Brian Doherty | May 27, 2009
Federal Reserve of San Francisco analyst thinks we gotta keep the zero interest rate train rolling until it derails in some terrible tragedy. From the Wall Street Journal's "Real Time Economics" blog:
San Francisco Fed economist...Glenn Rudebusch says the Fed’s history and its current economic expectations indicate “the funds rate should be near its zero lower bound not just for the next six or nine months, but for several years.”
The economist said the Fed will need to maintain this stance in part because its current interest rate policy is not easy enough, having been constrained by an inability to go below zero.....
The policy Rudebusch is referring to is the one the Fed put in place at the end of last year, as it struggled to stimulate a rapidly faltering economy. The Fed then took a step unprecedented in the era of modern monetary policy-making and pegged its overnight target rate in a band between 0% and 0.25%....
....economic and banking troubles have been such that policy makers have been forced to adopt a radical agenda of emergency lending and direct market interventions, to create an environment where those rock-bottom borrowing rates can be more effective.
The inflationary effects of such low interest rates--the encouraging of borrowing effectively means the injection of more new money into the economy--are still thought to be a worry for another day by our monetary policy mavens. Which raises the risk that that other day will be very worrisome indeed. Mo money, mo problems, as a wise man once said.
The St. Louis Federal Reserve's scary monetary base growth chart.
For them that has forgotten the Gerald Ford interregnum, title explained, to the extent there's any rational explanation.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
current interest rate policy is not easy enough, having been
constrained by an inability to go below zero.....
Dude, I've been doing shrooms too much. I could swear that says
that they want negative interest rates.
Mo money, mo problems, as a wise man once said.
Our leaders could probably benefit from observing the "Ten Crack
Commandments" as well.
They do want negative interest rates. But since they're not the ones lending the money, they don't see anything at all odd with it.
Its not just the low fed funds rate driving inflation. Its also
monetizing the debt via "quantitative easing" in the Treasury
market. The last bond auction was pretty much a failure, and it
looks like the next one will be, too.
Oh, yeah, that inflation train is a'comin'.
This article is about 5 days too late.
Beginning Thursday afternoon, the Fed completely lost the control
they had maintained over the MBS market, resulting in a free-fall
in mortgage bonds this afternoon.
Mortgage interest rates are 0.750% higher in rate as of about five
minutes ago than they were last Thursday morning.
There is no "0 interest rate environment" in existence. Rates are
higher now than they were before the Fed starting buying treasury
bonds and MBS.
We're probably looking at another leg down on the recession as the
effect of the last week's move all categories of bond rates works
its way out into the economy.
Not only will Wimpy get to eat his hamburger today, we will pay
him to do it.
------
Rates are higher now than they were before the Fed starting
buying treasury bonds and MBS.
Could this be because rational investors are looking into the
future and discounting for inflation?
The St. Louis Federal Reserve's scary monetary base growth
chart.
That's not a chart, that's a porno.
There is no inflation.
The money supply is still contracting. The higher yields on T-Bills
reflect further weakness.
The money supply is still contracting. The higher yields on
T-Bills reflect further weakness.
No, the yields on T-bills are a function of buyer demand, not
monetary supply. T-bills aren't cash, they are an investment, and
primarily a safe haven investment. The fact that the auctions have
been failing, requiring higher rates, is an indication that demand
for T-bills is down, as T-bills are no longer seen as a safe
haven.
And why aren't they seen as a safe haven, you ask? The colossal
debt we have taken on have created doubts about the ability to
honor them (absent major inflationary devaluation), and our
super-duper loose monetary policy guaranteeing such inflation.
Hmmmm....that chart makes me want to exchange all these pretty pieces of paper with numbers on them and 'Federal Reserve Note' for real goods I can use at some point in the future - like rice, flour, gas, gold and silver.
No, the yields on T-bills are a function of buyer demand,
not monetary supply. T-bills aren't cash, they are an investment,
and primarily a safe haven investment. The fact that the auctions
have been failing, requiring higher rates, is an indication that
demand for T-bills is down, as T-bills are no longer seen as a safe
haven.
And why aren't they seen as a safe haven, you ask? The colossal
debt we have taken on have created doubts about the ability to
honor them (absent major inflationary devaluation), and our
super-duper loose monetary policy guaranteeing such
inflation.
This is problematical but very worthy of an answer.
But, happy hour takes precedent.
The money supply is not contracting, it is expanding. But it is
not expanding at a level that replaces the contracting of
credit.
If credit declines by $8 Trillion, and money supply expands by $3
Trillion, you are in a deflation.
I do not know when credit will cease contracting. I do not know
when the Fed and Treasury will stop expanding the money supply. I
do not know if the Fed and Treasury will eventually create more new
money than the amount of credit that will ultimately contract. If I
had to place a bet, I would bet on the Fed and Treasury eventually
overshooting rather than undershooting, but they haven't overshot
yet.
I think we need to be very careful with loosely thrown terms
like "money".
M0 is clearly expanding, as the graph shows. No, wait, it fucking
exploded.
It is quite possible that despite the pumping up of M0, that the
higher order Ms are not expanding and may even be
contracting.
I would think that is only a temporary effect and that they will
unfortunately follow M0 eventually.
they haven't overshot yet.
I think they have overshot, but with the time delay, it isnt
obvious yet.
robc, M2 has also expanded, although not nearly as much as M0. However, given that M2 has increased about 10-15% while the economy is contracting, it's hard to believe we can avoid massive inflation once the economy starts to rebound.
The money supply is expanding, but the velocity of money has
declined. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
But all those dollars aren't going to lie around in bank vaults
forever.
The money supply is expanding, but the velocity of money has
declined. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
Yep, I think we have a winner. If M2 has increased 10-15% while M0
has, what, nearly doubled?, then clearly the velocity has
declined.
I would think that is only a temporary effect and that they
will unfortunately follow M0 eventually.
t's hard to believe we can avoid massive inflation once the
economy starts to rebound.
But all those dollars aren't going to lie around in bank vaults
forever.
I think at least 3 of us are in agreement.
"the funds rate should be near its zero lower bound not just
for the next six or nine months, but for several years."
Shit yes! Free money for everybody (banking oligarchs first,
though)!
How could The Big O say we're "out of money"?
The money supply is not contracting, it is expanding. But it
is not expanding at a level that replaces the contracting of
credit.
Invisible Finger for the win....
All the Fed has managed to do is slow down the economy's descent,
and make sure that as soon as things start to recover, inflation
and interest rates are going to make the 70s look like an era of
sound money.
How are those interest payments on the soon-to-be 20 trillion
dollar national debt gonna feel when the short term rates hit
double digits?
Craig,
We have locked that debt up in low-interest 100 year bonds, right?
Right? Um, please tell me Im right?
:)
Re the graph: what other country of 305 million
outsourced their money supply to the Fed last year? 'Cause that
spike couldn't just be us.
Re WIN: I have this newspaper photo laser-etched in my memory of
George Harrison visting the Ford White House (surrealism #1), where
he received a WIN button from President Ford (surrealism #2).
I think this might be evidence that someone actually DID put LSD in
the water supply in the '70s.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245