Showing posts with label exit strategy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label exit strategy. Show all posts

Sunday, June 30, 2013

FELIX SALMON FIRMLY BELIEVES NOT IN THE INFLATION-EXPECTATIONS IMP, BUT IN THE TIGHTENING TOMMYKNOCKERS... by DeLong

How the Fed lost control of short term interest rates by Gavyn Davies (HT DeLong)
 "The declines in the prices of bonds and many risk assets… have come as surprise to some Fed officials, who thought that their decision to taper the speed of balance sheet expansion in the next 12 months, subject to certain economic conditions, would be seen as entirely separate from their thinking on the path for short rates…. The FOMC under Chairman Bernanke has worked very hard on its forward policy guidance, so there is probably some frustration that the markets have 'misunderstood' the Fed’s intentions. Richard Fisher, the President of the Dallas Fed, said that 'big money does organise itself somewhat like feral hogs', suggesting that markets were deliberately trying to 'break the Fed' by creating enough market turbulence to force the FOMC to continue its asset purchases. This is dubious logic. Investors who dumped bonds after the FOMC meeting would make money if bond prices fell further. They therefore presumably want the Fed to tighten policy, which is the opposite of what Mr Fisher indicates. Nor is it right to suggest that big money 'organises itself' at all; investors act in competition with each other, not in collusion."
...
Narayana Kocherlakota, President of the Minneapolis Fed, has made some concrete suggestions this week on economic thresholds. In the present context, his most important suggestion is that the Fed should say that it will not increase the federal funds rate until the unemployment rate has fallen below 5.5 per cent, which would represent a full one percentage point reduction compared to the present 6.5 per cent threshold. This would be subject to the medium term outlook for inflation remaining below 2.5 per cent. 
It is not clear that all members of the FOMC, several of whom have clearly become very worried about the reach for yield in the financial system, would be willing to go that far. But if the Fed really does want to get short rate expectations back under control, they may need to think very seriously about Mr Kocherlakota’s thresholds.
There are other ways to combat "reaching for yield" other than slow growth and high unemployment. More regulation on leverage and margins (see Alan Blinder on this), financial transaction taxes, etc.

Historic Mistake Watch by Krugman
So what’s the point of Fed communication? Mainly it’s not about the specific numbers; it’s about conveying what kind of central bankers we’re dealing with, and hence what they’re likely to do in the future. Talk of extended easy money can help the economy now precisely because it makes the Fed sound like it’s not a conventionally-minded central bank, eager to snatch away the punch bowl; even asset purchases work mainly because they reinforce that impression of unconventionality. 
But when the Fed starts talking about tapering at a time when unemployment is still very high and inflation below target, it undoes all of that good work; suddenly the FOMC starts sounding once again like a group whose fingers are already twitching as they fight the urge to grab that punch bowl. 
Undoing this damage is going to be very hard. One thing that will matter a lot, however, is the choice of Bernanke’s successor. If she’s a well-known dove, that could help a lot. If he’s, say, someone known for saying things like “stimulus is sugar“, look out below.
Yellen or Romer, not Geithner. My sense is that the Republicans like Corker will filibuster whoever it is.

Tuesday, May 28, 2013

exit strategy (Yoda Kuroda)



Nikkei Sinks Again Amid Mixed Signals From Central Bank
In Tokyo, the minutes of the Bank of Japan’s policy meeting on April 26 revealed a degree of doubt about the bank’s ability to inject a healthy dose of inflation into an economy that has suffered from crippling deflation for years. 
According to the minutes, “a few members” pointed out that the goal of 2 percent inflation appeared “difficult to achieve” in the planned time frame of about two years, “since it was highly uncertain whether changes in inflation expectations would lead to a rise in the actual rate of inflation.” 
Some board members also noted that the bank’s aggressive easing policies appeared to have been perceived by the markets as “contradictory” — comments that highlighted the challenges that the bank and policy makers are wrestling with. 
The bank, on one hand, has committed to ending deflationary expectations and starting an economic recovery by flooding the economy with money, which would cause long-term interest rates to rise. But the bank has also committed to keeping those interest rates in check, partly by buying large amounts of government bonds. That has sowed confusion among market players over whether they should welcome or worry about the recent rise in long-term rates.
Haruhiko "The Keymaster Yoda" Kuroda should say "we want long-term interest rates to remain low until we hit 2 percent inflation, with the economy running at full capacity and potential levels and with the output gap closed. This means 2 percent inflation, not runaway inflation. To prevent runaway inflation we'll allow long-term rates to rise at the appropriate time. This will contain inflation. Hope that clears things up. Market players should look for signs that the output gap is closed. That's when rates will rise. We estimate output gap closure in two years depending on the international economic context (see China, the U.S. and Europe.)"

Tuesday, March 05, 2013

escape velocity

Bernanke on long-term interest rates by James Hamilton
Bernanke called attention to several different forecasts of where the 10-year yield might be a few years down the road, including the Blue Chip consensus, Survey of Professional 
Forecasters, CBO, and the term-structure model that was used to construct Figure 1 above. 
Source: Bernanke (2013).
I was quite surprised to see the Fed Chairman produce this graph. If it is indeed the case that the 10-year yield is going to rise from 2% to 4% relatively quickly, it would mean significant capital losses for someone who buys a 10-year bond today. If the market comes around to taking such forecasts more seriously, bond prices should fall on Monday. 
However, Bernanke also emphasized that there is considerable uncertainty associated with these forecasts, on the down side as well as the up side.
 
Source: Bernanke (2013).
Bernanke offered the following explanation for why he wanted to call attention to forecasts of future ten-year rates: 
"It is worth pausing to note that, not that long ago, central bankers would have carefully avoided this topic. However, it is now a bedrock principle of central banking that transparency about the likely path of policy, in general, and interest rates, in particular, can increase the effectiveness of policy. In the present context, I would add that transparency may mitigate risks emanating from unexpected rate movements." 
Bernanke is clearly committed to keeping short-term interest rates low for quite a while yet. But a separate question is how much more the Fed wants to allow its balance sheet to grow with additional large-scale asset purchases. I think they'll want to give ample warning in advance of actually stopping the new purchases. 
And perhaps before dropping more direct hints about ending LSAP, Bernanke would want to make a speech like this one.
(emphasis added)