speeches · January 22, 1959
Regional President Speech
Karl R. Bopp · President
FOR RELEASE:
2:00 p.m., Central Standard Time,
Friday, January 23, 1959.
THE ENVIRONMENT OF MONETARY POLICY
By Karl R. Bopp
President, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia
Before the
National Credit Conference of the American Bankers Association
Afternoon Session on Friday, January 23, 1959,
At the La Salle Hotel, Chicago, Illinois.
We are now standing at the top of another year. I should like to take
advantage of the perspective to look over our accomplishments and our short
comings and to indicate why it is imperative that we solve the problem of in
flation.
Before I talk about problems, let me say a word about accomplishments.
Overall, the American economy has acquitted itself well since the war - better
than many expected, with the depression still fresh in memory. Our gross national
product in real terms has increased about 40 per cent, or about 3 per cent a year.
Unemployment has been relatively low, averaging about 4 per cent.
We have thus far won at least three battles over mass unemployment and
depression. Our economy has shown a remarkable resiliency in adjusting to new
conditions. Last year was not typical. Unemployment was high and gross national
product fell slightly in real terms. Fortunately, conditions improved considerably
by the end of the year. Production bounced back after the middle of 1958; and
unemployment, though still high, began to decrease. Most observers expect 1959
to be better than 1958. There is every reason to expect that growth, vhich has
characterized the American economy, will be resumed.
Our chief shortcoming has been the erosion in the value of money. Our
price level is about 30 per cent higher than it was in 19A7. Some would have us
believe that economic growth and inflation go hand-in-hand. Others go further
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-2-
and maintain that inflation in moderate doses stimulates economic growth.
Experience does not give conclusive answers concerning the relation
ships between growth and inflation. We have had rapid growths (l) with in
flation, as in the decades before the First World War; (2) with price stability,
as during the 1920*s; and (3) with deflation, as during the quarter-oentury
following the Civil War, when gross national product doubled while the level
of prices fell substantially.
Experience does not warrant us in burdening ourselves with inflexible
strictures because of assumed relationships between growth and inflation. I
should like to indicate why there is good reason not to do so. Inflation pro
duces obvious injustices. There is reason to believe that especially where it
becomes a "way of life" inflation tends to undermine efficiency and economic
growth in real terms.
Although I shall concentrate today on efficiency and growth or the
production of wealth, I hope you will excuse brief quotations concerning the
effects of inflation on the distribution of wealth.
The "most striking consequence" of inflation "is its injustice to
those who in good faith have committed their savings to titles to money rather
than to things." "If we are to continue to draw the voluntary savings of the
community into 'investments,1 we must make it a prime object of deliberate
State policy that the standard of value, in terms of which they are expressed,
should be kept stable . . . "
If you are interested in this aspect of the problem, I suggest that
you read MONETARY REFORM, written thirty-five years ago by J. M. Keynes, from
which I have extracted these quotations.
My primary concern today is in the effects of inflation on economic
efficiency and growth. You might be interested, incidentally, in Keynes* view on
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-3-
this aspect of inflation. He wrote: "Inflation has not only diminished the
capacity of the investing class to save but has destroyed the atmosphere of
confidence which is a condition of the willingness to save. Yet a growing
population requires for the maintenance of the same standard of life, a propor
tionate growth of capital."
The kind of economic system that we have will function most efficiently
when the value of money remains constant. Prices are of strategic importance in
our free market economy. They allocate our resources into those employments in
which they can most profitably be used. When competition is keen, resources
are allocated into those employments in which our consumers want them to be used.
There are imperfections and frictions, of course. Things do not work so smoothly
or so quickly as Adam Smith and some others believed. Nevertheless, as I see it,
this is basically the way in which our economy operates; the consumer dictates,
the quest for profit motivates, end the price system allocates.
Countless decisions to earn and spend, to borrow and lend are channelled
through the cold exacting calculus of a free market to allocate our resources.
The standard unit of these calculations, of course, is the dollar. Balance sheet
and income statements are written in dollar terms. They can reflect change
accurately only if the dollar itself - the unit of measurement - remains reasonably
constant•
An outstanding American economist once gave an excellent illustration of
how inflation leads to faulty decisions and obscures inefficiencies. In the 1920's
he bought a shirt from a woman shopkeeper on the outskirts of Berlin. The woman,
who wished to prove she was not a profiteer, told him: "I am charging you only as
much as it will cost me to replace the shirt. I have, of course, made my usual
profit on that shirt, which I bought for less."
Let us analyze some economic implications of this transaction. In one
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-4-
accepted accounting sense, the woman had made a profit. Her selling price was
greater than her bookkeeping cost. But it is clear that if she used this "profit"
to meet her living expenses, she would not be able to replace her inventory. In
stead of living off income she would be living off her inventory. In real terms
she had no income even though in money terms she had a profit.
If this were the only implication, one might feel sorry for the poor
woman end pass on. I have introduced the transaction, however, to illustrate
some principles. In an intricately balanced market system, such decisions have
wider effects.
Competitors, even those who are not fooled by the money illusion, will
have to meet her price or lose business. They may be more efficient, but they
cannot compete, except at a loss.
Inflation tends to obscure such inefficiencies. It can rescue for a
time some businesses which otherwise would be forced to correct their errors or
fail. On the other hand, efficient businessmen may be put in jeopardy because they
face competition that does not permit them to raise prices while their suppliers
may not face such competition. Or businessmen who are otherwise efficient may find
themselves in trouble simply because they do not understand the destructive impact
that inflation can have on capital.
If we accept inflation which thus frustrates efficiency and seems to
reward illusion, I doubt that our economy can grow up to its potential. You are
all familiar with illusory profits that really come from capital as a result of
understating depreciation because of higher replacement costs.
Accountants can, of couise, adjust their methods crudely to allow for
inflation. Accelerating depreciation on fixed assets, valuing inventories on the
basis of last-in, first-out, and adjusting for changes in the price level are il
lustrations. In the nature of thd case, however, the adjustments cannot be com-
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-5-
plete. One reason is that not all of them are allowable deductions from income
in the computation of taxes. Even if most businesses could and did take advan
tage of all possible accounting adjustments, I wonder if this would not, in and
of itself, aggravate the inflationary problems, I suspect that prices would
tend to move up more uniformly and perhaps more quickly.
It should also be recognized that all those efforts are non-productive.
They would be included in gross national product but they contribute nothing that
society would not have had without them, had the price level remained stable. At
best, all these efforts would achieve indirectly and crudely what could be
achieved directly with a stable monetary unit.
I should like next to make a few comments on the view that inflation is
destructive only when it is rapid and that creeping inflation, of say 2 per cent
or 3 per cent a year, brings net benefits. My first comment concerns the power
of compound interest in the long run even though the rate is low. A price level
that rises at 2 l/2 per cent a year compounded will double in about twenty-nine
years.
Do not underestimate the effects of such creeping inflation on large
groups of people. Recently a Federal Advisory Council, composed of representa
tives of industry, labor and the public, issued a report on the Social Security
system. The Council unanimously reported that the method of financing Old Age
and Survivors* insurance is sound. But the Council issued a warning:
n. . . the trusteeship is so large, and the number of
people involved so great that the defeat of benefi
ciaries* expectations through inflation would gravely
imperil the stability of our social, political, and
economic institutions
Some advocates of creeping inflation recognize such hardships and recom
mend that the sufferers be compensated - but compensated by whom? Many persons
have relatively fixed income contracts other than their benefits from Social Se
curity.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-6-
But I wonder if we could really hold inflation to 2 l/2 per cent a
year, if the idea that inflation had become a way of life were held universally.
There are forces at work in our economy that tend to turn a creeping inflation
into a leaping inflation.
Perhaps the most powerful force spurring an inflation into a walk, a
trot, and a gallop is man*3 perverse ability to turn his fears into reality.
Once people begin to expect a rising price level they do things that tend to
bring it about.
If they are afraid that prices will rise next month, they have a real
incentive to make next month*s purchases this month. They have an incentive to
trade money for goods, real estate, stock, and anything else they think will
rise in value. When many people think and act this way, prices are certain to
rise - not next month, but this month, and by more than originally expected.
Inflation, whether gradual or galloping, is not a uniform process. As
we all know, some prices and incomes increase faster than others. Some do not
increase at all. Schemes to protect the purchasing power of victim groups -
workers, public utility stockholders, government bondholders, and others - have
been adopted or proposed here and in foreign countries.
By and large, I think cost-of-living and other purchasing power adjust
ments contribute to inflationary pressures by increasing costs. But, as an ethi
cal matter, I think the special arguments made for special groups are all equally
good. All groups deserve protection. Wouldn't we save a good deal of economic
and political conflict, though, by preventing inflation in the first place?
I am not one of those who believe that inflation is inevitable. It
is a human phenomenon and people can do something about it. Once it is under
stood, they will do something about it. For my own part, I do not find the
reasoning of those who say inflation is inevitable any more convincing than the
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-7-
reasoning of those who in the 1930' a concluded that v/e were a mature economy-
incapable of full use of our resources. The words inevitable and perpetual
are too powerful to describe future human behavior.
Inflation is a result of varied and complex forces and it must be
attacked on a wide front. Our output of goods and services is moving to new
record levels. Certainly under these circumstances, as Chairman Martin said
recently, here in Chicago: "We must face up to the reality of either raising
taxes or revising our tax structure to produce more revenue or reducing the
priorities of some other programs until we can get things in better balance."
Just a year ago, Carl E. Allen, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of
Chicago, indicated forcefully what is needed in the private sector of the economy.
He said: "It is human nature, when we overreach ourselves and have no one to blame
for our excesses other than ourselves, to seek out a culprit on the one hand and a
savior on the other. I believe that elements in labor are doing just that today.
They turn to industry as the culprit and to the Government as their savior. And
there are elements in industry which have priced themselves out of a market. They
have themselves to blame for their excesses, so they look to labor as the culprit
and to Government as their savior. The culprits are different, but unfortunately
the hoped-for saviors are the same - the Government. . . . We can hope that manage
ment and labor in the months ahead will recognize that lasting rewards cannot come
from constantly increasing prices, but rather that their mutual interests and the
well-being of the country both require price stability."
We need also to understand the role of flexible monetary policy. We
have had such a policy for eight years, easing credit when declines have been
under way, as in 1957-1958, and moving away from ease as business recovers.
Monetary restraint is never popular. To be effective some borrowing and spend
ing must be restrained. It may be. as some have urged, that certain areas of
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-8-
the economy should be sheltered somewhat from the impacts of credit restraint.
But I should like to emphasize that expansion of the sheltered areas necessarily
reduces the unsheltered areas and thus makes the impact on them greater. This
in turn can create new "hardships," leading to attempts to extend the sheltered
areas. Special dispensations for special groups tend to weaken general credit
restraints. If special dispensations become widespread, general credit restraint
becomes meaningless.
I have said I do not believe that inflation is inevitable. If we under
stand its erosive effects and how it operates,we will as a people attack it on the
wide front tjiat is necessary. We can achieve the goal on which we all agree -
stable economic growth in real terms.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Cite this document
APA
Karl R. Bopp (1959, January 22). Regional President Speech. Speeches, Federal Reserve. https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/regional_speeche_19590123_karl_r_bopp
BibTeX
@misc{wtfs_regional_speeche_19590123_karl_r_bopp,
author = {Karl R. Bopp},
title = {Regional President Speech},
year = {1959},
month = {Jan},
howpublished = {Speeches, Federal Reserve},
url = {https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/regional_speeche_19590123_karl_r_bopp},
note = {Retrieved via When the Fed Speaks corpus}
}