Current excess reserves could create a massive increase in the money supply if banks significantly increase their lending or investing.

The FOMC’s two-pronged approach involves a potential conflict: forward guidance assumes a high degree of substitutability across the maturity structure, while quantitative easing assumes a low degree.

On balance, the figure suggests that structural unemployment during economic downturns has increased since 1991.

Policymakers should not think of price stability and economic stability as competing objectives but as complements - the best way to achieve the latter is to be firmly committed to achieving the former.

It's hard to make a firm prediction as to when the Fed will raise interest rates.

Greater transparency is a means to better synchronize the public with policymakers and minimize the risks of undesirable economic outcomes.

Permanent increases in the monetary base foreshadow eventual increases in inflation that can increase, rather than reduce, unemployment.

The recent declines in tightening of lending standards suggest that business lending may be poised for a rebound.

As long as the strength of the recovery remains uncertain, there are few other investment opportunities, after adjusting for risk and taxes, with anticipated returns greater than the near-zero interest the Federal Reserve pays on deposits.

Why was the increase in the money stock so small when the increase in the monetary base was so large?