Persistent inflation is the result of lax monetary stance There are good reasons for assigning central banks a single main objective, namely to promote price stability. Inflation is primarily a monetary phenomenon. Short-lived inflation can have many causes, but persistent inflation is the consequence of a lax monetary stance. In the long run, monetary policy therefore primarily has an effect on prices. Under normal conditions it only has a temporary impact on economic growth and employment. Since central banks broadly speaking have only one instrument, i.e. interest rates, and can therefore only achieve a single long-term macroeconomic goal, it is natural to set price stability as the ultimate monetary goal. This is not to say that price stability is a more important goal than, say, full employment, but simply that monetary policy instruments are inherently better suited to impacting prices. It is pointless to set objectives for monetary policy which it cannot achieve. Through price stability, a forward-orientated monetary policy can contribute towards creating a stable economic environment on which the long-term growth potential of the economy, namely growth and prosperity, is based. The reason that central banks can have a widespread effect on interest rate formation in the markets through their interest rate decisions is that they have the exclusive right to issue money in the economy, i.e. base money. By controlling the price of base money, i.e.
The indicator, expressed as a ratio to the EU28 average (the UK still included), currently stands at close to 57 percent (after around 41 percent in 2007 and just over 25 percent in 2000). There is still very much room for progress. I say this having in mind the GDP per capita gap that is still substantial (and larger than those of most regional peers). In a scenario where Romania experiences constant 5 percent growth each year, while the EU grows on average only by 2 percent, it will take us 20 years to achieve full convergence. Under more pessimistic scenarios, I guess you don’t want to hear how long it would take to catch up. At this point, some of you may wonder why would anyone be pessimistic if local output currently grows at over 5 percent, at 6 percent in fact, in the second quarter of 2016, the highest rate in the EU? Well, as the effects of the recent fiscal stimulus wear off, GDP dynamics will come down, while additional stimulus, if implemented, will put even more at risk the already weaker fiscal position. Above all, growth needs to be achieved in a sustainable fashion, backed by productivity and while keeping fiscal and external deficits in check. The lessons taught by the most severe teacher of all, the economic crisis, should not be wasted… When I am talking about much room for progress, I am also referring to developments sometimes overlooked, especially if one has in mind only the aggregate figures.