Wednesday, August 1, 2012

No New Stimulus from the Fed

The Federal Reserve Open Market Committee did not announce any new monetary stimulus plans in the statement it issued to day. In its post-policy meeting statement it stuck to empty blather. The statement said that, given current economic conditions, Fed monetary policy is "likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate at least through late 2014."

This, of course, means nothing. At the first sign of accelerating price inflation, be that anytime in 2013, the Fed is likely to push rates higher. The Fed is operating without theory and is simply watching the economic numbers. Given that the Fed has recently slowed money growth dramatically, the economic numbers (and the stock market) will show increasing weakness. At some point, perhaps after a stock market crash, the Fed will open the monetary floodgates, which will be followed by severe price inflation. The price inflation will be followed by climbing interest rates.

Here's the Fed's full statement:
Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in June suggests that economic activity decelerated somewhat over the first half of this year. Growth in employment has been slow in recent months, and the unemployment rate remains elevated. Business fixed investment has continued to advance. Household spending has been rising at a somewhat slower pace than earlier in the year. Despite some further signs of improvement, the housing sector remains depressed. Inflation has declined since earlier this year, mainly reflecting lower prices of crude oil and gasoline, and longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable.

Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability. The Committee expects economic growth to remain moderate over coming quarters and then to pick up very gradually. Consequently, the Committee anticipates that the unemployment rate will decline only slowly toward levels that it judges to be consistent with its dual mandate. Furthermore, strains in global financial markets continue to pose significant downside risks to the economic outlook. The Committee anticipates that inflation over the medium term will run at or below the rate that it judges most consistent with its dual mandate.

To support a stronger economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at the rate most consistent with its dual mandate, the Committee expects to maintain a highly accommodative stance for monetary policy. In particular, the Committee decided today to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and currently anticipates that economic conditions--including low rates of resource utilization and a subdued outlook for inflation over the medium run--are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate at least through late 2014.

The Committee also decided to continue through the end of the year its program to extend the average maturity of its holdings of securities as announced in June, and it is maintaining its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments from its holdings of agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in agency mortgage-backed securities. The Committee will closely monitor incoming information on economic and financial developments and will provide additional accommodation as needed to promote a stronger economic recovery and sustained improvement in labor market conditions in a context of price stability.

Voting for the FOMC monetary policy action were: Ben S. Bernanke, Chairman; William C. Dudley, Vice Chairman; Elizabeth A. Duke; Dennis P. Lockhart; Sandra Pianalto; Jerome H. Powell; Sarah Bloom Raskin; Jeremy C. Stein; Daniel K. Tarullo; John C. Williams; and Janet L. Yellen. Voting against the action was Jeffrey M. Lacker, who preferred to omit the description of the time period over which economic conditions are likely to warrant an exceptionally low level of the federal funds rate.

8 comments:

  1. >>At some point, perhaps after a stock market crash, the Fed will open the monetary floodgates, which will be followed by severe price inflation. The price inflation will be followed by climbing interest rates.

    The longer they wait, the more severe the situation, the more they have to print and the higher the inflation. So why wait? Fed probably does not mind mild deflation?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm really surprised they didn't juice it this time around. Yay for me! More time to buy more cheap gold/silver.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Notice how the market barely moved on the news of no new easing. We didn't even get lip service of new easing. Why? I believe the market is starting to realize that if it did indeed drop any significant degree, the FED would ease. The FED even stated as much in it's statement. This is the beginning of the hyperinflationary market mentality. The market is beginning to have an unshakeable faith that the FED will indeed ease when the market crashes, therefore the market never crashes. As this faith in FED easing increases, the faith in the currency decreases. The FED may never have to ease again. Hyperinflation is looming. It will strike like a thief in the night, and once it takes hold, there will be nothing the FED can do to stop it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is a very interesting take. Some are saying market held up because market was not expecting easing by Fed in this meeting but it is expecting easing by ECB tomorrow. Commodities stocks are underperforming though, gold and energy stocks are not doing as well as technology and defensive stocks.

      Delete
    2. Then why did the market positively respond to QE2 and only stop positively responding when it became clear Bernanke was not committed to monetary easing?

      Face it, NGDP targeting is the best way to get us out of the recession. Selgin offered a cogent critique but I doubt Rothbardians consider Selgin a good economist because he doesn't simply quote Rothbard as a supporting argument.

      Delete
    3. LOL. Yeah, that's all Rothbardians do is quote Rothbard. Give me a single example please.

      Delete
    4. "Then why did the market positively respond to QE2 and only stop positively responding when it became clear Bernanke was not committed to monetary easing?"

      Specify in what ways it responded "positively" without reference to the circular concept of GDP. Because if you mean higher GDP because of the Fed's funny money heating up the economy, we're not going to agree that the Fed accomplished anything of the sort.

      "Face it, NGDP targeting is the best way to get us out of the recession. Selgin offered a cogent critique but I doubt Rothbardians consider Selgin a good economist because he doesn't simply quote Rothbard as a supporting argument."

      Face what exactly? You still haven't made a case for it. It's funny that the Mises institute - an explicitly Rothbardian organisation - probably gives Selgin more air time than any other economic education outlet, yet you have the gumption to make such blatantly dumb assertions. Selgin isn't very liked because he's an asshole, not because he isn't a Rothbardian in every respect.

      Delete
  4. We will see how market reacts if ECB stays pat tomorrow

    ReplyDelete