>The new issue of the FRB of Kansas City's Economic Review has an article,
>which I've only just skimmed so far, arguing that full employment should
>now be seen as 6 1/4% (old method of calculating unemployment, that is;
>new method would be around 6 1/2 give or take a few basis points). That
>means we're real close! Doesn't it feel good and prosperous? When this was
>reported on the newswires a couple of weeks ago the bond market went nuts.
>Rational observers may see no inflation here or abroad but the bond market
>is driven by sentiment not rational argument. We can talk ourselves blue
>in the face and they won't listen. Here's what passes for consensus
>thinking in the bond pits and on the trading desks: Clinton is a
>socialist, the economy is too strong, and the Fed should squeeze. For
>this, people "earn" six and seven figure salaries.
>
>Doug
>
>Doug Henwood [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Left Business Observer
>212-874-4020 (voice)
>212-874-3137 (fax)
I propose we try to get together an AD with the text something like:
GET THESE GUYS HELP, QUICK.
Attack their idea with ridicule and some HISTORICAL DATA of when inflation has
accelerated in the past. (How did this situation work in 1988 and 1989 when
inflation didn't do ANYTHING -- and barely reacted to the pre-Gulf War run-up
in oil prices!). I think with contacts at the EPI and using PEN, we might be
able to get an ad in some papers -- sort of like we did with the election but
this is MUCH MORE IMPORTANT. People need to know the FED is sacrificing jobs
and prosperity so that people with lots of interest income can get even
richer!!
What do you say? Maybe someone can call Dean Baker at EPI and get him
involved. Cheers, Mike
Mike Meeropol
(bitnet%"mmeeropo@wnec")
(in%"[EMAIL PROTECTED]")
(#100)
PS: Willing to contribute $$$$ and perhaps even work on a draft but can't do
any logistics in terms of calling papers, etc. No time or knowledge for
that...
