Monetary Policy – Surgery Needed

Current monetary policy is still primitive and will remain so without making use of new measures such as macroprudential policies

Monetary policy has come a long way but it is still in its initial stages of development.  Serious shortcomings mean that the tools of monetary policy are still rudimentary just as those of medicine were crude in the past.  In the same way that leeches would be prescribed for every ailment in medieval times, central banks have tended to rely solely on interest rates to manage the economy.  The tendency to “reach for the leeches” is still with us even though the global financial crisis has highlighted the flaws inherent in this approach and a range of new techniques for managing the economy have been made available.

Learning some hard lessons

Doctors often did more harm than good in antiquity due to a lack of understanding of the workings of the human body.  With our knowledge of the economy also deficient in places, economists may be guilty of causing similar damage.  Hubris led economists to believe that booms and busts could be eliminated but their faith was shown to be spectacularly misplaced.  Despite this, economists have been slow to adjust their view of the world even though their remedies are proving both ineffective and costly.

The global financial crisis and its aftermath have taught us a few valuable lessons.  The limitations of using interest rates to moderate the business cycle (both before and after recessions) are now apparent.  Higher interest rates do little to temper lending when both bankers and borrowers want more debt.  It is also becoming clear that different sectors of the economy react to interest rates in different ways.  Consumers have shown themselves willing to take on excessive debt in order to spend or to buy property.  On the other hand, businesses cannot always be enticed to borrow for investment when the economy is weak. 

The limits of monetary policy have been laid bare by the faltering economic recovery.  Low interest rates and cheap cash have spurred on some lending but not the right type to generate sustainable economic growth.  Households have taken on debt to buy property (which mostly just increases prices) rather than businesses or the government borrowing to make the economy more productive.  Surplus funds have also built up prices in the stock market which, while somewhat beneficial in the short term, will create problems down the line.  The abundance of cash in the financial system may also reduce the effectiveness of central banks’ control over interest rates. 

For a better world

Monetary policy needs to continue to develop as economists learn more about the economy and how it reacts to different policies.  Manipulating interest rates is a blunt instrument that is applied across the whole economy.  Interest rates need to be raised eventually but it seems rash to do so in response to distortions in certain sectors.  An early interest rate hike has been proposed as a countermeasure to the booming UK property market.  Yet, this is like chopping off an arm to treat an infected finger.

A more measured approach would be preferable but will take time to realise.  Techniques such as minimally invasive surgery have been developed in medicine over many years and economists should aim for similar progress in monetary policy.  Disparities between policies in theory and practice mean that trial and error will be necessary.  Using a still sickly economy to trial new policy options may seem reckless.  Yet experimentation is the main route to breaking fresh ground even in medicine where there are actual lives at risk.  Forward guidance is an example of a policy which seemed useful in theory but whose application was fraught with issues.

A wider range of policies would help deal with problems now and in the future with greater effectiveness.  These two goals can be achieved by the Bank of England trialling the much-discussed macroprudential policies such as caps on mortgages and other limits on property lending.  Having a greater range of options allows for better tailoring of policy while targeted measures enable greater freedom in setting interest rates to reflect the overall economy.  Just as modern medicine has had to advance beyond leeches, future monetary policy will need to progress past what we currently have and such an evolution will only happen as a result of taking bold actions today.

Economics – more religion than science?

Economists claim to offer salvation but the tenets of economics need reforming before we can be saved

Economics is sometimes like a religion in that its adherents keep the faith irrespective of evidence to the contrary.  The global financial crisis has tested the conviction of many economists but few seem ready to renounce their previous beliefs.  This might seem strange with a discipline that aims to be more like a science but there are factors which mean economics relies more on faith than on facts.  Considering the positions of power held by economists, we can only hope that the moment of revelation is not too far off. 

In Markets We Trust

Economics claims to offer a path to the Promised Land.  The role of God is assumed by the concept of the invisible hand which prophesies that markets will bring about the most favourable outcomes in terms of output and prices.  One of the most sacred beliefs in economics is that we must defer to the invisible hand as much as possible.  Economists help this along, with central banks keeping down inflation while governments open up their economies to global markets.   This ushered in over two decades of unprecedented economic progress until financial turmoil struck like a plague in 2008. 

Yet, despite the economic Armageddon that followed, economists have remained stubbornly tied to the same creed.  The response to the financial crisis has relied on the traditional tonic of lower interest rates with newer orthodoxy calling for the use of quantitative easing when conventional measures did not work.  Central banks have stuck with these policies despite the resulting growing distortions in the financial markets which would be anathema for economists in normal times. 

Believing in false idols

One element which makes economics more like a religion and less like a science is that it is difficult to prove when someone is wrong.  Scientific theories can be tested by experiments carried out in laboratories or similar places where the conditions can be kept in check.  Economic hypotheses cannot be proven in such controlled environments.  The sheer volume of transactions by consumers and firms means that there may be any number of reasons behind a certain outcome.  The impossibility of isolating specific cause and effect relationships means that truths in economics can only be subjective. 

This means that economists can piously hold onto their previous ideas on how the economy works despite any evidence to the contrary.  Economists tend to become wedded to their ideas as they hone them over many years in long careers in academia.  Any newcomers to economic are also indoctrinated into the existing dogma with little scope for breaking out of the mould.  The current generation of economics students have risen up in arms against being taught theories that have little relevance to economic events.

One of the more old-fashioned ideas that economists cling to is a fear of inflation.  The full range of tools for monetary stimulus has not been available as central banks have been adamant that inflation should not be allowed to get out of control.  This stems from psychological scars in the minds of economists due to damage done by inflation in a bygone era (the 1970s).  Europe has suffered the most under this economic fanaticism and has had to deal with the added difficulties of the Eurozone crisis with few policy options available. 

It is not a coincidence that the global economy and economic theory are both stagnating at the same time – economic deliverance for us all may depend on a second coming of economics in a more practical form.

Another New Policy - Negative Interest Rates

Another unconventional policy measure may be trialled in Europe as its central bank struggles to revive the moribund economy

The on-going economic troubles have been demanding in many ways – including having to learn the meanings of an ever-increasing range of new economic terms.  This is due to central banks implementing a range of practices to breathe life into an economy which seems impervious to their best efforts at resuscitation.  The list of unconventional policies started with quantitative easing, which was soon followed with forward guidance.  The next piece of headline-grabbing jargon may be negative interest rates.  This latest innovation is expected to come from the European Central Bank (ECB) even as other central banks look to wind down their operations.

The What, How, and Why of Negative Interest Rates

The policy of negative interest rates is just as simple as it sounds – paying someone to hold money instead of receiving interest on any deposits of cash.  Fortunately, the humble blogger on the street will not be required to pay negative interest rates by his or her retail bank; instead, the banks themselves will be charged for their holdings at the central bank.  Banks tend to park any surplus funds with the central bank so the idea of negative interest rates is to spur banks into making better use of their reserves.  In particular, the policy is intended to boost lending by banks which has remained sluggish despite record low interest rates.

The policy is all about creating the right incentives.  The actual payments themselves would be small.  For example, the ECB is said to be considering an interest rate of -0.1% in place of its current rate of 0.25%.  Central banks have been frustrated by the failure of low interest rates to generate the desired result – more lending.  Both forward guidance and negative interest rates are policies aimed at achieving this.  

Timing – why now?

Now we understand the basics of negative interest rates, the final question is one of timing – why now?  The ECB is driven by two key factors – the changes to monetary policy in the US and fears about deflation in Europe.

The effects of the Federal Reserve printing money to buy bonds (known as quantitative easing) have reached far beyond the US borders with some of the money also finding its way to Europe.  Less loot leaving the US will likely lead to less liquidity in the European banking system.  Low levels of inflation (0.7% in January) have led to fears about consumer prices starting to fall, something already happening in places like Greece.  There are concerns that such deflation could further undermine demand and result in debts increasing in size relative to the economy.

The potential adverse consequences of these developments have pushed the ECB to act and negative interest rates are one of the few options available.  This is because the actions of the ECB are restrained by divergent views among the member countries of the European Union.  In particular, Germany has been adamant in upholding rules that limit the ability of the ECB to purchase bonds. 

Negative interest rates would also bring their own complications.  European banks may struggle to deal with negative interest rates which are not the norm.  The extra costs may weaken banks by lowering their profits, making them more cautious lenders and exacerbating the problem.  Low lending rates have had only a muted effect so the benefits of going negative may be limited.  Even if the policy is seen to be effective, Germany would be loath to offer more help to struggling countries in the periphery of Europe as it may encourage them to put off crucial reforms.

It is too early to say whether negative interest rates will ever make it into our everyday lingo.  Either way, we can only hope that it does not take many more new policies until we can shake off the current economic stupor.

Your Neighbourhood Economist turns 100

Not much cheer considering how little progress in dealing with economic stagnation has been made since the blog began

There has not been much to celebrate of late but Your Neighbourhood Economist is happy to have reached a satisfying milestone – 100 blogs (not years).  This blog started by asking “so what is going on?” back in November 2011, lamenting weak growth in the global economy.  Little did Your Neighbourhood Economist (or many others) know that there would still be few signs of improvement over two years later.

Perhaps the only consolation is that things could be worse.  At least the Eurozone has not self destructed (yet) thanks to the European Central Bank stepping in.  US politicians also showed some surprising good sense despite all expectations to the contrary.  But the positives are few and far between.

Governments in many countries have too much debt to be able to boost spending which is leaving monetary policy as the main route out of the current weak economic growth.  However, expansive monetary policy has not been enough to generate much economic stimulus despite record low interest rates and loads of newly printed cash in the global financial system.  In fact, monetary policy may be doing more harm than good.  

Movements of surplus funds are creating havoc in emerging markets.  Uncertainty over the direction of monetary policy is a major obstacle in the way of a return to economic growth.  The costs of such policies are becoming more evident as the benefits are increasingly being called into question.

Central banks have struggled as the traditional tools of monetary policy have failed to have much of an effect.  New ideas have been tried (such as forward guidance) but the desired results have proved elusive.  Policy makers are getting side-tracked as new problems, such as concerns about deflation in Europe, draw their attention away from more pressing issues such as reforms.

Chances to celebrate may be a long way off so Your Neighbourhood Economist is glad for reasons to be cheerful (such as reaching 100 blogs) whenever possible.

Federal Reserve – preparing to taper

With crunch time coming up, the Federal Reserve puts in the groundwork for a key change in policy

In the long march of dealing with the aftermath of the global financial crisis, the recent baby steps taken by the Federal Reserve may be one of the most crucial parts of the journey.  The Federal Reserve is considering lowering the interest rate on reserves it holds for banks as part of a move to offset upcoming reductions (tapering) in its bond purchases which currently amount to US$85 billion each month.  This tapering is perhaps the most important policy change in the past 12 months with the health of the global economy in the balance, so the Federal Reserve is anxious to ensure all goes well.

The actions of the Federal Reserve have been keenly felt across the globe with stock markets everywhere buoyed by the extra cash sloshing around the international financial system.  This abnormal state of affairs where central bank policy dictates the movement of stock prices is increasingly creating distortions through excessive gains in stock prices.  A pickup in the US economy would mean that the extra stimulus is no longer needed, but a smooth transition as the Federal Reserve changes tack will be key to sustaining any economic recovery in the United States and elsewhere.

As such, the Federal Reserve has been keen to soften the blow to the stock markets with policies that act as a stimulus as it cuts back on the bond buying which has been the main focus of its expansionary policy.  The mere rumour that the Federal Reserve would buy fewer bonds resulted in the interest rates on 10-year US government bonds jumping from around 1.7% in May to almost 3.0% in September.  Forward guidance, with future hikes in interest rates linked to unemployment, was tried as a means to signal the intent to help the economy but investors did not buy it (see prior blog for more).  

Changes to interest rates on banks’ reserves which are under consideration will only probably have a minimal effect but it is the signalling by the Federal Reserve that may be more important.  By showing a willingness to continue to support the economy, the Federal Reserve eases concerns that its actions will trample over the nascent economic recovery.  Some of the best successes of monetary policy have taken effect through nothing more than the suggestion of future action, such as the promise by the European Central Bank to do “whatever it takes” to save the euro.  This convinced enough people that it put paid to the Eurozone crisis without a single bond being purchased or interest rate being changed.  

Your Neighbourhood Economist was previously critical of the Federal Reserve for not taking the opportunity to begin tapering in October but the extra couple of months have been put to good use in ensuring that the change in policy goes smoothly.  All eyes will now look to the next meeting of the Federal Reserve (17th to 18th December) when tapering may be announced especially if US job data released on the first Friday in December is seen as positive.  The Federal Reserve is taking a cautious line but it is worth ensuring that there are no stumbles in the finishing stretch.

Not so Great Expectations

Economists are sticking to old ideas about our behaviour but is it time to ask them for some more?

Economics has grown in popularity as people try to make sense of the troubles in the economy.  At the same time, what is taught as economics is being challenged after economics provided little help in predicting the global financial crisis or dealing with its aftermath.  Your Neighbourhood Economist has a particular issue with the common view among economists about how people think about changes in prices and interest rates.  This way of thinking has pushed monetary policy in the wrong direction as economists rely on theory which is increasingly being shown to be detached from reality.

The above position is based on the concept of rational expectations where people’s predictions of the future are built into economics models.  This first came to prominence during the 1970s where persistent inflation was a problem - high inflation had resulted in demands for higher wages which pushed up the costs of businesses and thereby led to businesses charging even higher prices.  The notion of expectations enabled economists to explain the reasons behind rising wages.  Since then, inflation has been tamed through new policies which make price stability the main focus of central banks under the rationale that people will not expect inflation to get out of hand if the central banks are on the case.

Central banks have been successful in handling inflation but other problems such as reigning in financial crises and dealing with the aftermaths of such have proved harder to manage.  Economists have been using the same tools through forward guidance which aims to boost lending by instilling expectations that interest rates will stay low for an extended period of time.  At the same time, measures to restore the economy have been restricted by concerns about the possibility of triggering a surge of inflation if central banks are seen to be less vigilant.  Surveys of people’s perceptions of inflation are now commonplace and followed by inflation-fearing economists almost as anxiously as politicians track polls on their popularity.

Yet times have changed.  Inflation is no longer such a big deal - globalization has resulted in increased competition which keeps down prices and weaker labour unions are unable to impose the industry-wide wages hikes of the past.  The average person on the street is not overly concerned about inflation in comparison to other worries about the economy so our actions are no longer shaped much by changes to prices.  The same is true for deflation - although the faltering economy in Japan is brought out as an example of what can go wrong, it is likely that Japan is an anomaly rather than a model applicable to other countries.  The old ideas on economics have not served us well in getting the global economy up and running again suggesting that economists ought to change their thinking to help deal with the hard times.