The Federal Open Market Committee announced yesterday that it has begun another round of quantitiative easing . Though they did not use that term. From the announcement: To promote a stronger pace of economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at levels consistent with its mandate, the Committee decided today to expand its holdings of securities. The Committee will maintain its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments from its securities holdings. In addition, the Committee intends to purchase a further $600 billion of longer-term Treasury securities by the end of the second quarter of 2011, a pace of about $75 billion per month. The Committee will regularly review the pace of its securities purchases and the overall size of the asset-purchase program in light of incoming information and will adjust the program as needed to best foster maximum employment and price stability. There has been a lot of public discussion among economists over whether this monetary policy measure is the right move. Karen Dynan , Vice President and Co-Director, Economic Studies at the Brookings Institution , thinks it is, pointing to inflation being below the Fed's target and unemployment being, in a word, "weak": For more of Dynan's analysis, click here . Meanwhile, writing in the Financial Times , Martin Feldstein calls the policy a "dangerous gamble": Mr Bernanke’s argument for QE is based on the “portfolio balance” theory which stresses that, when the Fed buys bonds, investors increase their demand for other assets, particularly equities, raising their price and increasing household wealth and spending. Equity prices have already risen by 10 per cent since Mr Bernanke discussed this approach. But how much further will equity prices rise and what will that do to GDP? Neither theory nor past experience can answer the first question. Much of the share price increase induced by QE may already have occurred based on expectations. An optimistic guess would be another 10 per cent. Since households have about $7,000bn in equities, that would imply a wealth gain of $700bn, raising consumer spending by about one-quarter of one per cent of GDP, a welcome but trivially small effect on incomes and employment. The other ways in which QE would raise GDP are also small. A 20-basis-point reduction in mortgage rates would have little effect on homebuying at a time when house prices are again falling. The increase in banks’ liquidity would do nothing since banks already have massive excess reserves. Big corporations are sitting on vast amounts of cash. Small businesses that are not spending because they cannot get credit will not be helped, because the banks on which they depend have a shortage of capital. Read Feldstein's op-ed here .
Filed under: Feldstein, Federal Reserve, Quantitative Easing, interest rates, monetary policy, recession, Bernanke, deflation, recovery, economic policy, bonds, inflation, FOMC, home prices, treasuries, QEII, homebuying, dynan, qe