A Quote by Gerhard Schroder

Any debate among politicians about monetary policy is counterproductive. — © Gerhard Schroder
Any debate among politicians about monetary policy is counterproductive.
Earmarks are counterproductive tools for entrenched politicians to shut down debate and buy votes.
The major economic policy challenges facing the nation today - pick your favorites among the usual suspects of low public and household savings, concerns about educational quality and achievement, high and rising income inequality, the large imbalances between our social insurance commitments and resources - are not about monetary policy.
Of course I welcome all the normalization of monetary policy. I think monetary policy should be normal.
By the beginning of the 20th century, the debate about monetary policy and the nation's financial system had been going on for over a century. Increasingly, the shortcomings of the existing system were causing too much harm to ignore.
...the debate among the scientists if over. There is no more debate. We face a planetary emergency. There is no more scientific debate among serious people who've looked at the science...Well, I guess in some quarters, there's still a debate over whether the moon landing was staged in a movie lot in Arizona, or whether the Earth is flat instead of round.
I was distressed by the poor quality of the debate surrounding energy. I was also noticing so much green wash from politicians and big business. I was tired of the debate - the extremism, the nimbyism, the hair shirt. We need a constructive conversation about energy, not a Punch and Judy show. I just wanted to try to reboot the whole debate.
In 1977, when I started my first job at the Federal Reserve Board as a staff economist in the Division of International Finance, it was an article of faith in central banking that secrecy about monetary policy decisions was the best policy: Central banks, as a rule, did not discuss these decisions, let alone their future policy intentions.
Talk radio is an asset to our nation because it encourages strong and healthy debate about public policy, and there is no reason to affect that debate with government legislation.
There is no debate among any statured scientists of what is happening. The only debate is the rate at which it is happening.
Inflation is certainly low and stable and, measured in unemployment and labour-market slack, the economy has made a lot of progress. The pace of growth is disappointingly slow, mostly because productivity growth has been very slow, which is not really something amenable to monetary policy. It comes from changes in technology, changes in worker skills and a variety of other things, but not monetary policy, in particular.
We need to keep in mind the well-established fact that the full effects of monetary policy are felt only after long lags. This means that policy makers cannot wait until they have achieved their objectives to begin adjusting policy.
I've always believed in expansionary monetary policy and if necessary fiscal policy when the economy is depressed.
Fiscal policy, monetary policy, they need to work together to try and raise the level of growth.
Beyond monetary policy, fiscal policy has traditionally played an important role in dealing with severe economic downturns.
Honest difference of views and honest debate are not disunity. They are the vital process of policy among free men.
Monetary conditions exert an enormous influence on stock prices. Indeed, the monetary climate - primarily the trend in interest rates and Federal Reserve policy - is the dominant factor in determining the stock market's major direction.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!