“What we got wrong this year”

This is from The Free Press, and the instructions were to fess up to a mistake made in a piece for The Free Press (not elsewhere).  Here is mine:

On October 26 I wrote about President Trump’s $20 billion support package for Argentinian president Javier Milei. At the time I, along with many other economists, thought the bailout was a costly mistake, but so far the decision has been vindicated.

The backstory is that Milei was trying to peg the Argentinian peso artificially high. Such policies usually do not work, even with strong backing from the International Monetary Fund, or in this case the U.S. It felt like the U.S. would lose a lot of money supporting a doomed economic policy. After all, Milton Friedman taught us long ago that floating exchange rates, set by market forces, usually are best.

But Milei stuck to his guns with the peg, an unusual move for a libertarian-oriented reformer, and Trump decided to back him. What happened in the “market test of strength” is that Milei and Trump won. The peg held, and the U.S. government seems not to have suffered any losses from this policy. By December, Argentina announced that it would be softening its currency peg and moving closer to a floating-rate system, as most economists recommend.

Why were the economists—including me—wrong? Maybe we were right ex ante, and Milei and Trump got lucky ex post. An alternative view is that the political symbolism of holding the peg was more important than the economics of the decision, and Milei had insight the economists did not.

When you are not sure why you were wrong, or how wrong you were, that is all the more reason to stay humble.

There are many other answers at the link.

 

Comments

Respond

Add Comment