Inside the Fed How Bemanke's Style

Inside the Fed How Bemanke's Style Differs from Greenspan's
Every Federal Reserve chairman has a different style that affects how policy decisions are made at the Fed. There has been much discussion of how the current chairman of the Fed, Ben Bernanke, differs from Alan Greenspan, who was the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board for nineteen years from 1987 until 2006.
Alan Greenspan dominated the Fed like no other prior Federal Reserve chairman. His background was very different from that of Bernanke, who spent most of his professional life in academia at Princeton UniGreenspan, a disciple of Ayn Rand, is a strong advocate for laissez-faire capitalism and headed a very successful economic consulting firm, Townsend- Greenspan.* Greenspan has never been an economic theorist, but is rather famous for immersing himself in the data—literally so, because he is known to have done this in his bath tub at the beginning of the day— and often focused on rather obscure data series to come up with his forecasts. As a result, Greenspan did not rely exclusively on the Federal Reserve Board staff’s forecast in making his policy decisions. A prominent example occurred during 1997, when the Board staff was forea surge in inflation, which would have required a tightening of monetary policy. Yet Greenspan believed that inflation would not rise and cominced the FOMC not to tighten monetary policy. Greenspan proved to be right and was dubbed the “maestro” by the media.
Bernanke, on the other hand, before going to Washas a governor of the Fed in 2002, and then as the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors in 2005, and finally back to the Fed as chairman in 2006, spent his entire career as a professor, first at Stanford University’s Graduate School of Business, and then in the Economics Department at Princeton University, where he became chairman. Because Bernanke did not make his name as an economic forecaster, the Board staff’s forecast now plays a much greater role in decimaking at the FOMC. In contrast to Greenspan, Bernanke’s background as a top academic economist has meant that he focuses on analytics in making his decisions. The result is a much greater use of model simulations in guiding policy discussions.
The style of policy discussions has also changed with the new chairman. Greenspan exercised extensive control of the discussion at the FOMC. During the Greenspan era, the discussion was formal, with each participant speaking after being put on a list by the secof the FOMC. Under Bernanke, there is more give and take. Bernanke has encouraged so-called two- handed interventions. When a participant wants to go out of turn to ask a question or make a point about something that one of the other participants has just said, they raise two hands and are then acknowledged by chairman Bernanke and called on to speak.
The order of the discussion at the FOMC has also changed in a very subtle, but extremely important way. Under Greenspan, after the other FOMC participants had expressed their views on the economy, Greenspan would present his views on the state of the economy and then would make a recommendation for what monetary policy action should be taken. This required that the other participants would then just agree or disagree with the chairman’s recommenin the following round of discussion about monetary policy. In contrast, Bernanke usually does not make a recommendation for monetary policy immediately after other FOMC participants have expressed their views on the economy. Instead, he summarizes what he has heard from the other particmakes some comments of his own, and then waits until after he has heard the views of all the other participants about monetary policy before making his policy recommendation. The process under Greenspan meant that the chairman was pretty much making the decision about policy, while Bernanke’s procedure is more democratic and enables participants to have greater influence over the chairman’s vote.
Another big difference in style is in terms of transGreenspan was famous for being obscure, and even quipped at a Congressional hearing, “I guess I should warn you, if I turn out to be particularly clear, you’ve probably misunderstood what I’ve said.” Bernanke is known for being a particularly clear speaker. Although there were advances in

Kết quả (Việt) 1:

Bên trong Fed làm thế nào Bemanke của phong cách khác nhau từ của Greenspan Mỗi chủ tịch dự trữ liên bang có một phong cách khác nhau mà ảnh hưởng đến cách quyết định chính sách ký Fed. Đã có nhiều cuộc thảo luận về làm thế nào hiện là chủ tịch của Fed, Ben Bernanke, khác với Alan Greenspan, những người đã là chủ tịch Hội đồng quản trị dự trữ liên bang cho 19 năm từ năm 1987 đến năm 2006.Alan Greenspan thống trị Fed như không có chủ tịch dự trữ liên bang trước khác. Nền tảng của mình là rất khác nhau từ của Bernanke, người dành phần lớn cuộc sống chuyên nghiệp của mình tại học viện tại Princeton UniGreenspan, một đồ đệ của Ayn Rand, là một người ủng hộ mạnh mẽ cho laissez-faire tư bản và đứng đầu một công ty tư vấn kinh tế rất thành công, Townsend - Greenspan.* Greenspan đã không bao giờ là một nhà lý luận kinh tế mà là khá nổi tiếng cho hoà nhập mình trong dữ liệu-vì vậy theo nghĩa đen , bởi vì ông được biết đến đã làm điều này trong bồn tắm của mình vào đầu ngày — và thường tập trung vào dữ liệu khá tối nghĩa loạt để đến với dự báo của ông. Kết quả là, Greenspan đã không dựa hoàn toàn vào nhân viên dự trữ liên bang ban thời trong việc đưa ra quyết định chính sách của mình. Một ví dụ nổi bật xảy ra trong năm 1997, khi nhân viên hội đồng quản trị là forea tăng lạm phát tăng cao, sẽ có yêu cầu một thắt chặt chính sách tiền tệ. Được Greenspan tin rằng lạm phát sẽ không tăng và cominced FOMC không để thắt chặt chính sách tiền tệ. Greenspan được chứng minh là đúng và được gọi là "maestro" bởi các phương tiện truyền thông.Bernanke, on the other hand, before going to Washas a governor of the Fed in 2002, and then as the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors in 2005, and finally back to the Fed as chairman in 2006, spent his entire career as a professor, first at Stanford University’s Graduate School of Business, and then in the Economics Department at Princeton University, where he became chairman. Because Bernanke did not make his name as an economic forecaster, the Board staff’s forecast now plays a much greater role in decimaking at the FOMC. In contrast to Greenspan, Bernanke’s background as a top academic economist has meant that he focuses on analytics in making his decisions. The result is a much greater use of model simulations in guiding policy discussions.The style of policy discussions has also changed with the new chairman. Greenspan exercised extensive control of the discussion at the FOMC. During the Greenspan era, the discussion was formal, with each participant speaking after being put on a list by the secof the FOMC. Under Bernanke, there is more give and take. Bernanke has encouraged so-called two- handed interventions. When a participant wants to go out of turn to ask a question or make a point about something that one of the other participants has just said, they raise two hands and are then acknowledged by chairman Bernanke and called on to speak.The order of the discussion at the FOMC has also changed in a very subtle, but extremely important way. Under Greenspan, after the other FOMC participants had expressed their views on the economy, Greenspan would present his views on the state of the economy and then would make a recommendation for what monetary policy action should be taken. This required that the other participants would then just agree or disagree with the chairman’s recommenin the following round of discussion about monetary policy. In contrast, Bernanke usually does not make a recommendation for monetary policy immediately after other FOMC participants have expressed their views on the economy. Instead, he summarizes what he has heard from the other particmakes some comments of his own, and then waits until after he has heard the views of all the other participants about monetary policy before making his policy recommendation. The process under Greenspan meant that the chairman was pretty much making the decision about policy, while Bernanke’s procedure is more democratic and enables participants to have greater influence over the chairman’s vote.Another big difference in style is in terms of transGreenspan was famous for being obscure, and even quipped at a Congressional hearing, “I guess I should warn you, if I turn out to be particularly clear, you’ve probably misunderstood what I’ve said.” Bernanke is known for being a particularly clear speaker. Although there were advances in