Possible conflicts between macroeconomic aims: full employment and stable prices

Published by Patrick Mutisya · 14 days ago

Government macroeconomic intervention – Conflicts between full employment and stable prices

Government macroeconomic intervention

Objective: Possible conflicts between macroeconomic aims – full employment and stable prices

In the short run many economies experience a tension between two of the principal macro‑economic objectives:

  • Full employment – minimising the level of unemployment and making the most of the country’s labour resources.
  • Stable prices – keeping inflation low and predictable.

Government policy must often choose between, or try to balance, these aims. The following notes outline why the conflict arises, the theoretical background, and the policy options available to governments.

1. Why a conflict can arise

1.1 Aggregate‑demand (AD) and aggregate‑supply (AS) framework

The position of the economy in the AD–AS diagram determines both the output (employment) level and the price level.

  • When aggregate demand rises (e.g. through expansionary fiscal or monetary policy) the AD curve shifts right. In the short run this raises real output and reduces unemployment, but it also pushes the price level upward – creating demand‑pull inflation.
  • When the economy is operating near full capacity, any further increase in AD mainly raises prices rather than output, intensifying the inflation problem.

1.2 The Phillips curve

The short‑run Phillips curve shows an inverse relationship between the unemployment rate (\$u\$) and the inflation rate (\$\pi\$):

\$\pi = \pi^{e} - \beta (u - u^{*})\$

where \$\pi^{e}\$ is expected inflation, \$u^{*}\$ is the natural rate of unemployment and \$\beta > 0\$.

  • Moving the economy below \$u^{*}\$ (lower unemployment) tends to raise inflation.
  • Attempting to keep inflation low by keeping unemployment above \$u^{*}\$ means accepting higher joblessness.

In the long run the Phillips curve is vertical at \$u^{*}\$, implying no permanent trade‑off – but the short‑run trade‑off is the source of policy conflict.

2. Sources of inflation that aggravate the conflict

2.1 Demand‑pull inflation

Occurs when AD outstrips the economy’s productive capacity. Typical triggers include:

  • Expansionary fiscal policy (higher government spending or tax cuts).
  • Expansionary monetary policy (lower interest rates, quantitative easing).

2.2 Cost‑push inflation

Arises from increases in production costs, shifting the short‑run AS curve left. Common causes:

  • Rising wages (especially if wage growth exceeds productivity).
  • Higher raw‑material or energy prices.
  • Supply shocks (e.g., oil price spikes).

Cost‑push inflation can raise prices even when unemployment is already high, making the conflict more acute.

3. Policy instruments and their impact on the two aims

Policy toolTypical effect on employmentTypical effect on inflationNotes / potential conflict
Expansionary fiscal policy (increase G or cut taxes)↑ Aggregate demand → ↑ output → ↓ unemployment↑ Aggregate demand → ↑ price level → ↑ inflationEffective when there is spare capacity; risk of demand‑pull inflation if economy near full capacity.
Contractionary fiscal policy (decrease G or raise taxes)↓ Aggregate demand → ↓ output → ↑ unemployment↓ Aggregate demand → ↓ price level → ↓ inflationUsed to combat high inflation; may raise unemployment.
Expansionary monetary policy (lower interest rates, QE)↓ borrowing costs → ↑ investment & consumption → ↓ unemployment↑ spending → ↑ price level → ↑ inflationTransmission lag; can fuel asset‑price bubbles.
Contractionary monetary policy (higher rates, sell securities)↑ borrowing costs → ↓ investment & consumption → ↑ unemployment↓ spending → ↓ price level → ↓ inflationOften the first response to high inflation; may depress growth.
Supply‑side measures (e.g., training, deregulation, tax incentives for R&D)↑ productivity → ↑ potential output → ↓ structural unemployment↑ potential output shifts AS right → ↓ price level for a given ADCan improve both aims in the long run, but effects are gradual.
Wage and price controlsMay temporarily protect employmentDirectly limit price risesOften lead to shortages, black markets, and reduced incentives to produce.

4. Managing the trade‑off – the policy mix

Governments typically adopt a combination of demand‑side and supply‑side policies to try to achieve both aims:

  1. Stabilise demand – Use moderate fiscal or monetary adjustments to keep AD close to the economy’s potential output.
  2. Boost supply – Implement structural reforms (education, infrastructure, competition policy) that shift the long‑run AS curve right, allowing higher output without triggering inflation.
  3. Credibility and expectations – Anchor inflation expectations through clear communication and, where appropriate, an inflation target. Stable expectations reduce the upward pressure on wages and prices when unemployment falls.

5. Example: The UK in the early 1990s

After a period of high inflation in the 1970s and 1980s, the UK government pursued a tight monetary policy to bring inflation down. This raised unemployment in the short run, illustrating the classic conflict. Later, supply‑side reforms (privatisation, deregulation) helped increase potential output, allowing lower unemployment without reigniting inflation.

6. Key take‑aways

  • The short‑run trade‑off between full employment and stable prices is illustrated by the downward‑sloping Phillips curve and the AD–AS model.
  • Demand‑pull and cost‑push inflation are the main mechanisms that turn a push for higher employment into higher inflation.
  • Pure demand‑side policies cannot solve the conflict; supply‑side measures are essential for long‑run improvement.
  • Policy credibility and managing expectations are crucial for reducing the magnitude of the trade‑off.

Suggested diagram: AD–AS model showing the effect of an expansionary fiscal policy shift of AD to the right, moving the economy from point A (high unemployment, low inflation) to point B (lower unemployment, higher inflation). Also include a Phillips curve illustrating the short‑run trade‑off.