Skip to content

Milton Friedman on Monetary policy and the Federal Reserve

The Federal Reserve System has long displayed a propensity to swing erratically from one extreme to the other, from excessively rapid to excessively slow monetary growth. The propensity has seldom been more dramatically evident than in recent months, which have seen the sharpest swings in monetary growth in decades.
Improving Monetary Policy
Column, 1980, Newsweek, July 28, 1980; reprinted in the Congressional Record, Extensions of Remarks, July 28, 1980, p. 20026, introduced by Representative Robert Dornan of California, who gives the column as appearing in the Newsweek issue “dated July 28, 1980”, Congressional Record, July 28, 1980, p. 20026
Checked against the sourceRead the originalCite this passage

Where this comes from

Checked against the sourceThe wording was checked against the work itself.

Topics

He also said

  1. There is one and only one basic cure for inflation: slowing monetary growth. But that cure is easier to state than to put into effect: witness our repeated abandonment of the cure.
    Why Inflation Persists
    Column, 1977, Newsweek (October 3, 1977); reprinted in full in the Congressional Record, Extensions of Remarks, September 29, 1977, p. 31684, introduced by Representative Parren J. Mitchell of Maryland, who gives it as appearing “in the October 3, 1977, issue of Newsweek”, Congressional Record, September 29, 1977, p. 31684
    Checked against the sourceRead the original
  2. My own prescription is still that the monetary authority go all the way in avoiding such swings by adopting publicly the policy of achieving a steady rate of growth in a specified monetary total. The precise rate of growth, like the precise monetary total, is less important than the adoption of some stated and known rate.
    The Role of Monetary Policy
    Journal article, 1968, American Economic Review 58, no. 1 (March 1968), pp. 1–17; reprinted in the House Banking and Currency Committee’s 1968 Compendium on Monetary Policy Guidelines and Federal Reserve Structure, pp. 214–224, p. 223 of the 1968 House reprint
    Checked against the sourceRead the original
  3. Over short periods, the relation between growth in money and growth in nominal income is often hard to see, partly because the relation is less close for short than for long periods, but mostly because it takes time for changes in monetary growth to affect income. And how long a time is itself variable. Today's income growth is not closely related to today's monetary growth; it depends on what has been happening to money in the past. What happens to money today affects what is going to happen to income in the future
    Money Mischief
    Book, 1992, Ch. 2 The Mystery of Money
    Not yet checked

Think this quote is wrong, misattributed, or missing context?Report it and it gets fixed, not argued with.