Turizm va mehmonxona xo

Benefits of Central Bank Independence


Monetary policy (mainly interest rates) used to be managed by the government. However, in recent years, there has been a trend to give monetary policy to independent Central Banks. The idea is that Central Banks will be more independent of political considerations and willing to keep inflation low – even if there are political costs to raising interest rates. The Central Bank officials are appointed by the government and are given broad guidelines (e.g. target low inflation). Political business cycle . The feeling was that when the government was responsible for setting interest rates, there was a political business cycle. This means that the incumbent government sought to influence the economic cycle to coincide with elections. Shortly before an election, there is a temptation to reduce interest rates. This helps to boost disposable income, increase economic growth and reduce unemployment. A strong economy makes it easier for the governing party to gain re-election. However, this loosening of monetary policy can cause the economy to grow faster than the long-run trend rate leading to inflationary pressures. Once the election is won, the government can increase interest rates to reduce inflation. If it causes a recession, there is still time for the economy to recover before the next election. Lawson boom and failure of monetary policy
This graph shows two booms – The Barber boom of 1973 and the “Lawson Boom” of the late 1980s. In the late 1980s, the government pursued expansionary fiscal and monetary policy, causing economic growth to exceed the UK’s long-run trend rate of 2.5%. The government felt their supply-side policies had created a supply side miracle. But, the above trend growth caused inflation and the government had to increase interest rates to reduce inflation. It caused a classic boom and bust.
Markaziy bank mustaqilligining afzalliklari


Pul-kredit siyosati (asosan foiz stavkalari) davlat tomonidan boshqarilardi. Biroq keyingi yillarda pul-kredit siyosatini mustaqil Markaziy banklarga berish tendentsiyasi kuzatilmoqda. G'oya shundan iboratki, Markaziy banklar siyosiy nuqtai nazardan mustaqil bo'ladi va foiz stavkalarini oshirish uchun siyosiy xarajatlar bo'lsa ham, inflyatsiyani past darajada ushlab turishga tayyor bo'ladi. Markaziy bank mansabdor shaxslari hukumat tomonidan tayinlanadi va ularga keng ko'rsatmalar beriladi (masalan, maqsadli past inflyatsiya). Siyosiy biznes sikli. Hukumat foiz stavkalarini belgilash uchun mas'ul bo'lganida, siyosiy biznes aylanishi bor edi. Demak, amaldagi hukumat saylovlarga to‘g‘ri kelishi uchun iqtisodiy tsiklga ta’sir o‘tkazishga harakat qilgan. Saylovdan biroz oldin foiz stavkalarini pasaytirish vasvasasi bor. Bu ixtiyoriy daromadni oshirishga, iqtisodiy o'sishni oshirishga va ishsizlikni kamaytirishga yordam beradi. Kuchli iqtisodiyot hukmron partiyaning qayta saylanishini osonlashtiradi. Biroq, pul-kredit siyosatining bu bo'shashishi iqtisodiyotning inflyatsiya bosimiga olib keladigan uzoq muddatli tendentsiya darajasidan tezroq o'sishiga olib kelishi mumkin. Saylovda g'alaba qozonganidan keyin hukumat inflyatsiyani kamaytirish uchun foiz stavkalarini oshirishi mumkin. Agar bu retsessiyaga olib keladigan bo'lsa, keyingi saylovlarga qadar iqtisodiyotning tiklanishi uchun hali vaqt bor. Lawson bumi va pul-kredit siyosatining muvaffaqiyatsizligi.

Ushbu grafikda ikkita bum ko'rsatilgan - 1973 yildagi Sartaroshlik va 1980-yillarning oxiridagi "Louson bumi". 1980-yillarning oxirida hukumat kengayuvchi fiskal va pul-kredit siyosatini olib bordi, bu esa iqtisodiy o'sish sur'atlarini Buyuk Britaniyaning uzoq muddatli tendentsiya darajasidan 2,5% dan oshishiga olib keldi. Hukumat ularning ta'minot siyosati ta'minot tomoni mo''jizasini yaratganini his qildi. Biroq, yuqoridagi tendentsiyaning o'sishi inflyatsiyani keltirib chiqardi va hukumat inflyatsiyani pasaytirish uchun foiz stavkalarini oshirishga majbur bo'ldi. Bu klassik bum va bustga sabab bo'ldi.