I’ve been discussing the Fed and inequality quite a bit this week and last. Two responses have been repeatedly generated by my commentary — both online and in private correspondence — so I thought to respond to them here.

A few people have attributed the headline of my Washington Post essay — “Janet Yellen is in danger of becoming a partisan hack” — to me. As professional writers should suspect, I didn’t write or approve the headline. This is the standard practice in the world of edited commentary. For the record, I don’t think Dr. Yellen is in any “danger of becoming a partisan hack.” The point of the headline is to get you to read the article; the world of commentary is extremely competitive. (I did, however, write the headline of this post.)

Also, I’ve been criticized for neglecting to criticize former Fed chair Alan Greenspan for transgressions similar to Janet Yellen’s. It is true that I’ve been silent on Dr. Greenspan to date. (My silence is due to space constraints, and my belief that readers will be much less interested in the words of a Fed chair who left office nearly nine years ago.) But since this has come up a few times let me say very plainly that Dr. Greenspan should not have endorsed President Bush’s Social Security plan in 2005, and Greenspan’s comments on the budget surplus in 2001 were inappropriate. For (at least) the reasons I mentioned this morning in the New York Times, the Fed chair should stay in her lane, whether she is a liberal or a conservative.

— Michael R. Strain is a resident scholar and economist at the American Enterprise Institute. You can follow him on Twitter at twitter.com/MichaelRStrain.