{
  localUrl: '../page/level_targeting.html',
  arbitalUrl: 'https://arbital.com/p/level_targeting',
  rawJsonUrl: '../raw/646.json',
  likeableId: '3510',
  likeableType: 'page',
  myLikeValue: '0',
  likeCount: '1',
  dislikeCount: '0',
  likeScore: '1',
  individualLikes: [
    'EricRogstad'
  ],
  pageId: 'level_targeting',
  edit: '3',
  editSummary: '',
  prevEdit: '2',
  currentEdit: '3',
  wasPublished: 'true',
  type: 'wiki',
  title: 'Path targeting',
  clickbait: 'Don't say "We want this price to go up at 2%/year", say "We want this to be $1 in year 1, $1.02 in year 2, $1.04 in year 3" and don't change the rest of the path if you miss one year's target.',
  textLength: '4303',
  alias: 'level_targeting',
  externalUrl: '',
  sortChildrenBy: 'likes',
  hasVote: 'false',
  voteType: '',
  votesAnonymous: 'false',
  editCreatorId: 'EliezerYudkowsky',
  editCreatedAt: '2016-09-14 02:13:20',
  pageCreatorId: 'EliezerYudkowsky',
  pageCreatedAt: '2016-09-14 01:48:09',
  seeDomainId: '0',
  editDomainId: 'RobertLecnik',
  submitToDomainId: '0',
  isAutosave: 'false',
  isSnapshot: 'false',
  isLiveEdit: 'true',
  isMinorEdit: 'false',
  indirectTeacher: 'false',
  todoCount: '8',
  isEditorComment: 'false',
  isApprovedComment: 'true',
  isResolved: 'false',
  snapshotText: '',
  anchorContext: '',
  anchorText: '',
  anchorOffset: '0',
  mergedInto: '',
  isDeleted: 'false',
  viewCount: '33',
  text: '[summary:  Suppose you're a [ central bank] targeting 2% annual [ inflation] (leaving aside whether this is a good idea).  On path targeting, you should *not* say:\n\n"Each year, we want the measured number for widget prices to be around 2% higher than last year."\n\nAnd instead say:\n\n"We want the price of widgets to be \\$1 in year 1, \\$1.02 in year 2, \\$1.04 in year 3, etcetera."\n\nEven if you undershoot or overshoot on year 2 and the price comes it at \\$1.01 or \\$1.03, you still target \\$1.04 in year 3.\n\nThe argument is that a path of 2%, 2%, 1%, 3%, 2% is *more* stable and *less* damaging than a path of 2%, 2%, 1%, 2%, 2%.  The first path is less likely to bankrupt somebody who finds that their nominal loans from year 1 are an unexpectedly high burden in year 5.\n\nPath targeting is also argued to be *far* more stable if the central bank isn't great at hitting its targets and often misses in the same direction.  Under annual targeting, a shaky central bank can end up with a path like 1.3%, 1.5%, 0.5%, 1.3%, 1.6%.]\n\n**Path targeting** or **level targeting** is a policy proposal which says that if, e.g., you are a [ central bank] whose [ sole nominal target] is the price of widgets, you should not say:\n\n"Each year, we [ want the increase] in widget prices to be around 2%."\n\nInstead you should say:\n\n"We want the price of widgets to be \\$1 in year 1, \\$1.02 in year 2, \\$1.04 in year 3, and so on."\n\nThen even if you undershoot the target in year 2 and get a price level of \\$1.01 instead of \\$1.02, you don't change the targeted level of \\$1.04 in year 3.  You just create additional money in year 3 to hit the same price target as before (aka, you try for 3% inflation to "make up" for the previous undershoot).\n\nOn a path target or level target, a central bank's error in one year has no effect on expected prices in future years: everyone still expects the bank to target \\$1.04 next year, then \\$1.06.  Even if the central bank is consistently undershooting its target by \\$0.01 every year, on a level target this merely means the actual path for year 2 and on is \\$1.01, \\$1.03, \\$1.05.\n\nConversely, targeting "2%/year inflation", *without* targeting a stable future path, means that if you undershoot and only get \\$1.01 in year 2, you will now say you want a \\$1.03 price level in year 3.  This means that when you create too little money in year 2, you've now *also* said you want to create less money in the future, which adds an *additional* deflationary force.  This is a form of destabilizing feedback.\n\nWe could evaluate the wisdom of path targeting for e.g. inflation (though a better target might be [644 NGDP]) by asking the key question of whether measured inflation of 2%, 2%, 1%, 2%, 2% is experienced by the economy as being more destructively volatile than 2%, 2%, 1%, 3%, 2%.  E.g., consider these two channels of damage:\n\n- "Oh, no!  I didn't expect money to be worth *that* much in year 5!  I can't afford to pay off the nominal loans I took out in year 1!"\n- "Oh, no!  My computer automatically prints menus where the numbers go up by 2% from whatever they were in the previous year, and now I have to reprint my menus!"\n\nWe'd like to have a less straw example above, and solicit suggestions.  In our defense, we're finding it hard to come up with a case where the causal impact is clearly being mediated by the this-year-vs-last-year ratio, and not by the ratio for this-year-vs-2-years-ago.\n\nPath targeting is particularly advocated by [645 market monetarism], an [ NGDP]-centric view which suggests that *stable long-term growth* in NGDP and *predictable levels* of future NGDP are economic factors of far greater importance than the isolated ratios for this-year-vs-last-year.\n\nThe prominence of path targeting in [645 market monetarism] also reflects concern by market monetarists that in [ sluggish modern economies] (e.g. Japan, the European Union, arguably the USA), the actual sequence of inflation numbers often tends to look like 1.3%, 1.5%, 0.5%, 0.3%, 1.5%.  In other words, where the central bank is turning out to be not very good at hitting its targets and is [ repeatedly missing in the same direction], a path target should be *much* more predictable and *much* less volatile than targeting the this-year-vs-last-year ratios as isolated numbers.',
  metaText: '',
  isTextLoaded: 'true',
  isSubscribedToDiscussion: 'false',
  isSubscribedToUser: 'false',
  isSubscribedAsMaintainer: 'false',
  discussionSubscriberCount: '1',
  maintainerCount: '1',
  userSubscriberCount: '0',
  lastVisit: '',
  hasDraft: 'false',
  votes: [],
  voteSummary: 'null',
  muVoteSummary: '0',
  voteScaling: '0',
  currentUserVote: '-2',
  voteCount: '0',
  lockedVoteType: '',
  maxEditEver: '0',
  redLinkCount: '0',
  lockedBy: '',
  lockedUntil: '',
  nextPageId: '',
  prevPageId: '',
  usedAsMastery: 'false',
  proposalEditNum: '0',
  permissions: {
    edit: {
      has: 'false',
      reason: 'You don't have domain permission to edit this page'
    },
    proposeEdit: {
      has: 'true',
      reason: ''
    },
    delete: {
      has: 'false',
      reason: 'You don't have domain permission to delete this page'
    },
    comment: {
      has: 'false',
      reason: 'You can't comment in this domain because you are not a member'
    },
    proposeComment: {
      has: 'true',
      reason: ''
    }
  },
  summaries: {},
  creatorIds: [
    'EliezerYudkowsky'
  ],
  childIds: [],
  parentIds: [
    'ngdplt'
  ],
  commentIds: [],
  questionIds: [],
  tagIds: [],
  relatedIds: [],
  markIds: [],
  explanations: [],
  learnMore: [],
  requirements: [],
  subjects: [],
  lenses: [],
  lensParentId: '',
  pathPages: [],
  learnMoreTaughtMap: {},
  learnMoreCoveredMap: {},
  learnMoreRequiredMap: {},
  editHistory: {},
  domainSubmissions: {},
  answers: [],
  answerCount: '0',
  commentCount: '0',
  newCommentCount: '0',
  linkedMarkCount: '0',
  changeLogs: [
    {
      likeableId: '0',
      likeableType: 'changeLog',
      myLikeValue: '0',
      likeCount: '0',
      dislikeCount: '0',
      likeScore: '0',
      individualLikes: [],
      id: '19564',
      pageId: 'level_targeting',
      userId: 'EliezerYudkowsky',
      edit: '3',
      type: 'newEdit',
      createdAt: '2016-09-14 02:13:20',
      auxPageId: '',
      oldSettingsValue: '',
      newSettingsValue: ''
    },
    {
      likeableId: '0',
      likeableType: 'changeLog',
      myLikeValue: '0',
      likeCount: '0',
      dislikeCount: '0',
      likeScore: '0',
      individualLikes: [],
      id: '19563',
      pageId: 'level_targeting',
      userId: 'EliezerYudkowsky',
      edit: '2',
      type: 'newEdit',
      createdAt: '2016-09-14 02:10:00',
      auxPageId: '',
      oldSettingsValue: '',
      newSettingsValue: ''
    },
    {
      likeableId: '0',
      likeableType: 'changeLog',
      myLikeValue: '0',
      likeCount: '0',
      dislikeCount: '0',
      likeScore: '0',
      individualLikes: [],
      id: '19559',
      pageId: 'level_targeting',
      userId: 'EliezerYudkowsky',
      edit: '0',
      type: 'newParent',
      createdAt: '2016-09-14 01:48:10',
      auxPageId: 'ngdplt',
      oldSettingsValue: '',
      newSettingsValue: ''
    },
    {
      likeableId: '0',
      likeableType: 'changeLog',
      myLikeValue: '0',
      likeCount: '0',
      dislikeCount: '0',
      likeScore: '0',
      individualLikes: [],
      id: '19557',
      pageId: 'level_targeting',
      userId: 'EliezerYudkowsky',
      edit: '1',
      type: 'newEdit',
      createdAt: '2016-09-14 01:48:09',
      auxPageId: '',
      oldSettingsValue: '',
      newSettingsValue: ''
    }
  ],
  feedSubmissions: [],
  searchStrings: {},
  hasChildren: 'false',
  hasParents: 'true',
  redAliases: {},
  improvementTagIds: [],
  nonMetaTagIds: [],
  todos: [],
  slowDownMap: 'null',
  speedUpMap: 'null',
  arcPageIds: 'null',
  contentRequests: {}
}