Central banks face pressure to absorb oil shortages and other shocks, but tightening money risks compounding the damage.
Every time conflict erupts in the Middle East and oil prices jump, the same anxiety follows: will central banks respond with tighter money?
It’s an understandable fear. Households dislike inflation, and policymakers are tasked with maintaining price stability. But when inflation is driven by geopolitical crises — such as war in Iran or disruptions to global shipping lanes — the source is not excessive demand. It is a supply shock. And monetary policy is impotent before such disruptions.
When oil supply tightens or transport costs surge, the economy becomes poorer. Energy becomes more expensive to extract and move. No interest rate decision in Washington, Frankfurt, or London can produce more oil from the Persian Gulf or reopen a blocked trade route.
In these moments, central banks face a difficult but crucial choice. They can tighten monetary policy in an attempt to suppress inflation by weakening demand, slowing hiring, curbing investment, and cooling total dollar spending. Or they can allow a temporary period of elevated prices to absorb part of the shock while keeping the broader economy intact.
...read more at thedailyeconomy.org
pull down to refresh
related posts
Central Banks start wars, IMO