There are two points that are relevant as answers here:

1. You are using the word "price" as if it were singular. But, surely 
what you mean is to refer to some spectrum of "prices." Consequently, 
the "interest rate" cannot be a "swapping ratio" or relative price in 
that sense.

2. There are two "interest rates" at issue here. One of them is a 
discount rate reflecting time preference (really a spectrum of 
rates), which Wicksell and others referred to as "the natural rate" 
of interest. This reflects consumer intentions to spend or save out 
of current income.. The other is the price that the Fed attempts to 
set for loans of fiduciary media, which is usually referred to as the 
"nominal interest rate." This reflects policy maker views of how much 
fiduciary media to attempt to shove out into the economy.

The Austrian School general argument (opinions differ) is that when 
the nominal rate is below the "natural" or "real" rate, malinvestment 
occurs--meaning that sectors of the economy expand that do not 
reflect consumer time preferences. These expansions are ultimately 
unsustainable. The reasons why also differ among Austrian School 
theorists. The bottom line is that an ultimate economic downturn or 
complete collapse cannot be avoided by policy makers.

I suppose we'll just have to watch the international economy for the 
next two years to see if the proof is in the pudding.

Samuel Bostaph