First time visitor? Learn more.

Some Insight Into The Fed’s Actions

by coldwarrior ( 10 Comments › )
Filed under Academia, Economy, Inflation, Open thread, Special Report at September 13th, 2013 - 2:00 pm

The job of the Fed is to do two things: maintain price stability and provide the optimal monetary supply for maximum employment.  To do this, the Fed uses interest rates to control the supply and velocity of money. If no one is using the money, velocity is zero and there is no inflation. In fact, there can very easily be deflation.


With that in mind, the following article will give us some insight into why the Fed is doing what it’s doing and where the  ideas came from.

Woodford’s Theories Rooted in Japan Slump Embraced by Bernanke

The Federal Reserve is buying mortgage-backed securities and has stated it will keep interest rates low until unemployment falls. The Bank of Canada under Mark Carney likewise made an explicit promise about how long rates would be held down, and Carney is now bringing this practice to the Bank of England. The European Central Bank, led by Mario Draghi, has refined how it communicates its interest-rate intentions.

There’s a pattern here, Bloomberg Markets magazine will report in its October special issue on the 50 Most Influential people in global finance. Key central banks, faced with subpar growth and little room for further rate cuts, are embracing the research of one man: Columbia University economist Michael Woodford.
“His approach to monetary economics is the one that’s being followed, one way or another, at many of the world’s central banks,” says Richard Clarida, a colleague of Woodford’s at Columbia, a former U.S. assistant Treasury secretary for economic policy and an adviser to Pacific Investment Management Co. “Mike is the leading monetary theorist on the planet right now.”

Woodford, 57, has wrestled for more than two decades with the question of how central banks can promote growth once short-term rates have been cut to zero — including during a stint at Princeton University from 1995 to 2004. The Ivy League school in New Jersey was the place to be if you were an up-and-coming economist around the turn of the millennium.

Princeton Thinkers

Ben S. Bernanke, future chairman of the Fed, was there. He had recruited Woodford from the University of Chicago. Paul Krugman, who would go on to win the Nobel prize in 2008 for his research on trade, also was at Princeton. Lars Svensson, later a deputy governor of the Swedish central bank, was a visiting professor. And their big topic of discussion was Japan. Ten years after the bursting of a property-price bubble, the country was mired in deflation. Short-term interest rates had been cut as far as they could go, and the monetary authorities were at a loss about what else to do.

The Princeton professors had plenty of ideas. Bernanke leaned toward having the Bank of Japan gobble up assets as a way of pumping money back into the economy. Woodford was skeptical that would do much. He favored a strategy called forward guidance. He wanted Japan’s central bank to promise to keep interest rates pinned near zero until the country’s economy had fully recovered from its bust and had conquered deflation. The aim of such a communications strategy would be to convince companies and consumers that growth will pick up and prices will stop falling — and induce them to spend rather than hoard cash.

Jackson Hole

At the time, Japanese policy makers paid the American academics little mind. They began a program of quantitative easing in 2001, ramping up slowly and then abandoning it five years later, and they didn’t embrace any forward-guidance principles.

Jump forward to August 2012, to the Fed’s annual ideas confab in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, in the Teton mountains. The focus at this meeting was on this conundrum of what central banks can do when rates have already been cut to nothing, what policy makers call the zero bound — only now Japan was not the sole example.

The Fed had cut rates effectively to zero at the end of 2008, and yet the U.S. recovery from the worst economic trauma since the Great Depression had been discouragingly slow. European central bankers were searching for new policy tools as well, as the region slipped into recession.

Woodford’s Advice

The academic presentation that made the biggest splash at Jackson Hole was Woodford’s. The professor questioned the efficacy of the central bank’s purchases of Treasury securities and suggested that any further buying of assets should be concentrated on mortgage-backed debt, to help the housing market. He also called for a revamp of the Fed’s communications strategy to solidify its commitment to returning the economy to full health.

At its next meeting, in September 2012, the Fed announced it would start to buy $40 billion of mortgage securities per month. In December, policy makers junked their statement that they would keep rates low until the middle of 2015 and instead pledged low rates until certain economic goals are met — the strategy Woodford had articulated. The Fed promised to hold rates at zero at least until unemployment falls to 6.5 percent, as long as inflation isn’t forecast to rise above 2.5 percent.

Gauti Eggertsson, a former New York Fed researcher and occasional co-author with Woodford, says the Columbia professor’s ideas permeate recent central bank actions. “He is probably one of the best-known, most influential economists that noneconomists are not aware of,” says Eggertsson, who’s an associate professor at Brown University.

Law School

Woodford didn’t set out to become an economist. He majored in physics at the University of Chicago and then earned a law degree at Yale University in 1980. Because so many of his Yale professors cited the importance of economic concepts, he decided to study the subject at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

“I got excited about economic problems and didn’t look back,” Woodford says. While still at MIT, he won a John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation fellowship, or genius prize.

Following MIT, Woodford taught at Columbia and then the University of Chicago. After economist Frederic Mishkin was named director of research at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in 1994, he asked Woodford, newly arrived at Princeton, to be one of his advisers. This high-powered kitchen cabinet included Bernanke, Clarida and Christopher Sims, who later won the Nobel prize.

Economics Text

In 2003, Woodford published an equation-laden book titled “Interest and Prices: Foundations of a Theory of Monetary Policy” (Princeton University Press). It has come to be known as the bible of modern monetary economics, San Francisco Fed President John Williams says. He has a joke he likes to tell about Woodford that shows how eager central bankers are to embrace the ideas he advocates. Williams compares himself to an Olympic gymnast who works hard on a routine, performs it well in competition and sticks the landing. Woodford is the judge, holding up his score: a seven. He tells the gymnast Williams, “You did a good job, but you’re not quite where you need to be.”

That’s more or less what Woodford says about recent Fed actions. He welcomes the Fed’s intention to taper off its purchases of Treasury securities and mortgage debt, though he says the central bank could be clearer about the rationale.

“As the Fed’s balance sheet gets bigger, the bar to justify additional purchases does start getting higher,” Woodford says. “This could have been made clearer from the beginning, avoiding confusion about the significance of tapering now.”

Significant Improvement

While saying that the Fed’s current guidance on interest rates is a “significant improvement,” Woodford sees problems with tying the policy to progress on reducing joblessness. As unemployment falls toward 6.5 percent, the Fed will be forced to explain what it will do, especially if, as Woodford suspects, it doesn’t want to raise rates at that time.

He says the Fed should adopt a broader goal: returning total economic output — nominal gross domestic product, in economist parlance — back to the trend it would have been on if the recession hadn’t occurred.

In Europe, Draghi said on July 4 that the ECB expects to keep its key interest rate where it is now, at 0.5 percent or lower, for “an extended period of time.” That was a step toward Woodford’s monetary formula.

And in the U.K., when Carney testified to Parliament in February, after being selected to become the next governor of the Bank of England, he invoked the academic. Defending the use of central bank interest-rate commitments, he referred his questioners to Woodford’s Jackson Hole paper in particular. In early August, Carney committed the central bank to keeping interest rates at a record low until unemployment reaches 7 percent.

Japan Pledge

Even Japan, the case study on the minds of the Princeton thinkers more than a decade ago, has taken some of Woodford’s advice. The strategy Bank of Japan Governor Haruhiko Kuroda began in April, as the government seeks to remedy what’s now a quarter century of sputtering growth, combines Bernanke’s recommended asset purchases with the type of communication Woodford favors, a pledge to push inflation to 2 percent.

Woodford is about as close to the world’s monetary powers as one can be from a seat in academia. Bernanke referred to him as a friend while explaining, at a September 2012 press conference, that Woodford’s research shows how forward guidance can be the central bank’s most powerful tool once rates have been cut to near zero.

Woodford says he doesn’t get much opportunity these days to talk to Bernanke, as the Fed chairman is surrounded by security and watches his every word. In the calm of his office on the Columbia campus, Woodford says he’s happy as an academic and doesn’t covet a policy-making job.

“Having the ability to be an outside critic and have an outside stance is one that I enjoy a lot,” he says.

Tags: , , ,


Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

10 Responses to “Some Insight Into The Fed’s Actions”
( jump to bottom )

  1. darkwords
    1 | September 13, 2013 2:49 pm

    They need to let the invisible hand work. Give the individual confidence in the economy. The astro turfed effort to bump the minimum wage to $15 will be destabilizing because there is no added value behind it.

  2. 2 | September 13, 2013 2:57 pm

    @ darkwords:

    Actually, raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour makes things worse. YOu’ll have inflation come out of that as the costs of labor are passed on to the consumer. What is worse, though, is that now people who are making $30K a year, which is considerably above minimum wage, will become people employed for minimum wage. It makes the poor poorer.

  3. darkwords
    3 | September 13, 2013 3:04 pm

    I think central banks are very limited in what they can influence unless they have central control over the spending psychology of individuals.

    What slows growth down? Lack of confidence? Corruption? Too much government? Is slow growth a bad thing?

    Or what is the purpose of interest? To limit risk? Are there investment that are mostly risk free?

    To me central banking management is a lot like the the global warming alarmist weather model management. It’s not really predictable in a chaotic environment.

    I’d want a central bank to improve the stable flow of money in the country. And advocate trade and market issues with foreign governments. Not much else.

  4. darkwords
    4 | September 13, 2013 3:06 pm

    @ 2 Iron Fist: I was trying to tell that to some lefties yesterday and they were incensed. Said the markets have never and will never do that. Inflation…..

    It’s why it is particularly stupid to place any of these social justice advocates in government positions.

  5. 5 | September 13, 2013 3:10 pm

    To me central banking management is a lot like the the global warming alarmist weather model management. It’s not really predictable in a chaotic environment.

    Exactly. Command economies have failed everywhere they’ve been implemented. You can’t simply mandate people spend money that they don’t have. I think one of the sleepers in our economy is consumer debt. Damned near everyone is in hock up to their eyeballs in consumer debt. People have maxed out their cards. You aren’t going to generate a lot more activity by making credit looser.

  6. 6 | September 13, 2013 3:14 pm

    darkwords wrote:

    It’s why it is particularly stupid to place any of these social justice advocates in government positions.

    Which is, scarily enough where most of them intend to go. I don’t really get that. WHo wants to work for the government? It would be frustrating as hell for me to have to put up with all the bullshit that they do. But these “Social Justice” types get degrees in PolySci, and go directly into the government from there. They do this because they want to hold the reigns of power to one degree or another. Being a bureaucrat pays well, and the benefits are unrealistically high. But they produce almost nothing of value. That’d just drive me batshit.

  7. darkwords
    7 | September 13, 2013 3:16 pm

    @ 5 Iron Fist: that does slow things down There was a time I acquired a lot of credit and spent a lot. Then a few years later a crunch came and the debt crippled my business. Cutting corners everywhere. Cutting buying everywhere. And no ability to re finance because the banks thought I was too small to bother with. Everyone in good with central banking was re financing but me. I eventually did, but it was too late for the business. Central banking practices were sticky for me and had a lot of barriers while the economy itself was dynamic and changing all the time. The mistake there was to borrow the money and try to grow too fast.

  8. darkwords
    8 | September 13, 2013 3:20 pm

    @ 6 Iron Fist: I work with social justice people. Their whole day is spent trying to identify and find problems. Usually where none exist. They engage lawyers, have the ears of politicians, make a mountain out of a molehill at every opportunity. All with the purpose of scaring people into validating their crappy education. All local governments and fortune 500 companies are now ripe with these weeds.

    If a company sells stock, they have also bought into social justice.

    I’m ok with social justice if it is merit based. Not the current class behavior modification system being forced on everyone.

  9. 9 | September 13, 2013 4:33 pm

    CW, I respect your abilities as an economist, but before I even read the article, an endeavor which I fully intend to take, I must take exception with your opening introduction to it. This is not the purpose of the fed. While that may be the purpose that the fed has taken upon itself, the original purpose for its creation was to act as a buffer that would prevent bank failures simply by having a huge amount of cash on hand to make certain that member banks would always have the ability to maintain adequate liquidity to fight off momentary emotionally driven runs. For that one purpose of course, the fed has proven itself to be a complete failure. Some time during the Depression of the 30’s, the geniuses in our congress ceded their authority to master our coin over to the fed, and that purpose was also taken on. The specter of deflation was a result of tying our economy to a hard asset, (Gold,) and not due to problems with velocity, (consumer spending.) I do agree with tightening the money supply, since inflation is just as dangerous as deflation, but that can be accomplished by other means as well. You are conflating the disease, inflation, with the symptom, rising prices. Our economy has inflated, and there is nothing that can stave off the inevitable symptom from manifesting itself.

  10. Bumr50
    10 | September 13, 2013 10:44 pm

    Why can’t I ever have meetings at Jackson Hole, all paid for and sh*t?

Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David