Inertial Taylor Rules: The Benefit of Signaling Future Policy
16 Pages Posted: 28 Oct 2007
Date Written: April 2007
Abstract
We trace the consequences of an energy shock on the economy under two different monetary policy rules: a standard Taylor rule where the Fed responds to inflation and the output gap; and a Taylor rule with inertia where the Fed moves slowly to the rate predicted by the standard rule. We show that with both sticky wages and sticky prices, the outcome of an inertial Taylor rule is superior to that of the standard rule, in the sense that inflation is lower and output is higher following an adverse energy shock. However, if prices alone are sticky, things are less clear and the standard rule delivers substantially less inflation than the inertial rule in the short run.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
Recommended Papers
-
Imperfect Competition and the Effects of Energy Price Increases on Economic Activity
-
Not All Oil Price Shocks are Alike: Disentangling Demand and Supply Shocks in the Crude Oil Market
By Lutz Kilian
-
Do We Really Know that Oil Caused the Great Stagflation? A Monetary Alternative
By Robert Barsky and Lutz Kilian
-
Oil and the Macroeconomy Since the 1970s
By Robert Barsky and Lutz Kilian
-
Oil and the Macroeconomy Since the 1970s
By Robert Barsky and Lutz Kilian
-
The Macroeconomic Effects of Oil Price Shocks: Why are the 2000s so Different from the 1970s?
By Olivier J. Blanchard and Jordi Galí
-
The Macroeconomic Effects of Oil Shocks: Why are the 2000s so Different from the 1970s?
By Olivier J. Blanchard and Jordi Galí
-
The Macroeconomic Effects of Oil Shocks: Why are the 2000s so Different from the 1970s?
By Olivier J. Blanchard and Jordi Galí
-
Exogenous Oil Supply Shocks: How Big are They and How Much Do They Matter for the Us Economy?
By Lutz Kilian