To me, a wise and humane policy is occasionally to let inflation rise even when inflation is running above target.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
When people begin anticipating inflation, it doesn't do you any good anymore, because any benefit of inflation comes from the fact that you do better than you thought you were going to do.
You can't have a regime which continuously subsidizes things; as inflation rises, you keep prices of certain things unchanged.
I have never believed that central banks should have rigid inflation targeting. That is not a good thing to stabilize. There is nothing in economic theory to back this.
We have to keep our eye on inflation, but so far inflation remains reasonably in check on the global stage.
Avoiding inflation is not an absolute imperative but rather is one of a number of conflicting goals that we must pursue and that we may often have to compromise.
The government will always tell you that it wants low inflation. The real issue is the horizon over which to bring inflation down.
I continue to believe that the American people have a love-hate relationship with inflation. They hate inflation but love everything that causes it.
I have said repeatedly that the way to sustainable growth is to bring down inflation to much more reasonable levels.
I'm just opposed to a pure inflation-only mandate in which the only thing a central bank cares about is inflation and not employment.
The central focus of what we are doing at the Fed is to keep inflation from accelerating - and preferably decelerating.
No opposing quotes found.