The evidence is very strong that we do actually control it, because in many countries you can see in the historical data when central bank targeting was introduced that the inflation rate drops fairly rapidly into the target band.
It's not a perfect control system because the cost is "NAIRU": non accelerating rate of unemployment. That is, economic growth and wage growth are constrained to avoid a wage-price spiral. And sometimes you get a shock from outside the system.
Please do show this very strong evidence that the effect is any more than the supply chains sorting themselves out. Even some within the CBs are doubting the causality.
Japan had the lowest inflation of any major economy post COVID, and yet persisted with essentially a ZIRP. There's a good argument that in our high reserves world, interest is actually inflationary.
>There's a good argument that in our high reserves world, interest is actually inflationary.
How's that working out with Turkey?
It will probably work out just fine as they become a key player in European LNG.
Turkey couldn’t have serviced their debt with rising interest rates and continued government spending on expansion.
Being inflation averse makes sense when you can’t reasonably make use of funds. It’s not clear how much of that is actually related to the business cycle and how much is related to MMT, regardless of what adherents would have you believe.
UK historical investigation: https://www.elibrary.imf.org/display/book/9781557758897/ch07... - written in 2000, but you can see on this graph https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/gbr/uni... how flat it is from 1992 to 2020. That's a very good record for any piece of policy. Inflation control works for controlling business cycle inflation. However, it's not perfect and the COVID+war shock resulted in unavoidable inflation.
It's a ""plant"" in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_theory sense.
(my original comment: "you can see in the historical data when central bank targeting was introduced that the inflation rate drops fairly rapidly into the target band".
The US graph is similar https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/usa/uni... - although the adoption of inflation targeting wasn't fully formalized, it was definitely used in setting interest rates from the 90s.
Now show the UK plot for the 2010s. Also, show the one for Japan. It's easy to cherry pick data to show whatever you want. It doesn't constitute strong data for a casual and reliable link between interest rates and inflation.
Plot the days when your air conditioner is on with the temperature of your room. It will have many concrete examples and a long-term correlation showing that actually, the air conditioner is associated with the temperature going up.
All feedback/control systems are like that.
Your argument would have more weight if the inflation predictions were accurate. Here's the prediction report for the BoE in Aug 2014: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/inflation-...
(It's worth noting that even with the assumption of the models used being useful, the spread on those inflation rates is wild).
Here's what actually happened: https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/time...
It very rapidly hit the bottom end of the prediction range before jumping up again pretty high. All that time interest rates were held constant and low.
Given they claim feedback lags of two years or so, one wonders what the point of all this is... (one cannot run a control loop with control lags substantially longer than the time constant of the system; that's basically the recipe for an unstable control system, assuming of course the control system is doing anything).
There's an argument that it's inflation expectations that matter, but there are dissenters within the temple that disagree: https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/feds/files/2021062pap...
The second link https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/gbr/uni... is from 1960 to 2023.
This is the result of demographic crash and stagnation more than anything else...
You mean interest rates don't necessarily control inflation?
Japan is the worlds first steady state economy and got that way due to a sudden stagnation in trade and then demographic crash over a generation.
They've tried just about anything (except unrestrained foreign immigration or forced breeding) to jump start the economy but nothing has worked.
Inflation is effectively zero...
They haven't tried just about anything. They haven't tried printing enough money.
As a counterfactual: if you can print arbitrary amounts of money without raising inflation, you can just gradually buy up all the assets in the world with newly printed money. As far as I can tell, the Japanese central bank does not own the US stock market or all the gold in the world or all bitcoin etc, yet, so they haven't printed enough money.
Btw, what makes you think Japan is a 'steady state economy'? https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NYGDPPCAPKDJPN says their real GDP per capita grew fairly steadily over the years. It's just the price level that has been relatively steady, but if that's your yardstick, than just about any economy that used to be on a gold standard would also fit that idiosyncratic definition.
Exactly, but read many macro textbooks and they will tell you that interest rates control inflation. You've eloquently described a counter example and made the point I was trying to make.