Tom’s doing some heavy lifting, PGL is in form, Bruce has started SocSec 101, and the entire economics blogsphere is having so many conniptions over Hillary that you’d think the CEA was actually the Shadow Government.
So I just want start easy, and take a look at three easy-to-compare data points:
First, the Federal Funds target rate since 2007 (I include the last change in 2006 since it was the rate for the first 8.5 months of 2007):
If you make money easier to get, standard theory says that people will get it. While this raises the “threat” of inflation, it makes credit easier to get as well. So the theory goes.
Friends in the mortgage industry are telling me you have to be “rich” just to get a home loan now.
Even granting I have a vested interest right now in peole being able to get mortgages, this is keeping the market from clearing and expanding the housing crisis. Again, contrary to the theory that easier money means, well, easier to get money.
So we have easier money and tighter credit. The implication is that the banks are keeping that money, no circulating it. No wonder they want to be paid interest on reserve requirements.*
But what about the inflation fears of easier money? Surely, if the money is not circulating, that shouldn’t be a fear?
Hoenig said rising inflationary pressures are “troublesome” and a “serious” matter. “The bigger concern is that these increases are beginning to generate an inflation psychology to an extent that I have not seen since the 1970s and early 1980s,” he said. Hoenig added that “there is a significant risk that higher inflation will become embedded in the economy and require significant monetary policy tightening to reduce it.” He tied rising prices primarily to overseas factors, including a “sizable decline” in the U.S. dollar’s value.
Welcome to the Global Economy. But Hoenig is sanguine about the Fed Funds rate, even if he is willing to use the R word:
Hoenig’s views on the economy were relatively upbeat, even as he described the nation as being “at the brink of a recession.” He suggested interest rates were close to where they needed to be.
“The current accommodative stance should be sufficient to cushion the economy
from a deeper slowdown and the risks that financial disruptions could spill over to the broader economy,” he said. As the economy and markets improve “it will be necessary for the Federal Reserve to remove the policy accommodation in a timely manner.”
Citing “room for optimism,” Hoenig said “financial markets appear to have stabilized somewhat, and the economy should pick up in the second half of the year as fiscal and monetary stimulus take hold.” The official said he believe markets’ role in the current turmoil has been overstated, and that higher energy prices and housing woes have exacted the greater toll. He also said he believes the “credit crunch” hasn’t proved as damaging as some had feared.
So there we have it. We have inflation, but cutting rates was the right thing. And the credit crunch isn’t too bad, even if only the rich can buy a house. And that 325 basis points of easing in the past eight months just hasn’t gotten into the economy yet; give the banks another six months or so.
I feel better; how about you?
*Meanwhile, I am reliably informed that Bank of America just cut the rates on their (currently in place) contracts with consultants by 5-15%, depending on length of service (greater for longer).