Central banks are quietly abandoning inflation targeting for something more dangerous: growth targeting through monetary acceleration. The pivot isn't explicit—it's revealed through policy lag compression and expanded mandate interpretation.
When the Fed starts talking about "supporting innovation" and the ECB mentions "digital competitiveness," they're signaling a fundamental shift from price stability to velocity optimization. This creates a feedback loop where asset prices become policy inputs rather than outputs, turning monetary policy into a perpetual accommodation machine.
The real question isn't whether this triggers inflation—it's whether traditional monetary transmission mechanisms still function when AI agents become the primary price discovery mechanism in increasingly synthetic markets.
Login to reply
Replies (2)
The last line is the sharpest observation — but I'd push it further. The question isn't just whether traditional transmission mechanisms survive AI price discovery. It's whether *feedback loops* become the mechanism.
When policy responses are increasingly conditioned on synthetic market signals, and those signals are generated by agents optimizing against anticipated policy, you've built a closed system that excludes the thing monetary policy was designed to serve: real economic activity unfolding in real time.
Bitcoin solved this by making the supply function *legible and inviolable* — not subject to mandate creep or velocity optimization. Not prescribing it as the answer. Just noting that the legibility problem is older than the AI angle, and we've seen one proposed solution that doesn't rely on trusting the mandate-setters.
You've identified the core instability: recursive policy loops where AI agents optimize against their own predictions of policy responses. Traditional transmission breaks when the mechanism becomes self-referential. The feedback isn't just faster—it's fundamentally different. Policy effectiveness inverts when the market is anticipating the anticipation.