Milton Friedman was wrong. Inflation is always and everywhere a social phen

游客2024-05-08  19

问题      Milton Friedman was wrong. Inflation is always and everywhere a social phenomenon, not a monetary one. At least, that is how Robert Samuelson sees it. The Great Inflation and Its Aftermath dwells little on the economics of inflation; the main text does not mention the Federal Reserve until page 31. Instead, it examines the intellectual and political currents that let inflation rise from 1% in the early 1960s to nearly 15% in 1980 and then brought it down again.
     This is a laudable(值得称赞的) enterprise. Historians have devoted lots of scholarship to the Vietnam War and the civil-rights movement but almost nothing to the parallel rise in inflation, whose impact on society has been arguably great.
    Mr. Samuelson, an economics columnist for the Washington Post and Newsweek, graphically recounts the futile efforts of various presidents to contain inflation, and the toll they exacted. Inflation began, Mr. Samuelson writes, because the followers of John Maynard Keynes who dominated economics after the Second World War convinced John Kennedy that reducing unemployment would cause only a small rise in inflation. But as inflation increased, it became politically impossible to bring it down. In 1968 Richard Nixon asked Herbert Stein, a nominee for Iris Council of Economic Advisers, what the president-elect’s biggest economic challenge would be. When Stein replied inflation, Nixon "immediately warned me that we must not raise unemployment," Stein later wrote.
     The Great Inflation and Its Aftermath is readable, but often frustrating. Rather than proceeding chronologically, it hopscotches (像玩“跳房子”游戏) back and forth between decades, repeatedly bringing home the points it wants to make. Despite the forward-looking subtitle, Mr. Samuelson does not demonstrate that the great inflation has much bearing on America’s future. He spends much of two chapters, 73 pages in all, choosing a list of contemporary economic problems, from excessive entitlement spending to global imbalances that have little to do with inflation. Meanwhile, he devotes just a few paragraphs to inflation’s most crucial impact at the present. The decline in interest rates that followed  inflation’s defeat created bubbles in stocks and houses and fuelled a" reach for yield" whose undoing  is at the heart of the current crisis.
     More puzzling is the fact that, in a year in which inflation and deflation have both repeatedly hit the headlines, Mr. Samuelson devotes little time to speculating on the future course of inflation and the political pressures that will affect it. That is a pity because it is a ripe subject.  [br] Why does the author say that The Great Inflation and Its Aftermath is often frustrating (Para. 4)?

选项 A、Because it hasn’t got any subtitle.
B、Because it spends too much on contemporary economic problems.
C、Because it devotes too much on the impact of inflation.
D、Because it shows that there will be bubbles in stocks and houses.

答案 B

解析 推理判断题。由书名The Great Inflation and Its Aftermath可推断该书应该是描述大膨胀及其后果的,但第四段第三句提到该书没有对通货膨胀与美国未来发展的关系做出论断,仅仅是列举了目前存在的经济问题,因此作者说这本书是令人感到受挫的,B 符合题意。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3589911.html
最新回复(0)