Yeah, the current political system and news organizations would absolutely punish Biden for taking the blame on inflation, so the current "it's someone else's fault and also I am fixing it" is just what you get.
...though the certainty that inflation is definitely 100% Biden's fault is a bit unjustified too.
Biden is already getting the blame regardless. He's one of the least popular presidents in US history, in part due to the brutal inflationary wave that is mauling wages and the standard of living for the average person.
When you walk into your grocery store and see consumer basics going up in price so dramatically, it's going to prompt the desire to blame, and of course Biden is a big target. Regardless of if it's fair for voters to blame Biden so heavily, they are and will.
Well, it is unfair. It always is. The president is regarded as being responsible for the economy. And the Fed is supposed to be independent, free from political control, to keep the politicians from meddling in the economy.
Was Biden running the government response (or the Fed policy) when 2008 happened (when QE started, that many here are blaming for the inflation)? No, he wasn't. He wasn't even running the response for the first part of Covid. I seem to remember stimulus checks with Trump's signature on them.
One could fault Biden for the anti-drilling and anti-pipeline policies. But much of the blame is just "he's the guy currently there", so he gets the blame. "The buck stops here", and all that. It's unfair. But it happens to every president, and it's always unfair.
> And the Fed is supposed to be independent, free from political control, to keep the politicians from meddling in the economy.
No, the Fed is supposed to be relatively isolated from short-run political influence to put a step of separation between government fiscal policy targeting the economy (the responsibility of Congress) from monetary policy affecting the currency (the responsibility of the Fed) except to the extent that the former effects the landscape that the latter targets, to maintain confidence in the currency by making monetization of debt unlikely.
This is very much not to prevent the elected officials of government from intervening in the economy. If anything, it frees them to do so, because the barrier against monetization of debt not only protects the currency, it protects policymakers from the perception that deficits will likely be resolved with monetization, which is a brake on fiscal policy that involves deficit spending.
This seems like an unfortunate consequence of candidates being expected to promise everything and the kitchen sink on the campaign trail, and the increase in federal power. That combined with very high partisanship makes it easy to point the finger as to who is responsible. People usually aren't presented a more nuanced narrative.
It isn't economics 101, though. It might be Austrian economics 101, but that's been pretty squarely rejected for being too simplistic a model.
The reality is everyone agrees: if you increase the money supply beyond demand for money, inflation will result. However, the demand for money is extremely difficult to model and is incredibly unpredictable. There's demand for US dollars all over the world, from dollarized economies like Venezuela and El Salvador and Panama - to European and Asian bond buyers - to unusual dollar demand curves at home, such as the sudden fear that gripped the economy during COVID that caused everyone to stuff dollars into their mattresses.
The model is far more complex than you're making it out to be.
Monetary expansion in the face of recession has been the feds policy since 2008. Not only is Biden not the one who decided to expand the monetary base/keep interest rates low, even if he had decided that it would’ve been in line with the last 2 presidents.
Given the timelines I can't see how Biden is even 10% at fault. The previous administration started trade wars which began to blow up supply chains even prior to the pandemic. They also increased the deficit during a time of economic growth when they should have been trying to decrease it. So if anything I would break down the blame like this: The Fed: 60% (for QE and keeping rates too low for way too long), Previous admin: 20% (trade wars, increasing deficits when they should've been working on reducing them), Putin 15% (for invading Ukraine), Biden admin (maybe 5%, but even that is probably a bit high)
> Isn't the Fed taking directions from whatever administration is in power?
No, the Fed is an independent entity similar to the supreme court. The president could fire the chair and install someone new, but I don't believe that has ever been done.
Does Congress get any blame for promising an infrastructure bill for at least a decade, treating it as a political football, and then loading it up with various pet projects?
> Does Congress get any blame for promising an infrastructure bill for at least a decade
Congress isn't a person or even an institution with a unitary head, and that's at least 5 separate Congresses, several of which didn't have even approximate unity between the two houses on the issue.
And most of the promises on that came from the White House, not “Congress” (as if there was anyone who could speak for “Congress” anyway.)
And Congress passed infrastructure bills in 2009, 2012, and 2015 before the one in 2021.
...though the certainty that inflation is definitely 100% Biden's fault is a bit unjustified too.