The intellectual building blocks for yesterday's Fed move existed before Mr Sumner began blogging. It is hard to imagine them being assembled into actual policy so quickly without his efforts and their rapid spread through the economics blogosphere.
As the market monetarist community is now pointing out, the Fed's new policy is a step in the right direction, but it is a long way from what they would actually recommend implementing. And they're right. Fairly or not, however, the policy will be judged as a test of market monetarist ideas. Yesterday's market moves suggest that nominal output growth should accelerate in coming quarters. How much acceleration is likely to occur will depend on how much room the Fed is willing to give the economy to run. If the rise in inflation expectations leads the Fed to begin walking back its new language a month from now, the gain will be small.
But the expectation should be that there will be higher nominal growth. And given the broad view that demand-side weakness is the primary constraint on recovery, that nominal growth should be accompanied by faster real growth and faster employment growth. Based on my own observations of the co-movement of inflation expectations and payrolls, I'm expecting nonfarm employment to be growing at more than 200,000 jobs a month by the end of the year, with more possible depending on the Fed's touchiness.
I recognise that if nothing like that occurs, it will represent evidence that I've gotten one or several things wrong. Yesterday's move was exciting no just because it represented an intellectual victory or because it could lead to real economic improvement, but also because it holds out the possibility of new knowledge; one way or another we should learn something important. It was a victory and a test for market monetarism.
If he's right, the Dos Equis will be on Barack Obama.