KnowNOW!

Global Economic Watch

Syndication

Recent Posts

Tags

Archives

  • FOMC January Meeting: Majority of Participants Project Target Interest Rate Hike At Least Two Years Off

    It looks as though interest rates will remain low for the next two years. At their January meeting, members of the Federal Open Market Committee not only kept the target federal funds rate between 0 and 1/4 percent, they, as a group, projected the next rate increase would likely not come until 2014 at the earliest. They also set the inflation target at 2%. Here is a look at the Fed's projections for GDP and unemployment: At his press conference following the meeting, Ben Bernanke noted that the Fed needs to remain open to measures to "provide further stimulus" if the pace of recovery slows: Read the FOMC January statement here .
  • Fed Investments Net Nearly $77 Billion in 2011

    The Federal Reserve had another good investment year, making $76.9 billion in profits off of treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities and the like. But the Wall Street Journal 's Jon Hilsenrath says not to get too excited. While the Fed was able to turn over that tidy profit to the US Treasury this year, there is still quite a bit of risk in its portfolio.
  • Marketplace Whiteboard: Why the EU Wants Dollars

    Last week the Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank announced a plan in which they, along with other key central banks, will coordinate efforts to fight the global credit crunch . In short, the Fed will make it easier for the ECB to get dollars. Why do they want dollars, when they have their own currency? Paddy Hirsch takes to the Marketplace Whiteboard to explain: Why does the EU want U.S. dollars? from Marketplace on Vimeo .
  • Low Expectations and No Monetary Policy Changes from the FOMC November Meeting

    The Federal Open Market Committee has wrapped up its two day November meeting, and it appears there are no significant changes to monetary policy coming in the near future. The Fed will keep the federal funds target rate at 0 to 1/4 percent, as the committee anticipates recovery will continue at a slow pace. From the release: The Committee continues to expect a moderate pace of economic growth over coming quarters and consequently anticipates that the unemployment rate will decline only gradually toward levels that the Committee judges to be consistent with its dual mandate. Moreover, there are significant downside risks to the economic outlook, including strains in global financial markets. The Committee also anticipates that inflation will settle, over coming quarters, at levels at or below those consistent with the Committee's dual mandate as the effects of past energy and other commodity price increases dissipate further. Here's a look at the Fed's current projections for GDP and jobs: Read the full release here , and watch Fed Chair Ben Bernanke's press conference from the FOMC meeting below:
  • Mark Thoma Sees SIgns of Coming Fed Action

    In his Money Watch column, Mark Thoma looks at the below graph and sees signs that the Fed will pursue further quantitative easing measures: Thoma writes: The Fed is very sensitive to and very fearful of deflation, and the fall in inflation expectations evident in the graph was one of the reasons the Fed decided to implement QE1. And as you can see from the graph, this (along with the other steps the Fed took at that time) turned the expectations around, at least for awhile. However, just before the dotted vertical line on the graph, expectations began falling again. What is the vertical line? It shows the point in time when QE2 was announced by Ben Bernanke (August 27 of 2010 at Jackson Hole, Wyoming), and once again inflation expectations turned around. However, notice that recently the trend has turned downward again and if this continues the Fed is likely to intervene once again. What do you see in the graph? Do monetary policy measures need to be taken? What are the lessons from QE1 and QE2? Read The Fed Is Laying the Groundwork for Further Easing here .
  • 'Extreme' Policy Moves of 2011

    Calling the Fed's latest maneuvering, dubbed operation twist , extreme policy might seem a little, well, extreme. But that is exactly what the folks at Central Bank News have done in adding it to the list of the most extreme policy moves of 2011. Here's the list: 1. Belarus Financial Crisis 2. The Twist 3. Swiss Franc Floor 4. ECB SMP and the Confidence Crisis 5. Bank of Japan Earthquake Response 6. Vietnamese Hyperinflation 7. Brazilian Rate Reversal 8. Kiwi Earthquake Insurance 9. Joint Liquidity Operations 10. 'Chindia' Tightening For details of each of the policy moves listed above, read Top 10 Most Extreme Monetary Policy Moves of 2011 here .
  • FOMC Meeting Response

    The Federal Reserve decided yesterday to leave the federal funds target rate unchanged at 0-0.25%, citing the slowness of the economy's growth and stable longer term inflation expectations . The Fed will also sell some short term Treasuries, and in return buy some longer term Treasuries. While there were calls for more action from the Fed, Tim Duy called the Fed' stance "bold." Bottom Line: I think Fed official believe they are being bold; I see them as continuing to ease policy in 25bp increments. Expect that to continue. Assuming the economy fails to regain momentum, the Fed will follow up with additional action – QE3 will be the next stop. Ignore the dissents; they are background noise. Don’t expect miracles; expect small moves, the equivalent of 15bp here, 25bp there. The real leverage could potentially come from fiscal policy leveraging the easy monetary policy. Print the money and spend it. Open up the refinancing channel. Overall, make the objective of national economic policy simply be to decisively move us off the zero bound. Not deficits, not the dual mandate, just commit to pulling us off the bottom. Read Duy's Fed Watch response to the FOMC meeting here . For more analysis of the announcement and possible response today on Wall Street and in Washington, here's the Wall Street Journal's Evan Newmark , Jon Hilsenrath , and Thorold Barker :
  • Paul Volcker on 'A Little Inflation'

    In a New York Times op-ed, Paul Volcker expresses some concern that members of the Federal Reserv's Open Market Committee are starting to find the prospects of "a little inflation" tempting. The thinking that concerns Volcker is that 4 or 5% inflation might have a stimulating effect for the economy. Not so, says Volcker: My point is not that we are on the edge today of serious inflation, which is unlikely if the Fed remains vigilant. Rather, the danger is that if, in desperation, we turn to deliberately seeking inflation to solve real problems — our economic imbalances, sluggish productivity, and excessive leverage — we would soon find that a little inflation doesn’t work. Then the instinct will be to do a little more — a seemingly temporary and “reasonable” 4 percent becomes 5, and then 6 and so on. What we know, or should know, from the past is that once inflation becomes anticipated and ingrained — as it eventually would — then the stimulating effects are lost. Once an independent central bank does not simply tolerate a low level of inflation as consistent with “stability,” but invokes inflation as a policy, it becomes very difficult to eliminate. It is precisely the common experience with this inflation dynamic that has led central banks around the world to place prime importance on price stability. They do so not at the expense of a strong productive economy. They do it because experience confirms that price stability — and the expectation of that stability — is a key element in keeping interest rates low and sustaining a strong, expanding, fully employed economy. Read A Little Inflation Can Be a Dangerous Thing here .
  • Bernanke on the Outlook for Growth and Inflation

    Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke also took to the podium yesterday, albeit with a much, much smaller audience. He gave his outlook on the US Economy in Minneapolis, but he there was little in his speech to suggest any significant change in monetary policy. He did address increased gas and food prices in the context of inflation concerns: Prices of many commodities, notably oil, increased sharply earlier this year. Higher gasoline and food prices translated directly into increased inflation for consumers, and in some cases producers of other goods and services were able to pass through their higher costs to their customers as well. In addition, the global supply disruptions associated with the disaster in Japan put upward pressure on motor vehicle prices. As a result of these influences, inflation picked up significantly; over the first half of this year, the price index for personal consumption expenditures rose at an annual rate of about 3-1/2 percent, compared with an average of less than 1-1/2 percent over the preceding two years. However, inflation is expected to moderate in the coming quarters as these transitory influences wane. In particular, the prices of oil and many other commodities have either leveled off or have come down from their highs. Meanwhile, the step-up in automobile production should reduce pressure on car prices. Importantly, we see little indication that the higher rate of inflation experienced so far this year has become ingrained in the economy. Longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable according to the indicators we monitor, such as the measure of households' longer-term expectations from the Thompson Reuters/University of Michigan survey, the 10-year inflation projections of professional forecasters, and the five-year-forward measure of inflation compensation derived from yields of inflation-protected Treasury securities. In addition to the stability of longer-term inflation expectations, the substantial amount of resource slack that exists in U.S. labor and product markets should continue to have a moderating influence on inflationary pressures. Notably, because of ongoing weakness in labor demand over the course of the recovery, nominal wage increases have been roughly offset by productivity gains, leaving the level of unit labor costs close to where it had stood at the onset of the recession. Given the large share of labor costs in the production costs of most firms, subdued unit labor costs should be an important restraining influence on inflation. Read Bernanke's speech here .
  • Fiscal Policy vs Monetary Policy

    Time to get back to the basics. Citizens want to know: who is going to save us from the economic morass? The president? Congress? The Fed? And what tools might they use? Paddy Hirsch explains the core differences between fiscal policy and monetary policy at the Marketplace Whiteboard : Fiscal and Monetary Policy from Marketplace on Vimeo .
  • Roubini Calls for Swift Action to Stop Depression

    In an op-ed for the Financial Times , Nouriel Roubini calls S&P's decision to downgrade the US credit rating "misguided," and he worries that it is making an already dangerous economic situation worse. Between the US economy's inability to add jobs, and the economic stagnation and debt struggles in Europe, Roubini is expecting another global recession. And he fears that this one might be significantly worse than the last. So can we avoid another severe recession? It might simply be mission impossible. The best bet is for those countries that have not lost market access - the US, UK, Japan, and Germany - to introduce new short-term fiscal stimulus while committing to medium-term fiscal austerity. The US downgrade will hasten demands for fiscal reduction, but America in particular should commit to look for significant cuts in the medium term, not an immediate fiscal drag that will worsen growth and deficits. Most western central banks should also introduce further QE, even though its effect will be limited. The European Central Bank should not just stop rate hiking: it should cut rates to zero and make big purchases of government bonds to prevent Italy or Spain losing market access - the outcome of which would be a truly major crisis, requiring doubling (or tripling) of bail-out resources, or debt workouts and a eurozone break-up. Read Mission impossible: stop another recession here .
  • FOMC Meeting Minutes

    The Fed has released the minutes from the June Federal Open Market Committee meeting, and it is an interesting read. Okay, maybe interesting isn't the right word. Perhaps illuminating. In short, members of the committee hold to their views that the slow but steady recovery will continue, though they are looking at it as more slow now than they thought it would be a few months ago. And they largely hold to their policies of the moment--though there is clearly some disagreement over monetary policy moving forward: Most participants expected that much of the rise in headline inflation this year would prove transitory and that inflation over the medium term would be subdued as long as commodity prices did not continue to rise rapidly and longer-term inflation expectations remained stable. Nevertheless, a number of participants judged the risks to the outlook for inflation as tilted to the upside. Moreover, a few participants saw a continuation of the current stance of monetary policy as posing some upside risk to inflation expectations and actual inflation over time. However, other participants observed that measures of longer-term inflation compensation derived from financial instruments had remained stable of late, and that survey-based measures of longer-term inflation expectations also had not changed appreciably, on net, in recent months. These participants noted that labor costs were rising only slowly, and that persistent slack in labor and product markets would likely limit upward pressures on prices in coming quarters. Participants agreed that it would be important to pay close attention to the evolution of both inflation and inflation expectations. A few participants noted that the adoption by the Committee of an explicit numerical inflation objective could help keep longer-term inflation expectations well anchored. Another participant, however, expressed concern that the adoption of such an objective could, in effect, alter the relative importance of the two components of the Committee's dual mandate. Participants also discussed the medium-term outlook for monetary policy. Some participants noted that if economic growth remained too slow to make satisfactory progress toward reducing the unemployment rate and if inflation returned to relatively low levels after the effects of recent transitory shocks dissipated, it would be appropriate to provide additional monetary policy accommodation. Others, however, saw the recent configuration of slower growth and higher inflation as suggesting that there might be less slack in labor and product markets than had been thought. Several participants observed that the necessity of reallocating labor across sectors as the recovery proceeds, as well as the loss of skills caused by high levels of long-term unemployment and permanent separations, may have temporarily reduced the economy's level of potential output. In that case, the withdrawal of monetary accommodation may need to begin sooner than currently anticipated in financial markets. A few participants expressed uncertainty about the efficacy of monetary policy in current circumstances but disagreed on the implications for future policy. Read through the full minutes here .
  • Strong Dollar Rhetoric, Weak Dollar Reality

    Politicians and policy makers in the US often talk a big game when it comes to the need for a strong dollar. But as Willem Buiter , Chief Economist of Citigroup, and Ebrahim Rahbari , an economist for Citigroup, write at VoxEU , "US strong-dollar rhetoric has contrasted sharply with a weak dollar reality." Buiter and Rahbari argue that current policy will keep the dollar relatively weak against other currencies. But they also see no viable alternative to the dollar as the key currency in global business. Stepping away from the rhetoric about the dollar, Buiter and Rahbari remind us of some of the reasons policymakers may be okay with the dollar not getting to strong too quickly: [A] low actual dollar exchange rate may be seen as a net benefit for the US, because, in the presence of nominal rigidities, a depreciation of the nominal dollar exchange rate implies a real depreciation and therefore an increase in the international competitiveness of the US tradables sectors. The US is quite an open economy today, with the ratio of trade (the sum of imports and exports) to GDP at around 30%, comparable to Japan (Figure 3). Net exports have also played a significant part in the slowly solidifying recent cyclical recovery in the US, though it is, of course, true that many factors affect the evolution of net exports besides the level of the (nominal or real) exchange rate. Read The ‘strong dollar’ policy of the US: Alice-in-Wonderland semantics vs. economic reality here .
  • NY Fed President on US Economic Outlook

    William Dudley , President of the Federal Bank of New York , spoke earlier today at New York University's Stern School of Business, and he gave a measured, somewhat positive prognosis of the US economy. While he said that there are mixed signals coming from the employment data, there is some good news in the data on consumer spending, productivity, and consumer and business confidence. On the activity side, a wide range of indicators show a broadening and strengthening of demand and production. For example, on the demand side, real personal consumption expenditures rose at a 4.1 percent annual rate during the fourth quarter. This compares with only a 2.2 percent annual rate during the first three quarters of 2010. Orders and production are following suit. For example, the Institute of Supply Management index of new orders for manufacturers climbed to 67.8 in January, the highest level since January of 2004. The revival in activity, in turn, has been accompanied by improving consumer and business confidence. For example, the University of Michigan consumer sentiment index rose to 77.5 in February, up from 68.9 six months earlier. Indeed, the 2.8 percent annualized growth rate of real gross domestic product (GDP) in the fourth quarter may understate the economy's forward momentum. That is because real GDP growth in the quarter was held back by a sharp slowing in the pace of inventory accumulation. The revival in demand, production and confidence strongly suggests that we may be much closer to establishing a virtuous circle in which rising demand generates more rapid income and employment growth, which in turn bolsters confidence and leads to further increases in spending. The only major missing piece of the puzzle is the absence of strong payroll employment growth. We will need to see sustained strong employment growth in order to be certain that this virtuous circle has become firmly established. So, there's the good news. But Dudley was careful to caution against premature optimism. And he while he outlined the dangers of low-interest rates, and the chance they might "foster a buildup of financial excesses or bubbles that might pose a medium-term risk to both full employment and price stability," he also explained that the Fed does have tools to avert crisis: To summarize the main points, we have a considerable amount of slack, little evidence of discontinuous speed limit effects, and little inflation pass-through from commodities into core inflation when inflation expectations are well-anchored, which is currently the case. This suggests that the biggest risk in terms of higher underlying inflation over the next year or two is that inflation expectations could become unanchored. This might occur, for example, if there were a loss of confidence in the ability and/or willingness of the Federal Reserve to tighten monetary policy in a timely way in order to keep inflation in check. In this regard, the proof of the pudding will be in our actions—talk is cheap. What is key—that the appropriate policy steps are taken in a timely manner. Read Dudley's Prospects for the Economy and Monetary Policy here .
  • Econbrowser: Progress Report on QE2

    At Econbrowser , James Hamilton takes a crack at evaluating the effectiveness of the Fed's latest quantitative easing tactics (and includes some helpful graphs for anyone trying to teach the subject): The graph below provides our calculations of the average maturity of publicly-held debt both before and after the Fed's operations, updated to include the first 3 months of QE2. The blue line is the average maturity (in weeks) of debt issued by the U.S. Treasury. The green line is the average maturity of publicly held debt, that is, the green line represents the results of subtracting off the Fed's holdings of Treasury debt. Historically the green line was above the blue. This is because the Fed preferred to buy the shorter-term debt, as a result of which the average maturity of the remaining debt held by the public (green) was bigger than that for the debt as originally issued (blue). However, since the start of 2008, that relation has been reversed-- the Fed has been buying a disproportionate share of the longer-maturity debt, and thus has been a factor in reducing the average maturity. But also since 2008, the Treasury has been issuing more long-term debt faster than the Fed has been buying it, so that the green line continues to rise over time. What we find in the latest data is that this trend has continued over the last 3 months, even with QE2. The graphs below highlight details of the last year. The top panel is the average maturity of publicly-held Treasury debt inclusive of all Fed operations, that is, it corresponds to the green line in the preceding figure. Although the average maturity in the second and third months of QE2 (December and January) fell a little below that for the first month (November), the average maturity in every one of these three months was bigger than in every month of the two years prior to QE2. The second panel shows the fraction of publicly-held Treasury debt (again, after netting out the Fed's operations) that is of 10 years or longer maturity. This has gone on to make new highs in both December and January. Our conclusion is that if QE2 made a positive contribution to the improving economic indicators since the program began, it could not have been through the mechanism of shortening the maturity of publicly-held Treasury debt. There are, to be sure, other places where the Fed's QE policies could have made some sort of impact, and Hamilton notes this in his post. Read Progress report on QE2 here .
1 2 3 4 Next >