For a while, both the old and the new goals seemed to be on the same level. To the central banks They were assigned the goal of contributing to the increase economic, apart from fulfilling its traditional mission of ensuring the price stability. It is debatable whether this additional responsibility was the result of a decision taken in an absolutely free manner, or whether it was influenced by considerations regarding the attitude of these banks towards the social environment in which they operate. On several occasions and places, the central bank was attributed to act as a technical enclave, insensitive to the needs of the population and more interested in calculating macroeconomic balances, thus being the target of political pressure. The same were the criticisms of the IMF and its sometimes draconian recommendations, so it is not surprising that that body also adopted, at least formally, a broader range of criteria for the purposes of its evaluations.
While the price stability was maintained, it was possible for the central banks focus your attention on the increase of the economies, and incidentally, where there were functional markets for company shares, also on the vigor and valuation of the stock market indices as a sign of the health of economic activities. Some years were characterized by a strange complacency, derived from the apparent fact that it was feasible to apply expansive monetary policies without affecting the stability. The reports and statements of the central banks they were more concerned about GDP and employment, and their mention of prices was more on the side of expressing concern that they were not going up or could go down.
Now that inflation is a problem, when having to choose between increase Y stabilityas the Fed Chairman put it, the central banks they should give preference to the latter, even if this affects the rate of expansion of the economy.
