Ben Bernanke Quotes

I have never believed that central banks should have rigid inflation targeting. That is not a good thing to stabilize. There is nothing in economic theory to back this.

Our purpose is to lean against the winds of deflation or inflation, whichever way they are blowing.

The only way to ensure that inflation expectations remain safely anchored near the FOMC's target is to keep inflation close to that target on a consistent basis.

Japan's experience suggests the importance of assessing the sustainability of price stability over a fairly long period, which many central banks have emphasized in recent years.

A crucial responsibility of any central bank is to control inflation, the average rate of increase in the prices of a broad group of goods and services.

Low and stable inflation in many countries is an important accomplishment that will continue to bring significant benefits.

The central focus of what we are doing at the Fed is to keep inflation from accelerating - and preferably decelerating.

Whip Inflation Now

The Federal Reserve has an official commitment to two different policies. One is to prevent inflation from getting too high. The second is to maintain high employment... the European Central Bank has only the first. It has no commitment to keep employment up.

No one thinks of controlling inflation of a continental-sized country by holding back municipal tariffs. Macroeconomic stability cannot be achieved through microeconomic intervention.

We pay some price when necessary to bring down inflation but that price is temporary and is not large relative to the permanent gain from reduced inflation.

Inflation is lower and more stable and the real business cycle fluctuations are more modest.

There are limits to monetary policy.

Domestic inflation reflects domestic monetary policy.

The country needed someone credible to fight inflation and Volker was the man for the job…. He understood that the government had to establish credibility in order to give policy makers flexibility when they needed it.

I have said repeatedly that the way to sustainable growth is to bring down inflation to much more reasonable levels.

The government will always tell you that it wants low inflation. The real issue is the horizon over which to bring inflation down.

During the Greenspan-Bernanke era, the Fed has embraced the view that stability in the economy and stability in prices are mutually consistent. As long as inflation remains at or below its target level, the Fed's modus operandi is to panic at the sight of real or perceived economic trouble and provide emergency relief.

I'm sure Mark Carney is a very clever young man, but I think that the government would be mad to move from inflation targeting to money GDP targeting.

When you have steady inflows and global central banks hell-bent on stoking credit activity and inflation, money will flow into the most attractive areas.

Monetary policy should remain data dependent, be well communicated, and ensure that inflation expectations remain anchored.

The best way that a central bank can support growth on a durable basis is to ensure inflation is low, stable - there is financial stability - and that is the role that the central bank plays.

Yes, 4% is the government-mandated target to the MPC. The plus/minus 2 percentage-point upper and lower bands are the tolerance levels specified by the government. If we breach those for three consecutive quarters, we need to inform the government of why that happened and what we propose to do to bring inflation within the two bands.

However, in spite of the general perception that monetary policy should be conducted so as to avert deflation, a central bank cannot lower interest rates below the zero lower bound.

Deflation isn't good, and inflation is easier to cure than deflation.