##re ( the riksbank must be clearer ), column in the swedish newspaper dagens nyheter on 13 september. claussen, carl andreas, magnus jonsson and bjorn lagerwall ( 2011 ), “ a macroeconomic analysis of housing prices in sweden ”, in sveriges riksbank ( 2011 ), pp. 67 – 95. englund, peter ( 2011 ), “ swedish house prices in an international perspective ”, in sveriges riksbank ( 2011 ), pp. 23 – 65. finansinspektionen ( 2012 ), ” the swedish mortgage market ”, 13 march 2012. ingves, stefan ( 2012 ), “ stora risker med alltfor lag ranta ” ( major risks with an overly low interest rate ), svenska dagbladet newspaper, 18 october. isaksen, jacob, paul lassenius kramp, louise funch sørensen and søren vester sørensen ( 2011 ), ” household balance sheets and debt – an international country study ”, danmarks nationalbank monetary review, 4th quarter 2011, part 2, pp. 39 – 81. jansson, per ( 2012 ), ” my view on inflation targeting ”, speech at karlstad university, 11 october. national institute of economic research ( 2012 ), the swedish economy, august 2012. mishkin, frederic s. ( 2011 ), ” monetary policy strategy : lessons from the crisis ”, nber working paper no. 16755. bis central bankers ’ speeches qvigstad, jan f. ( 2005 ), “ when does an interest rate path ‘ look good ’? criteria for an appropriate future interest rate path – a practician ’ s approach ”, staff memo no. 2005 / 6, norges bank. reinhart, carmen m. and kenneth s. rogoff ( 2009 ), this time is different, princeton university press. rogerson, richard ( 1997 ), “ theory ahead of language in the economics of unemployment ”, journal of economic perspective 11 ( winter ), pp. 73 – 92. svensson, lars e. o. ( 2010 ), “ why a lower repo - rate path? ” speech held at umea university, 24 february 2010. svensson, lars e. o. ( 2011a ), " for a better monetary policy : focus on inflation and unemployment ”, speech at lulea university on

. while these rules are useful as benchmarks, in my view they should not be excessively relied on for policy decisions. 19 for further discussion of the neutral nominal federal funds rate, see janet l. yellen ( 2015 ), “ the economic outlook and monetary policy, ” speech delivered at the economic club of washington, washington, december 2, https : / / www. federalreserve. gov / newsevents / speech / yellen20151202a. htm. see fernanda nechio and glenn d. rudebusch ( 2016 ), “ has the fed fallen behind the curve this year? ” frbsf economic letter 2016 - 33 ( san francisco : federal reserve bank of san francisco, november ), http : / / www. frbsf. org / economic - research / publications / economic - letter / 2016 / november / has - fedfallen - behind - curve - this - year. for example, frb / us simulations using the taylor ( 1993 ) rule for the period 2010 - 15 show substantially higher unemployment and lower inflation than was actually realized. for more information about the taylor ( 1993 ) rule, see john b. taylor ( 1993 ), “ discretion versus policy rules in practice, ” carnegie - rochester conference series on public policy, vol. 39 ( december ), pp. 195 - 214. - 10 the red solid line in figure 7 shows the policy prescription using the original 1993 taylor rule together with the september sep dots for the federal funds rate. 20 the taylor rule prescription has been derived using the median value for core pce price inflation, the unemployment rate, and the longer - run normal unemployment rate from the september 2016 sep. the intercept in this taylor rule represents the longer - run real interest rate - - or r * - which is set to 2 percent. if we replace that intercept with the median of the longer - run r * implied by the most recent sep, which is 0. 9 percent, we see that the rule prescribes much lower settings for policy interest rates than the unadjusted rule ( the blue dashed line in figure 7 ). the lower intercept does not completely close the gap between the taylor rule prescription and the dots. however, many observers believe that the neutral real interest rate is currently well below its longer - run value. the language that has appeared in the committee ’ s postmeeting statement since december 2015 that “ the federal funds rate is likely to remain,