The Fed Should Cut Interest Rates Soon

Narayana Kocherlakota thinks the Fed needs to respond to the coronavirus pandemic by reducing interest rates:

The outbreak has triggered a huge burst of risk aversion in financial markets. We should expect that risk aversion to manifest itself as a drag on household and business spending on travel and many other services. There is, of course, the possibility that this risk aversion continues to grow, creating its own negative dynamic: As consumers and businesses respond to alarming events, they pull back, causing growth to slow still more.

This cycle is why the economic threat from the virus is so unnerving. If the cycle develops, it would represent an adverse demand shock that will weigh on businesses’ willingness to hire and raise prices. The appropriate monetary policy response, of course, is to ease interest rates.

I think Kocherlakota is right—though perhaps not for the reason he outlines. At this point, we still don’t know how strongly the coronavirus outbreak will affect the US economy. It’s unclear if rate cuts are appropriate yet, and under normal circumstances I might favor waiting a bit longer before making a decision.

However, even before the outbreak there was a good case to be made for at least a modest reduction in interest rates. So even if the coronavirus outbreak turns out to have only a small effect on the economy, a rate cut is probably a good idea anyway. The added benefit of demonstrating that the Fed is willing to deal aggressively with a public health emergency is just gravy.

So yes: cut interest rates soon. The upside might be high and the downside is almost certainly low.

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate