The primary argument against active monetary and fiscal policy is that the effects of such a policy are often the opposite of what the policy maker intended, which is the case for active monetary policy.
While active monetary policy can be extremely good for the economy (at least as seen by some economists) it can also have disastrous results. The Great Depression of the 1930s can be considered the first example of this, since it was created through active monetary policy. A similar case can be made for the Great Depression of the 1920s. It is true that the stimulus package that the Fed used in those years was not the best stimulus.
It’s because of this that the monetary policy argument for active monetary policy is so strong. There is even the possibility that these bad outcomes could have been avoided had the Fed not been active during the Great Depression. The fact that we have the Great Depression again is a pretty good argument that this was not an isolated, random occurrence.
The reason why this argument is so strong is that it works as a basis for the idea of an active monetary policy. It works because the Fed is a very powerful institution, it is not afraid to do anything to help the Fed, it will actually be the best option. But the fact that the Fed is not afraid to do nothing is itself a form of active monetary policy.
The only reason why the Fed would take steps to help the economy is if it could be seen to be doing something to help the economy. But if you think about it, it is not really a strong argument against active monetary policy. The Fed is currently not doing anything, and that is what makes it much harder to justify.
Active monetary policy is when you do something that is not a good thing to say about the Fed. It is not a strong argument against active monetary policy because it is not the Fed that is doing the actions. The Fed is just doing what its policy makers want it to do which is nothing. It is just doing what it wants because of the way the monetary system works.
It’s not the Fed that is doing the actions. It’s the government that is doing the actions.
What is being debated here is the ability to take actions of one’s own volition, not a mandate from the government. The government has no right to tell you what to do. The government has no right to tell you to take action. The government has the power to tell you what to do, but it also has the power to tell you what actions are not allowed to be taken. It is a balance act.
The second argument is that our money system is not a strong monetary policy. It is a weak, easy-to-manipulate monetary policy. The government does not have the power to tell you how to run your money. The government does not have the power to determine your actions. This is a power that the government has, but the government does not have the power to tell the private sector how to run their economy.