Hoskins And Aiyagari Summary

981 Words2 Pages

Reviewing the articles assigned, Hoskins and Aiyagari provide their stance on a zero inflation objective to achieve price stability and refer to one another’s viewpoints. Hoskins is an advocate while Aiyagari is not. Hoskins’ stance is based on three main reasons: the Central Bank has control over the price level of goods and services over time but no control over the growth of output, if the commitment by the Central Bank is seen as credible it can promote economic efficiency and growth, and zero inflation is better than inflation rate stability. The article is a mix of his viewpoints and response to critics, such as Aiyagari. Both provide decent arguments; however, I tend to find Aiyagari’ s more convincing overall as his arguments seemed more logical and factually based. Hoskins’ refutes did not seem terribly substantiated or …show more content…

While Aiyagari notes, much like Hoskins, that the Central Bank can control the price level of goods and services, it can only be done if the commitment is seen as credible, which the author is skeptical about since the federal government hasn’t been able to contain federal debt recently on several occasions. I would also be skeptical as the issue of federal debt has been seen in the news often. Just within the past month it has been reported that the U.S. federal debt is climbing to 150% of GDP by 2047; currently, it’s at 101% of GDP (http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/30/debt-and-deficits-are-going-to-explode-in-the-next-30-years-cbo-says.html). According to Aiyagari, to be viewed as credible, the Central Bank and fiscal authorities need to join forces over the long run. This is because to maintain to maintain the federal budget balance, fiscal authorities need to adjust taxes; otherwise the bank has to change their course to deal with accumulating public

Open Document