth around sustainable level to me monetary policy is becoming more normal in particular, my view of a neutral orr-star cease-fire you add 2% influence the idea of a neutral rate you have 2-1/2's we are in a good economy where monetary policy at least in my view right around a neutral. so that brings me to the question of what is the future going to snowfall we're in a good place now, monetary policies is roughly neutral and the economy is in a good place. so the baseline is good.
4:54 pm
but of course, there's always uncertainties around the economic outlook, and we need to be thinking through some of those. let me go through a few possible scenarios that are relevant. one, we would see geopolitical risks recede, be resolved. we could see other positive develops that lead to the economy to kind of get back to its rather robust trajectory we saw last year. that's one upside possibility. the second scenario is basically the one i laid out. growth roughly trend, continuation of a solid economy. of course always the downside risks that certain risks that could realize that would knock the economy somewhat off course. so thinking but the very scenarios, what does it mean for monetary policy. i start from the point i think we're in a very good place, the economy is in a good place so
4:55 pm
how will monetary policy respond depending on the various scenarios and my answer is simple. depends on what happened in the economy and it depends on the appropriate response to changing circumstances. and i'm going to say something that i've been saying a lot for several years, keep saying for as long as i'm in this position and i'm guessing i'll keep saying for the rest of my life, what i'm about to say is very important in the current juncture and that is it's really important for the fed to continue to be very data dependent, that is the key phrase for thinking how to respond to changing economic circumstances. just had our -- in january, our last meeting. we indicated that given the -- where the economy is and the outlook, that we decided not to change the target federal funds rate and we also indicated appropriately that given the circumstances that we're in, with essentially no inflation
4:56 pm
anywhere pressures and give the global and check financial condition, we could afford to be patient and making future decisions around policy, and i think that makes complete sense given the situation we're in, and given the fact that there are still significant uncertainties looming large. in terms of thinking about monetary policy, think it's helpful to have an article metaphor in mind and that is monetary policy is like steering a large ship. the policy action can leave a wake a mile long and when we think about taking our -- taking the decisions we make, we need think about how they effect the economy over a long period of time and need to be collecting all of the data we have and data by data i mean the economic statistics, i mean talking and
4:57 pm
then following what is happening in financial markets, what's happening in the global economy and talking to business lettered from robbed the country hearing from people in the business community and more generally about what is happening. taking all of that dat together and analyzing it and trying our best to achieve a continuation of the situation we're in now. strong labor market, inflation near 2%, and steady good growth. i started with a discussion of why r-star and g-star, these ideas are important. they're important because they help photograph not only how to think about monetary policy and the decisions we make and always about what real kind of a normal economy looks like now that we have fully recovered from the recession and now moving to phase that is more normal economic cycle. moderate growth should be a surprise and should not be a source of worry or concern.
4:58 pm
for those of you who are still surprised that 2% growth is actually pretty good, my only comment is maybe listen to beyonce a little too loud and haven't been watching the data signs we have been watching for a long time. so, again i go back to my punch lynn on all of this, economy is in a very good shape. outlook as uncertainty. have to be flexible and data dependent and focus on just trying to keep this economy on the track that it currently is. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you for providing context and very thoughtful insight with us. it is wonderful to hear an
4:59 pm
economist say this for a long time and will continue to say it. that is very seldom the case. so thank you very much. and on that, i'll invite john paulson to please start the q&a. john: thank you for your remarks, john. my first question is on forecasting a recession. in november, when fed chair jerome powell was here, he said he didn't know what might cause the next financial downturn, and that there's some event nobody sees coming, oftentimes. as you specialize in monetary policy and uncertainty, do you have thoughts on what might be the trigger of the next downturn? john: obviously, this is a version of the question what keeps me up at night. that's a terrific question, and a timely one. i think it does come up in the context of an economy that's
5:00 pm
going from pretty, i would say growth is pretty strong, to growth that's maybe more film obviously a slowdown in china affects the global economy, so those are personally find to be a particular area of focus, is uncertainty
5:01 pm
aspect. in terms of indicators of a or some risk of that, ou know, i think for us the important thing to do is to keep i am well positioned and -- i'm sure there's like 90% of the people here are better players than me, so don't listen to the tennis met for, part. to the policy we need to be well positioned. i said, onomy, like slowed significantly, you need poll in that way, you need to speed up. positioned e well for that. no matter which way it plays it as needed.just me ask john to continue and then we can let him go play tennis. i don't have a question about tennis. to the nt to go back september 2018.
5:02 pm
the median 2019ection had two hikes in and one in 2020. would slow toh it the elevated rates of 2018. in a seen some bad news few areas, even relative to that orecast, but it is been relatively limited in general, even when you look at financial been at s, there's least a partial trip in that. hearing you correctly, you're saying there isn't really terms of where the go.d rate is going to you're talking about patience in neutral rate. f there is 100-basis point of tightening, that would be quite a large shift relative to what's
5:03 pm
and evenin the economy in the market. so my two-part question is, one, i right in hearing you -- am i hearing you correctly that no lean, you're not 2.5%ting any move from the 2019 and 2020. and if so, and we've seen such a in terms of relatively limited amount of information, could it be that back going to shift right n the back of relatively small amounts of new information? john: september does seem like a time ago to me. i think there have been some shifts.ant i will answer directly like what appened in the last six months roughly. i think in september, speaking for myself here, obviously. seeing indications and
5:04 pm
and in september december of perhaps obviously in signs of weakening china, concerns about financial conditions tightening later in the year, and obviously fiscal policy would provide less stimulus in 2019. back then i thought the economy 3% to 2.5%.rom my enview back in september -- own view is that unemployment ould trend to 3.5% or even less. i thought inflation would get to % but would be trending above that. so that was from my perspective. just an economy that was not -- not just strong, but rate without unemployment getting to historically low levels and inflation pickup in may be more prominent.
5:05 pm
the development since then has shifted my view. as far as se signs global growth have shown up in data. i know the forecast of pretty whether it is the e.c.b. or european commission i everybody has revised their forecast for european growth. challenges is the getting closer to brexit and some of these other issues. terms of financial conditions, you're right. tightened onditions quite a bit. the low would suggest a bigger growth this year. financial conditions have reversed partially the decline. i think a part of that is the reassessment of policy. so if we hadn't, i think, shifted our communication around the likely path of interest
5:06 pm
rates, i don't think it would as they onded as much have. in terms of thinking about the well, we were expecting, many of us were expecting to as far as est rates december, i think given that forecast, that seemed to be a baseline view of where a policy would be appropriate to go. again, that wasn't a commitment or a promise or anything, it is of the economic forecast that i had that somewhat higher interest rates with be consistent achieving our goals. y view now is that economic growth is likely to be closer to tend, unemployment will continue to be low, around 4% or low, but not trending much lower, and the inflation data and the inflation xpectation data confirmed that inflationary risks don't seem to be out there right now at all. and so, again, suggesting
5:07 pm
somewhat better that we -- need tong that we don't tighten the monetary policy maybe as much as i previously thought. so i think the data has changed enough. he risks are obviously out there as part of that story and so at least from my perspective, shift in my view in the appropriate path for policy. n terms of whether i would change my views back. well, i did mention in the speech, if this was kind of a fake, if the economy really 3% this year 5 to or inflation picked up more, we have to reassess that. i think the patience language is a commitment ot saying we're not going to raise interest rates. saying right now the economy's in a really good lace given the level of the interest rate. we have some time to collect more data, to get to your point, reassess the economic outlook,
5:08 pm
and come to a judgment. say that we to would ever need to raise interest rates or lower interest rates, but for the time being i think we're in a good place and i don't have any particular i think the term you used, as far as where policy should be where it is now. >> thank you. second question concerns the tools the fed uses. since short-term interest rates likely to rise as high as they have been in the past, have less room to cut rates to stimulate growth in of a downturn. does the fed ls have to stimulate growth and rates, egative interest as they have done in europe and japan, be one of those tools? john: john, that is an important question. again, we're in a time where the strong, but we node to take time to think
5:09 pm
strong, as we have as the fed, far as our playbook if we ave another economic downturn, which will eventually half i like hat the u.s. will be australia, with 27 years out of recession, or you hit on some of the key policy tools. can cut interest rates to respond to a downturn. we could appropriate, go back to what people call or asset ve easing purchases like we did in the the last decade. we could consider negative rates.t we did consider having negative of the rates in terms interests we. we decided as a committee not to that. we only got close to zero. one of the things we're doing as what my colleagues around the world are doing is
5:10 pm
ssessing and evaluating the eecbrience of japan and the and the swiss national bank and there are, such easing.titative this is not as favorable but i would not seclude any of the thinking aboutin that. if i could take maybe three on this question. the federal reserve is undertaking this year a very kind of assessment and eview of our monetary policy framework, the way we set our long-run strategy and policy goal. this is something that we heard a great speech on here in new recently. this is something we're going to only ot of outreach, not cademic you outreach to communities on how to make it
5:11 pm
est for your goals and whether the current framework and current set of tools is adequate succeed or are there other ways to think about policy or communicate policy to help us to be even more effective in the future. i think that's a conversation hat is part of your question and it is something that i've been very supportive of and lot of work o do a this year and continue into the next year as we think about some so that we're well prepared for whatever may come. thanks. i have a bit of a followup on that question. and -- specifically on changes targeting ation framework. concept oken about a called average rating, where you modestly higher inflation rate during the good part of the cycle because you bad part of the cycle you might be well blow the
5:12 pm
2% -- below the 2% target. i have two questions about that. have some do you umbers for us how high that overshoot should be during the good part of the cycle during expansion, nice 3%, what that number should be. realize this is all very preliminary. and the second part of the a stion is, would this be bygone bygone policy where you for 2.25% or 2.5% during the cycle no of matter what came before or severe a particularly undershoot would cause you to eally want to make up ground and lift that number in the recovery from the slump. john: and so this is part of the
5:13 pm
discussion and debate around the policy framework. the current framework and the way we describe it, it is true only in the u.s., most this as anks describe flexible inflation targeting want to get itwe -- i'm aiming to bring inflation 2% from above or below and it is trying to get back to on average hopefully you will be around 2%. japan and in in ost every advanced economy, a very advanced rate, or zero is much taught us it harder to get inflation back to below than you might have thought given the policy nts on monetary interest very low rate. so this average targeting to me,
5:14 pm
if you have a goal of 2% inflation, it should really be that on average over, you know, that er period of time inflation is around 2%. sometimes a little bit above, a little bit below, but the average is 2%. modest o me, a minor or modification, but a modification the e way we describe policy framework today. how do you implement that? obviously the relevant questions. is it going to be -- is it a that you say after a period where inflation is low do that?ry to make up for do you just try to have an inflation rate that is slightly 2% in good times? those are alternative ways of describing this for me. i go back to the fundamental thing you want to do in this is aim for ework inflation expectations at 2%, so their ople are making decisions, whether business
5:15 pm
people, or people deciding to uy a house or car, i'm expecting inflation to be 2% over the horizon that i'm get ing about and not caught up in the fact that sometimes it is well below and is hard to get it back to 2%. doing iew is any way of this keep the average inflation also kind of anchors expectations around 2% getting effective at the main objective. there are a lot of issues on how are plement that and those the topics people will be thinking about. i should be clear, no decisions have been made. we're just starting a process of thinking about some of these you know, again, this is -- we do things on fed time here, so it will take a lot of study, a lot of analysis, and for my colleagues at the table, of memos. so we'll be working on this for quite some time. importantly, having these conversations in the public is
5:16 pm
good. being transparent and say, all to do is achieve our dual mandate goals. create high ing to inflation or anything like that. e're trying to achieve our goals as best we can and thinking hard about how to do that. issue of bygones is another one of the options out there. to be learned, more to be discussed over the next year or so. questions.k >> my last question concerns normalization. 910 billion dollars crisis began, the the balance peaked at $4.5 trillion. reduced to $4 trillion currently. fed stop int will the the balance sheet normalization? a time frame? john: did you say we're out of
5:17 pm
questions? the question of the so it is interesting because for much -- all the facts that you exactly right. we rose from under $1 trillion $4.5 trillion, and we're trillion. $4 this is a normalization during during the rorry -- recovery, the fed bought in order to lower interest rates and to get the and get rowing faster america back to work. we're moving back to a to what the more new normal balance sheet is. announcement that the f.o. in the make is that future we will conduct the monetary policy that we did in the last decade. will have ample reserves.
5:18 pm
rates on adjusting reserves and repo rates to keep in alignment with the fomc decision. a that decision suggests balance sheet that will not be nywhere near as small as the $900 billion number you indicated. ten ther thing is since years ago or 12 years ago, the amount of currency outstanding, liabilities of the of the federal reserve, has more than doubled. changesve been a lot of that happened from 12 years ago $900 billion. to currency, iver is the the amount of -- policy reasons and for their own reasons it makes sense. happened, andhave also that our plan is to hold in the banking system in support of the new monetary policy framework. i don't have a hard answer for
5:19 pm
hen are we going to stop and exactly how much we're going to further reduce the balance sheet. everyone knows who follows the fed, it is something actively discussing, again, the most important point is that the balance sheet will as small as it was about before because the times have changed. the time being we are shrinking in a very telegraphed way. in the coming months i expect make further decisions. as soon as we make further we'll ns, announcer: that. we have -- announced that. have learned from transparency that it is helpful helpfulin why and it is for the economy about why do you do what you're doing so people plan around that. that is the commitment we have to continue to do that as well as we can. thank you.
5:20 pm
>> my final question also relates to the monetary policy framework. specifically about inflation expectations. hasink there is a view that been expressed by a number of inflationcipants that expectations may be somewhat consistent with the 2% longer-term inflation rate. when i look the at the indicators out there, it is not obvious to me and i wanted to on this.view t is true that break-even inflation rates are somewhat elow 2%, certainly if you translate them into p.c.e. there but it is also true is research about risk prema, if that research seriously, you would find that expect inflation is pretty with the 2% target
5:21 pm
even at the current levels. the surveys, k at at -term forecasts are exactly 2% according to the forecasters, and household expect tagss, 3.2% on survey, and 3% on the near fed survey. your or ou think we're below 2% at levels less than 2% at this point? john: it is an important we think most e of our economic models suggest household decisions depend on what people think inflation will be. will be ink inflation high, you will make different positions. think it is whack a mole. expectations, get we say, finally we got it, and other issues that come up and we find that is not
5:22 pm
the perfect issue. think all of these are informative and valuable. i thinkr your question, hard to distinguish between our inflation expect associations -- right at 2% or is hard for us to know. i'm one of the people who the fact that we've seen inflation expectations come down. might be an adjustment that has nothing to onreally with people's views underlying infrayings -- inflation. something that i do pay attention to because i do think that if you go back to the of central banking for as long as you can think of it, the fed, ears for having a nominal anchor, having and e believe that low stable inflation is something that we are achieving on a think it is , i
5:23 pm
critically important for economic prosperity. any ne thing the fed or potential bank, i think mission number one is to provide stable longer period of time. normally in my career, i went to 1980's and grad school in the early 1990's, my was from getting inflation too high. inflation ighting that we saw back in the 1960's, 1980's. the challenge is on the other japan and seen in many other countries where they struggled with inflaths being too low.flation being my answer to your question is i expectationslation are pretty well behaved, and i think the range is at our goal. definitely it is something on my radar that looking around the orld and seeing how inflation has been under the target year after year and how that is hanging behavior in those countries, we don't want that to
5:24 pm
happen here, and i think the framework question really is not to solve a problem we have but to avoid a problem that we could of the inflation anchors slipping lower. awesome y, these were questions from both of you. thank you so much. .pplause) /* three t.v. was simply giant networks and government then a called pbs and small network rolled out a idea, let th a big viewers decide what was important to them. c-span opened the doors for all see, bringing you unfiltered congress and beyond. this was true people power. n the 40 years since the landscape has clearly changed. monolithic media,
5:25 pm
outube stars are a big thing, but c-span is relevant. no government money supports c-span. it is funded as a public service s your cable or satellite provider on television and unfilteredan is your view of government so you can mind.p your own brokb -- browder talked about his experience in russia an event hosted by the world council. >> a lot of people ask me if i think there was collusion. and i don't know if there was collusion or not. there is ado know is person out there in the world who does know if there was not, and his name
5:26 pm
special mueller, counsel has access to information. f anyone wants to see the information he has access to, mueller indictment of 12u.s. authors. if you read this indictment, you ill discover that robert mueller had access to the -mails between one russian g.r.u. agent and another russian g.r.u. agent. of these ess to all e-mails. e had access to the bit coin payments they used to try to shield their payments. thought washat they secret he has access to. in addition, he has access to taps, to witnesses to subpoenaing banks, to everything. time he's done, if there's collusion, we'll know it
5:27 pm
nd if there's not collusion, we'll know it because he knows everything. >> you can see the entire bill browder ith tonight starting at 8 p.m. eastern. journal 's washington live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up tuesday morning, new magazine's author talks about global warming and fred president s about trump's reelection prospects and the 2020 democratic field so far. be sure to wash c-span's journal.n join the discussion. congress is in recess all this week. nancy pelosi discussd that they will
5:28 pm
terminating his national declaration on bored security. you -- border security. c-span.see it live on returns, they will begin debate on the green new deal. our companion n c-span2. hill hearing l t-mobil andives from sprint. the wireless industry and consumers and also professors. this is about two and a half hours. will comecommittee


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on