logo
Trump is about to test whether the Fed learned its inflation lesson

Trump is about to test whether the Fed learned its inflation lesson

CNN31-03-2025

The Federal Reserve admits it badly misjudged the beginning of the inflation crisis, but officials hope they won't make the same mistake again. President Donald Trump's tariffs are about to determine whether America's central bank is up for the challenge.
In 2021, as the US economy recovered from the pandemic, consumer prices began to creep higher. Fed officials said then that rising inflation would only be 'transitory.'
Notoriously, that proved to not be the case, and, by the spring of 2022, the Fed was in the throes of its most aggressive rate-hiking campaign since the 1980s.
Inflation has improved considerably since then, but the Fed still gets flak for being so wrong in 2021.
Now the Fed is working on a new 'policy framework,' including lessons from its mistaken bet that high inflation would be just a blip. And while that framework needs to work for future crises, it's especially urgent at the moment — given the chaos and confusion already spurred this year by President Donald Trump's sweeping economic agenda, centered on tariffs, tax cuts and deregulation.
'I think it's a fair criticism that we could have acted earlier,' James Bullard, who served as president of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis from 2008 to 2023, told CNN in an interview late last year. 'But you're never going to be totally certain in macroeconomics about what's going to happen next and this is the world we've always lived in.'
Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, a reliable critic of the Fed, was blunter during Chair Jerome Powell's February semiannual update on monetary policy: 'It's now clear that the Fed acted too late and let inflation get too high, and then responded by keeping rates too high for too long.'
The pandemic triggered a sharp, two-month recession, with double-digit unemployment. In the previous downturn, during the 2007-2009 Great Recession, the labor market was slow to recover.
The Covid recession, hitting before prices started to jump, kept the Fed focused on promoting job growth, rather than wrangling inflation. After all, runaway prices hadn't been a problem in decades.
'The 2020 framework put more emphasis on full employment,' said Laurence Ball, an economics professor at Johns Hopkins University who researches monetary policy.
But back then, economists were convinced that inflation would quickly fall down to earth.
'The good ship Transitory was a crowded one,' Powell said last year in his keynote speech at the Kansas City Fed's Jackson Hole Economic Symposium.
Kristin Forbes, an economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and former member of the White House's Council of Economic Advisers, said during a panel discussion earlier this month that it didn't matter the US central bank was late because it picked up ground by raising rates aggressively — all without sacrificing too much of the economy's health.
'Central banks were slow to tighten, but they made up for that,' she said.
Every five years, the Fed revises a two-page document detailing the Fed's strategy and long-term macroeconomic goals. That's happening now, with officials expected to finish by this summer. But Trump has already changed the world's biggest economy in big ways, just in two months in office. And there are more changes on the way.
On Wednesday, Trump is set to announce sweeping tariffs that will match those foreign countries impose on the United States, continuing an ongoing tariff spree that has already doubled duties on China to 20% and imposed new ones on metals and autos. Trump's tariffs are widely expected to jack up prices and weaken growth, potentially leading the US economy toward 'stagflation,' a toxic duo of tepid or negative growth and accelerating inflation.
'It's a difficult moment right now because there are risks on both sides, with some measures indicating the risk of a recession while others suggest a resurgence of inflation,' said Emi Nakamura, an economics professor at the University of California, Berkeley. 'But obviously, you don't want to be fighting the last war. You want to recognize that there are some special features in each economic cycle.'
'So, given that we've had this recent experience with inflation, they have to be thinking about a framework in a context where there's now a real concern that longer-term inflation expectations could get destabilized,' Nakamura added. One closely watched survey by the University of Michigan, out Friday, showed that inflation expectations in the next 5 to 10 years surged this month to the highest level since February 1993.
Forbes, the MIT professor, suggested loosening the Fed's 2% inflation target to a band, such as 1.5%-2.5%. Powell has said the 2% target is not going away but hasn't weighed in on a range instead.
The Fed's framework review is also looking at the central bank's 'policy communications tools,' according to the Fed, which was precisely the central bank's biggest mistake, according to Laurence Meyer, a former Fed governor who served from 1996 to 2002.
'Transitory was a terrible word to use because that means fleeting, so markets lost some confidence in their communication,' he told CNN. 'Temporary means not permanent, and that's what they should have said'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

How major US stock indexes fared Wednesday, 6/11/2025
How major US stock indexes fared Wednesday, 6/11/2025

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

How major US stock indexes fared Wednesday, 6/11/2025

Wall Street's rally stalled after stocks climbed back within 2% of their all-time high. The S&P 500 slipped 0.3% Wednesday, marking its first drop in four days. The Dow Jones Industrial Average ended little changed, and the Nasdaq composite lost 0.5%. The action was stronger in the bond market, where Treasury yields eased after a report showed inflation ticked up by less last month than economists expected. That raised expectations for the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates later this year. Markets didn't react much to the conclusion of two days of trade talks between the U.S. and China. On Wednesday: The S&P 500 fell 16.57 points, or 0.3%, to 6,022.24. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 1.10 points, or less than 0.1%, to 42,865.77. The Nasdaq composite fell 99.11 points, or 0.5%, to 19,615.88. The Russell 2000 index of smaller companies fell 8.17 points, or 0.4%, to 2,148.23. For the week: The S&P 500 is up 21.88 points, or 0.4%. The Dow is up 102.90 points, or 0.2%. The Nasdaq is up 85.92 points, or 0.4%. The Russell 2000 is up 15.99 points, or 0.7%. For the year: The S&P 500 is up 140.61 points, or 2.4%. The Dow is up 321.55 points, or 0.8%. The Nasdaq is up 305.08 points, or 1.6%. The Russell 2000 is down 81.92 points, or 3.7%. Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data

GOP Senator Says Trump's Military Parade Reminds Him Of North Korea
GOP Senator Says Trump's Military Parade Reminds Him Of North Korea

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

GOP Senator Says Trump's Military Parade Reminds Him Of North Korea

WASHINGTON ― President Donald Trump's upcoming military parade featuring dozens of tanks and other armed vehicles in the nation's capital this week isn't sitting well with some members of his party on Capitol Hill. Asked about the June 14 event, which will cost taxpayers up to $45 million and will commemorate the Army's 250th anniversary, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) expressed concerns about its cost and the imagery typically associated with authoritarian regimes in the former Soviet Union and North Korea. 'I love parades but I'm not really excited about $40 million for a parade,' Paul told HuffPost. 'I don't really think the symbolism of tanks and missiles is really what we're all about.' 'If you ask me about a military parade, all the images that come to mind, the first images, are of the Soviet Union and North Korea,' he added. Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) also said he would spend the money on other things. 'The United States of America is the most powerful country in all of human history,' Kennedy told Fox News. 'We're a lion, and a lion doesn't have to tell you it's a lion. Everybody else in the jungle knows, and we're a lion. I would save the money, but if the president wants to have a parade, he's the President, and I'm not.' The Saturday parade — which happens to fall on the president's birthday ― will feature a massive amount of military equipment and thousands of soldiers in Washington, D.C. It comes amid nationwide protests against Trump's immigration crackdowns and his decision to deploy military troops to help quell unrest in Los Angeles. Trump on Tuesday threatened anyone planning to protest the parade, even though U.S. citizens have a constitutional right to peacefully assemble. 'If there's any protest that wants to come out, they will be met with very big force, by the way. And for those people that want to protest, they're gonna be met with very big force,' the president said from the Oval Office. Millions of people are expected to take part in 'No Kings' protests in more than 1,500 cities across the country on Saturday, organizers of the demonstrations have said. The effort is focused on pushing back against Trump's attacks on the rule of law. However, no 'No Kings' protests are planned for Washington, D.C., where the parade is being held. 'In America, we don't do kings,' reads a website for the demonstrations. 'They've defied our courts, deported Americans, disappeared people off the streets, attacked our civil rights, and slashed our services. The corruption has gone too. far.'

History Shows the Danger of Trump's Health Policies
History Shows the Danger of Trump's Health Policies

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

History Shows the Danger of Trump's Health Policies

U.S. President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. attend an event in the East Room of the White House on May 22, 2025 in Washington, DC. Credit - Chip Somodevilla—Getty Images On May 11, 2023, President Joseph Biden ended the COVID-19 public health emergency, calling an finish to the pandemic. By the end of 2023, COVID-19 claimed the lives of over 20 million people around the world. But through international cooperation and evidence-based science, vaccines were developed and the world moved on. Indeed, perhaps the biggest success of the period was the quick production of a COVID-19 vaccine. The research behind the mRNA vaccine had been ongoing since the 1970s, but the emergency of the pandemic and international sharing of knowledge helped bring the vaccine to fruition. Today, the COVID-19 vaccine has been credited with saving 2.4 million lives around the world. But now, the U.S. is choosing competition over cooperation. With President Donald Trump's day one executive order to leave the World Health Organization (WHO)—blaming their COVID-19 response—and the shuttering of USAID, the country is taking steps towards further dividing health efforts across the globe. Here in the U.S., a sudden end to $11.4 billion of covid-related grants is stifling national pandemic preparedness efforts on the local and state levels. And most recently, Health and Human Services Secretary RFK Jr. purged experts from the CDC Advisory Committee, putting lives at risk. Historical lessons demonstrate the need for global health infrastructure that works together, shares knowledge, and remembers that pathogens do not stop at borders. White House's Pandemic Office, Busy With Bird Flu, May Shrink Under Trump One of the greatest global health achievements of all time—smallpox eradication—provides a perfect example of what can be done with independent scientific research and international cooperation. During the Cold War between the U.S. and USSR, decades of tension brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. Yet, incredibly, the nations managed to find common ground to support the efforts of smallpox eradication. Indeed, they understood the strategic benefits that came from letting public health practitioners and scientists work outside of political divides. The WHO was founded after World War II in 1948. Its formation marked a move from international health, that focused on nations, to global health, that would serve humanity first. The WHO's first eradication effort was the failed, U.S.-backed, Malaria Eradication Program from 1955 to 1969. The Smallpox Eradication Program, with intensive efforts beginning in 1967, provided a chance for redemption for the U.S. and WHO. For the United States, investing in disease eradication and poverty helped to mitigate growing backlash against the Vietnam War. In June of 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson stated, 'I propose to dedicate this year to finding new techniques for making man's knowledge serve man's welfare.' He called for 1965—the same year he ordered ground troops to Vietnam to stop the spread of communism —to be a year of international cooperation that could bypass the politics of the Cold War. Previously, the USSR did not participate in the U.S. and WHO's first, failed global eradication plan for malaria. But upon rejoining the WHO in 1956, it was the Soviets who made the first call and investment into global eradication of smallpox in 1958. The WHO functioning as a mediator was crucial to allowing the USSR and the U.S. to work together. It allowed both nations to avoid giving credit to each other; rather success went to science itself. President Johnson called this 'a turning point' away from 'man against man' towards 'man against nature.' The limited role of politicians in the program proved to be key to its success. Scientists made decisions and worked together—no matter what country they came from—by focusing on disease and vaccination, not international tensions. The Soviet-initiated program was lead by Donald A. Henderson, a U.S. epidemiologist, who worked alongside the Russians until the last case of smallpox occurred in Somalia on October 26, 1977. During the 20th century, smallpox was responsible for an estimated 300 to 500 million deaths. Smallpox was officially declared eradicated by the WHO in October 1980, and is today still the only human disease to achieve this distinction. Less than a year after the declaration of smallpox eradication, the emergence of another pandemic, the HIV/AIDS crisis, reinforced the importance of science-first cooperation over politically-driven decision making. In June 1981, the first cases of a new unknown disease were reported in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. In short order, gay men were stigmatized and blamed in what would become one of the biggest public health disasters of all time. It took years of grassroots science-based activism to move beyond HIV/AIDS victim-blaming and find medical solutions. The Poster Child for AIDS Obscured as Much About the Crisis as He Revealed Too often, governments across the globe placed blame on the gay community for their 'sins' and did not provide needed support, leaving the sick to suffer and die. The pharmaceutical companies profited from the limited medications they had available and did not pursue sufficient development. The FDA process for new drugs was scheduled to take nine years, at a time when life expectancy after receiving an HIV/AIDS diagnosis was one year. These issues sparked activism, spawning the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP) in 1987. ACT UP organizers took science into their own hands and began educating themselves. Members began reading scientific journals religiously, learning the chemistry and epidemiology of drug manufacturing and clinical trials. Members learned how to translate these dense scientific messages to educate the community members on what was—and what was not—being done to help. Because of this work, the FDA changed policies to allow for new treatments to be tested at accelerated rates in times of emergency. ACT UP was able to shift the cultural blame showing that the issue was a result of politics getting in the way of scientific advancements. By 1990, ACT UP influenced the largest federal HIV program to pass Congress, the Ryan White CARE Act. This program was a vital precursor to the 2003 PEPFAR (The U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) global initiative. Both of these histories offer a powerful lesson: global health is national health, and national health is local health. With the recent funding cuts from the U.S. government, the future of global health is going in an unknown direction. And yet, the occurrence of pandemics is expected to increase in frequency due to climate change, mass migration, urbanization, and ecosystem destruction. It has been estimated that there is about a 25% chance we will have another COVID-sized pandemic within the next 10 years. No matter how secure the world makes borders, history shows that it can not protect us from disease if we do not have a strong, interconnected public health infrastructure. Luke Jorgensen is a Master of Public Health student at Purdue University where his epidemiology research examines human migration and infectious disease. Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Learn more about Made by History at TIME here. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors. Write to Made by History at madebyhistory@

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store