Monetary policy question. Not sure how to answer this, but it is a short answer problem that needs an explanation. If you could answer this, it would be very helpful. Thanks!

1. The Federal Reserve has a dual mandate of full employment and price stability. Oftentimes this mandate is challenging as there is a short term tradeoff between unemployment and inflation. From 2008 to 2015, however, inflation was consistently below the target rate while unemployment was well above its natural level. Should the Fed have pursued more aggressive monetary policy to raise inflation and lower unemployment? A. No. Inflation is always bad because it lowers the incentive to invest and we know that investment that increases productivity is the only way to raise living standards in the long run. B. No. The Fed exhausted its normal tools and the appropriate policy response then is large scale fiscal stimulus. There is only so much the Fed can do. C. Yes. The Fed could have done more and raising inflation to 3 or 4 percent would have eased the recovery without long term damage to the economy. D. Yes. Low inflation helps banks but is less helpful to most working class people, especially those with debt. The Fed should serve all people rather than the banks it regulates. E. It is possible that the Fed did not strike the right balance, but political pressure for austerity kept the Fed from being overly aggressive. The correct response then is to educate politicians and the general public on basic macroeconomics to generate political pressure for the best policies. Explain your