Economic Permazero - is it a Feasible Monetary Policy?

Hello Friends. I am writing an Economics Book: "50 Trillion Dollar Economy: India's Path to Economic Greatness by 2050"

I wanted to inquire of others your thoughts on "Neo-Fisherian" Economics, Economic Permazero - keeping Central Banking Interest Rates permanently low or zero - and similar issues. Do you think it is a Feasible Monetary Policy to keep rates at or near 0? The typical Keynesian objection is that this will lead to "high inflation", but the Fisher Equation - for which there is Great Empirical Support - shows otherwise. Other Empirical Evidence I discuss in my Book (below) also shows the same. Thoughts on this issue, Dear Friends? God Bless.

"
Footnotes:

[1]



https://www.stlouisfed.org/publicat...obvious-solution-to-the-low-inflation-problem

The Evidence Is Devastating:
Bank of Japan (21 years at zero rates):


  • Nominal rate: ~0%
  • Inflation: ~0% (wanted 2%, couldn't get it)
  • Stuck in low-inflation trap (can be solved by printing money!)
European Central Bank:

  • Rate: -0.34%
  • Inflation: -0.22% (DEFLATION!)
Swedish Riksbank:

  • Rate: -0.50%
  • Inflation: 0.79%
Pattern: The lower the rates, the LOWER the inflation (not higher!)

This vindicates the Neo-Fisherian thought, and rebuts Keynesianism.

When central bankers say:

"Negative rates are unconventional but necessary to boost inflation!"

We respond:

"Really? ECB tried for 8 years. Switzerland for 7. Sweden for 5. Denmark for 10. Japan for 8.

Average inflation across all of them: <1% (target was 2%).

At what point do we admit the theory is wrong and Neo-Fisherians are right?

Low rates cause low inflation. The Fisher equation isn't a suggestion—it's an identity."

*Chapter 2 Begins* ...
 
Top