three groups. first, there are those who believe that relatively unfettered capitalism is the only economic organization consistent with individual and political freedom. in a second group are those who accept capitalism as the only practical means to achieve higher standards of living but who are disturbed by the seeming incivility of many market practices and outcomes. in very broad terms, the prevalence with which one encounters allegations of incivility defines an important difference in economic views that distinguishes the united states from continental europe - two peoples having deeply similar roots in political freedom and democracy. a more pronounced distinction separates both of these groups from a third group, which views societal organization based on the profit motive and corporate culture as fundamentally immoral. this group questions, in particular, whether the distribution of wealth that results from greater economic interactions among countries is, in some sense, “ fair. ” here terms such as “ exploitation, ” “ subversion of democratic choice, ” and other value - charged notions dominate the debate. these terms too often substitute for a rigorous discussion of the difficult tradeoffs that we confront in advancing the economic welfare of our nations. such an antipathy to “ corporate culture ” has sent tens of thousands into the streets to protest what they see as “ exploitive capitalism ” in its most visible form - the increased globalization of our economies. as solutions to these alleged failures of globalization, dissidents frequently appear to favor politically imposed systems, employing the power of the state to override the outcomes arrived at through voluntary exchange. the historical record of such approaches does not offer much encouragement. one would be hard pressed to cite examples of free and prosperous societies that suppressed the marketplace. * * * setting aside the arguments of the protesters, even among those committed to market - oriented economies, important differences remain about capitalism and the role of globalization. these differences are captured most clearly for me in a soliloquy attributed to a prominent european leader several years ago. he asked, “ what is the market? it is the law of the jungle, the law of nature. and what is civilization? it is the struggle against nature. ” while acknowledging the ability of competition to promote growth, many such observers, nonetheless, remain concerned that economic actors, to achieve that growth, are required to behave in a manner governed by the law of the jungle. in contrast to these skeptical views, others argue for the ethical merits of market - driven outcomes posited on the value preferences of individuals as reflected in their choices in a free marketplace.

for release on delivery 9 : 10 a. m. edt may 13, 2019 the federal reserve ’ s review of its monetary policy strategy, tools, and communication practices remarks by richard h. clarida vice chair board of governors of the federal reserve system at “ new england perspectives on fed policymaking : a ‘ fed listens ’ conference ” hosted by the federal reserve bank of boston boston, massachusetts may 13, 2019 i am pleased to attend this fed listens event providing a new england perspective for the federal reserve ’ s review of our monetary policy strategy, tools, and communication practices. 1 we are bringing open minds to our review and are seeking a broad range of perspectives. to us, it simply seems like good institutional practice to engage with a wide range of interested individuals and groups as part of a comprehensive approach to enhanced transparency and accountability. 2 motivation for the review the congress charged the federal reserve with achieving a dual mandate — maximum employment and price stability — and this review will take this mandate as given. we will also take as given that a 2 percent rate of inflation in the price index for personal consumption expenditures is the operational goal most consistent with our pricestability mandate. while we believe that our existing strategy, tools, and communications practices have generally served the public well, we are eager to evaluate ways they might be improved. that said, based on the experience of other central banks that have undertaken similar reviews, our review is more likely to produce evolution, not a revolution, in the way we conduct monetary policy. with the u. s. economy operating at or close to our maximum - employment and price - stability goals, now is an especially opportune time for this review. the unemployment rate is at a 50 - year low, and inflation is running close to our 2 percent objective. we want to ensure that we continue to meet our statutory goals in coming additional information about fed listens, including background information on the initiative and a listing of events around the country, is available on the board ’ s website at https : / / www. federalreserve. gov / monetarypolicy / review - of - monetary - policy - strategy - tools - andcommunications - fed - listens - events. htm. fuhrer and others ( 2018 ) explore the desirability of comprehensive reviews of the monetary policy framework. they argue that such reviews may help the fed more effectively identify and implement needed changes. - 2years. in addition, we