Talk:Zero interest-rate policy

message: Krugman does not deserve credit for this idea. I am astounded that he can be attributed with this.
:Yes, this has nothing to do with Krugman, and the thesis that such economies are in a liquidity trap was noted by Keynes in 1936, and has been noted repeatedly since then.  What to do when you've already lowered the interest rates as low as they can go, but it still seems like you should lower tham further (the "0% bound") is a topic that has come up numerous times in Keynsian economics dating back to Keynes himself, with dozens of different analyses coming to different conclusions about what can be done and how effective doing it will be. --Delirium 09:42, May 9, 2005 (UTC)
Well, if Krugman doesn't deserve the credit, then someone should edit the Paul Krugman page, since he is described as the "main architect" of the ZIRP there.
My sense was that Krugman advocated a specific method for increasing the money supply. Since the central bank couldn't get commercial banks to lend even with interest rates at 0%, Krugman advocated that they expand the money supply by buying up forex with yen. This would increase the supply of yen in circulation, expand MS, and potentially generate some inflation. Asacarny 19:51, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Wonderstruck 17:39, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.68.162 (talk) 10:59, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does "zero inflation" redirect here? 

message: I propose that zero lower bound problem be merged into this article. Zero interest rate policy is what happens at the zero lower bound, so they are very closely related and should be discussed together.greenrd (talk) 21:32, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, but what should be the merged article's name? --bender235 (talk) 12:32, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Zero interest-rate policy. That's my proposal, anyway.--greenrd (talk) 11:36, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what the protocol is for something like this, but the merger makes sense to me. It also makes sense to keep the title of "Zero interest-rate policy" and just include a section for "zero lower bound problem".--Error9900 (talk) 16:34, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: The usual gripe is that whoever put the "tone" tag did not put any reason on this page about why they took the action. So, let's ask for it. I would argue that the cons far outweigh the pros from a historic sense as stated (more or less) in the list albeit the phrasing may be improved a little. The fact is that we do not know the ultimate consequences of the current state (except, from my experiences of the deal, both from an economic sense and from that of an American citizen, the effects stink), nor is there any clear way for the Fed to move having boxed itself into a corner. Unwinding (how I characterize the thing) ought to have happened long ago. Now, we have all the world's central bankers mimicing the Washington crowd (what say you? rush to the lowest level?). jmswtlk (talk) 23:05, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone warning 

message: Since both Switzerland and Portugal have imposed negative interest rates, I think this statement is inaccurate: "The ZIRP is an important milestone in monetary policy because the central bank is no longer able to reduce nominal interest rates"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.9.217.237 (talk) 21:57, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Negative interest rates