April 23, 2024

You are here: Home / Archives for ben bernanke

High & Low Finance: In Japan, a Test of Inflation Targets

December 20, 2012 by Leave a Comment

“Under a paper-money system, a determined government can always generate higher spending and, hence, positive inflation.”

— Ben Bernanke, 2002

Now we may find out if Mr. Bernanke was right. Japan appears to be ready to do whatever it takes to end its long run of falling prices. The Bank of Japan took limited action on Thursday, and more is expected in the new year.

Mr. Bernanke, then a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, and now its chairman, gave the speech quoted above at a time when the American economy was stumbling along in a slow recovery and prices, at least as measured by the Consumer Price Index, were declining.

He was arguing that the Fed would not be out of ammunition if it cut nominal interest rates to zero and the economy failed to respond. He has since proved he was right about that. In the speech, he made a passing reference to a phrase used by Milton Friedman, about using a “helicopter drop” of money to fight inflation, which eventually earned him the nickname “Helicopter Ben” from conservatives scandalized by his aggressive action after the financial crisis began.

For two decades, Japan has provided stark evidence that chronic deflation is possible in a modern economy. Prices have fallen steadily despite extraordinarily low interest rates. The economy has stagnated.

This week the Liberal Democratic Party, which had ruled Japan for nearly its entire postwar history until it was swept from power three years ago, won a landslide victory. Shinzo Abe, the prime minister from 2006 to 2007, will get another chance.

Mr. Abe devoted a decent part of his campaign to criticism of the Bank of Japan, the country’s central bank. He wants the bank to pursue inflation, and to effectively print money until it gets it. At one point during the campaign he spoke of a 3 percent inflation target, although he seems to have cut that back to 2 percent.

Either goal, if realized, would be a major change for the country. The inflation index used in calculations of gross domestic product is now 18 percent lower than it was at the end of 1994.

On Thursday, the central bank took a relatively small step in the direction favored by Mr. Abe. It decided to step up its asset purchases and seemed to leave open the possibility that it would adopt the inflation target at a later meeting. Mr. Abe praised the move.

To a significant extent, deflationary expectations are now baked into the Japanese economy. Tiny government bond yields have persisted for many years. Even though the nominal yields are small, the real (after inflation) yields have been respectable because there has been deflation, not inflation. And the competition has not been that great. The stock market has fluctuated, but it remains far below where it was when the Japanese bubble began to deflate in the early 1990s. Real estate losses from that bubble — do you remember when the gardens of the Imperial Palace in Tokyo were supposed to be worth more than the entire state of California? — still have an impact on investor psychology.

Western economists, Mr. Bernanke among them, have long called for Japan to target inflation. Lately, some Chinese economists have been offering similar lectures. But until now, little has happened. The central bank has announced a goal of positive inflation of up to 1 percent, but it is not widely believed, and it has certainly not happened.

As it is, the limited quantitative easing efforts of the Japanese central bank have been viewed as temporary, and as not really changing anything. Whether the new promises of something more significant will be credible remains to be seen.

“At this point, moving to a 2 percent target would not be such a giant step,” said Kenneth Rogoff, a Harvard economist who has suggested inflation targeting in the United States as well as in Japan. “They have to pursue it vigorously until we have inflation expectations firmly higher. No one knows how much they would have to do to accomplish that.”

The Bank of Japan has in the past been hesitant to really try to establish that credibility, for at least two reasons. One is that there is fear that the Japanese government bond market would be disrupted. Another is that it could do severe damage to the central bank’s own balance sheet. It owns a lot of Japanese government bonds whose market value would fall. Conceivably, that could cause the bank to seek a recapitalization from the government, something that would be embarrassing, to say the least.

To establish the credibility, the central bank would have to show a readiness to create credit at a rapid rate. It would probably also need to take steps to hold down the value of the yen, a move that would no doubt cause concern in the United States.

It is, however, very doable, as Switzerland has shown. When the euro zone debt crisis was at its worst, Switzerland became a safe haven for European investors worried that the euro might blow up. That drove up the value of the Swiss franc versus the euro and damaged Switzerland’s ability to compete. The Swiss government responded by announcing that the euro would not be allowed to fall below 1.2 Swiss francs. If necessary, the government would simply sell francs to meet any demand.

That has been necessary, and the Swiss have accumulated a huge portfolio of foreign currency. So, too, could the Japanese if they chose to announce that the dollar would henceforth be worth at least 100 yen, a level not seen since 2009.

Doing so would instantly restore at least some competitiveness to Japanese industry, which has experienced something that would have seemed impossible only a few years ago: Japan has a trade deficit.

Bringing inflation to Japan could make the country’s debt load — now higher than that of any other major country — appear more manageable. One unfortunate result of deflation coupled with perennial recession is that a country’s debt-to-G.D.P. ratio rises even if no more money is borrowed. Measured in yen, the Japanese economy was larger when Mr. Abe left office in 2007 — two years before his party lost power — than it is now.

A stronger recovery in the United States, not to mention avoiding a new Europe-wide downturn, would make it easier for Japan to begin to grow again. But even if that did happen, it would not solve all of Japan’s problems. The country has an aging, shrinking population. It needs more workers, but the Japanese attitude toward immigration makes Arizona look liberal by comparison.

Japan’s economy has been adrift for so long that much of the world takes for granted that it cannot, or at least will not, ever be reformed. Such cynicism has a basis, but it is possible that circumstances have changed. Japanese who seemed content with the way things were now clearly want something different, even if they are not sure what, or how to get it.

Three years ago, the Democratic Party of Japan won a landslide election, only to prove stumbling and incoherent when it tried to govern. Now the voters have turned back to the Liberal Democrats. Whether Mr. Abe will be more competent, and whether he will be able to effectively lead a party that still has competing factions, is far from clear.

Still, investors are taking heart. Japanese stocks leapt on the news of the election results, while the yen weakened. For now, at least, there is reason to hope that something important was changed by this election.

Floyd Norris comments on finance and the economy at nytimes.com/economix.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/21/business/in-japan-a-test-of-inflation-targets.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Filed Under: Global Business Tagged With: , ,

S.&P. Streak Comes to an End on Fiscal Worries

December 14, 2012 by Leave a Comment

The Standard Poor’s 500-stock index ended its six-day winning streak Thursday, retreating as worries intensified that Washington’s fiscal negotiations were dragging on with little progress.

Anxiety about the talks between Democrats and Republicans was enough to offset encouraging data on retail sales and jobless claims.

Investors are concerned that tax increases and spending cuts, set to begin in 2013 if a deal is not reached in Washington, will hurt growth. The stock market had taken the heated talk in stride lately, but downbeat remarks from the House speaker, John A. Boehner of Ohio, prompted some selling Thursday.

Mr. Boehner accused President Obama of “slow walking” the economy toward the automatic tax increases and spending cuts that will occur on Jan. 1, 2013, if no deal is reached. He was scheduled to meet with Mr. Obama later on Thursday.

“There is no conviction here and Boehner’s comments — as harsh as they were — were realistic,” said Jason Weisberg, managing director at the Seaport Securities Corporation in New York.

“The fiscal cliff is already built in,” Mr. Weisberg said. “That being said, people don’t like to be told the apocalypse is coming over and over and over again. The real players in this market have already closed their books.”

After nearing a 1 percent decline for the day, the S. P. 500 pared losses late in the session. The index had posted six consecutive sessions of gains through Wednesday, and at one point Wednesday, the S. P. 500 touched its highest intraday level since Oct. 22.

While the Federal Reserve’s announcement on Wednesday of a new round of economic stimulus bolstered stocks, Chairman Ben Bernanke’s comments that monetary policy would not be sufficient to offset the impact of the fiscal crisis weighed on sentiment.

The Dow Jones industrial average tumbled 74.73 points, or 0.56 percent, to 13,170.72 at the close. The S. P. 500-stock index fell 9.03 points, or 0.63 percent, to 1,419.45. The Nasdaq composite index slid 21.65 points, or 0.72 percent, to end at 2,992.16.

Apple’s stock, down 1.7 percent at $529.69, was among the biggest drags on the Nasdaq, while I.B.M., down 0.5 percent at $191.99, was among the biggest weights on the Dow. A federal jury in Delaware Thursday found that Apple’s iPhone infringed on three patents owned by MobileMedia Ideas.

Among the day’s biggest gainers, Best Buy shares shot up 15.9 percent to $14.12 after a report that the company’s founder, Richard M. Schulze, was expected to offer to buy the consumer electronics retailer this week.

The energy and information technology sectors were the S. P.’s weakest performers, with the S. P. energy index declining 0.9 percent. Shares of the American refining company Phillips 66 lost 1.6 percent to $52.21.

The day’s data sent some positive signals on the economy, with weekly claims for jobless benefits dropping to nearly the lowest level since February 2008, and retail sales rising in November after an October decline, improving the picture for consumer spending.

In Europe, European Union finance ministers reached agreement to make the European Central Bank the bloc’s top banking supervisor, which could increase confidence in the ability of European Union leaders to confront the euro zone’s sovereign debt crisis.

The Treasury’s 10 year note fell 9/32 to 99 1/32, with the yield rising to 1.73 from 1.70 on Wednesday.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/14/business/daily-stock-market-activity.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Filed Under: Economy News Tagged With: , ,

Economix Blog: Bruce Bartlett: Can the Fed Stimulate Growth or Only Inflation?

November 9, 2011 by Leave a Comment

DESCRIPTION

Bruce Bartlett held senior policy roles in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations and served on the staffs of Representatives Jack Kemp and Ron Paul. He is the author of the coming book “The Benefit and the Burden.”

Many economists, myself included, believe that a more aggressive Federal Reserve policy is needed to turn the economy around. Additional fiscal stimulus would also help. As the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, Ben Bernanke put it at a Nov. 2 news conference, “It would be helpful if we could get assistance from some other parts of the government to work with us to create jobs.”

Today’s Economist

Perspectives from expert contributors.

However, such assistance will not be coming. President Obama’s jobs package has been blocked by Republicans in Congress, and the order of the day is fiscal tightening, with the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction poised to offer recommendations for $1.5 trillion in additional deficit reduction by Nov. 23.

With fiscal stimulus off the table, monetary stimulus is all that is available. But the Republican view is that monetary policy is incapable of stimulating real growth – that it will stimulate only inflation. This view is regularly enforced by The Wall Street Journal editorial page, which establishes the ideological line for Republicans on Fed policy.

In an editorial on Feb. 29, 2008, The Journal said it was certain that higher inflation was on the way, calling it the “Bernanke reinflation.” An editorial on June 9, 2008, warned that easy money and Keynesian stimulus “is taking us down the road to stagflation.” On Feb. 6, 2009, the Journal editorial writer George Melloan said the inevitable result of economic stimulus would be inflation. On June 10, 2009, the economist Arthur Laffer wrote on the Journal editorial page that the increase in the Fed’s monetary base was “a surefire recipe for inflation and higher interest rates.”

Echoing the party line, Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, in a New York Times op-ed article on Feb. 14, 2009, said it was a virtual certainty that 1970s-style stagflation was coming back. In The New York Times on May 4, 2009, the conservative economist Allan Meltzer wrote that enormous budget deficits, rapid growth in the money supply and a sustained currency devaluation were “harbingers of inflation.”

More than two years later, none of those predictions has come to pass. According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, inflationary expectations have been falling for years and continue to fall. Indeed, recent reports from Reuters and CNNMoney found that deflation – falling prices – is a growing problem.

Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland

Although the anticipated inflation rate is falling and the “risk premium” — the difference between a bond that doesn’t adjust for inflation and one that does, in the same maturity — has scarcely changed, conservatives continue to warn that inflation is right around the corner, especially if the Fed were to adopt a new operating procedure called nominal gross domestic product targeting.

This is an idea supported by Christina Romer of the University of California, Berkeley, economists at Goldman Sachs and others. The idea is to permit a period of catch-up inflation to get nominal G.D.P. back to its prerecession trend, which would increase incomes, employment and household balance sheets.

But conservatives want nothing to do with N.G.D.P. targeting. Amity Shlaes, a columnist with Bloomberg News and a former Wall Street Journal editorial writer, denounced the idea in a Nov. 2 column, calling it “a license to inflate.”

Her view is that if a recession causes growth to fall, unemployment to rise and home prices to crash, people should just suck it up and learn to live with it. Allowing prices to rise from wherever they are, even if there has been a deflation that caused them to fall, opens the door to stagflation and even hyperinflation. It’s a risk too great to take. The risk of continuing the status quo is, apparently, nothing to be concerned about.

It’s tiresome to read such rationalizations for doing nothing about the second-greatest economic crisis in our history, especially from someone like Ms. Shlaes, who is well versed in the history of the Great Depression.

Then, too, there were those just like her, like Henry Hazlitt, an editorial writer for The New York Times, and Benjamin M. Anderson, an economist with Chase National Bank, who also said people should just suck it up, that unemployment was only caused by excessive wages and greedy workers and that inflation was a cure worse than the disease, even as the price level fell 25 percent from 1929 to 1933.

With fiscal stimulus off the table and Republicans gambling that continued economic stagnation will hurt Democrats more than them, the Federal Reserve is the only institution with the freedom of action and power to stimulate growth. But it is constrained by conservatives who charge that it is fostering inflation whenever it tries to provide monetary stimulus.

The fact that conservatives have consistently been wrong about this for the last three years has done nothing to diminish their confidence. They are like the French Bourbons, who learned nothing and forgot nothing.

Of course, no one wants to go back to the 1970s, when we had both rising inflation and rising unemployment. But the risk of inflation is now as low as it’s been since the 1950s, while slow growth and high unemployment impose a crushing burden on a huge portion of the population. If the Fed believes it can help, it has a responsibility to do so.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=eb3a151e29a96a41216a410faef813b3

Filed Under: Economy News Tagged With: , ,

Fed Should Resist New Stimulus, Republicans Say

September 21, 2011 by Leave a Comment

WASHINGTON (AP) — In an unusual move, Republican leaders of the House and Senate are urging Federal Reserve policymakers against taking further steps to lower interest rates.

On the eve of the Fed’s two-day policy meeting, the leaders sent a letter to Chairman Ben Bernanke warning that the Fed’s policies could harm an already weak U.S. economy.

The letter, sent Monday, was signed by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl of Arizona, House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia.

The letter followed criticism from several Republican presidential candidates that the Fed’s efforts to boost growth have already raised the risk of high inflation.

“The American people have reason to be skeptical of the Federal Reserve vastly increasing its role in the economy,” the lawmakers wrote.

It is rare for lawmakers to try to sway policy at the Fed, which operates independently of Congress and the White House. But the letter was sent at a time when Bernanke, a Republican, has faced growing criticism from members of his own party.

Former Fed official Joseph Gagnon, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, called the letter “outrageous. It’s incredible.”

Gagnon said it’s been several decades since such high-level politicians tried so directly to influence the Fed.

“The fact that it’s in print and signed by the leaders of the House and minority leaders of the Senate raises it up a notch,” Gagnon said.

David Jones, head of consulting firm DMJ Advisors and the author of books on the Federal Reserve, said he can’t recall another instance when members of Congress had made such a direct approach to the Fed in the week that the central bank was meeting.

“It is inappropriate for politicians to try to exert this kind of influence,” Jones said.

He suggested it would make the Fed’s job of managing interest rates harder because financial markets will grow concerned about whether the central bank could be unduly influenced by political pressure.

The lawmakers were responding to expectations that the Fed will announce a new step Wednesday to further lower interest rates. Republicans have been critical of the Fed’s previous efforts to lower rates through the purchase of U.S. Treasurys.

The letter expressed “serious concerns” that the Fed’s actions could weaken the foreign exchange value of the dollar or encourage excess borrowing by consumers who are already carrying too much debt.

Bernanke has rebuffed his critics. He has argued that rates must remain at record lows to encourage lending and invigorate the economy, which has struggled to grow more than two years after the recession officially ended.

He has acknowledged that inflation has ticked up in recent months. But Bernanke says that is mostly because of temporary factors. He expects inflation to subside in the coming months.

The comments from GOP leaders also come after Bernanke suggested that Republicans in Congress should support efforts to stimulate hiring and growth, rather than focus solely on deficit cutting.

___

AP Economics Writer Paul Wiseman in Washington contributed to this report.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=819be3dbb291b16339606be40efffbbd

Filed Under: Business News Tagged With: , ,

Economic View: What’s With All the Bernanke Bashing?

July 30, 2011 by Leave a Comment

He left a comfortable professorship at Princeton to run the Federal Reserve — and this is what he gets.

Mr. Bernanke has worked tirelessly to shepherd the economy through the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, and yet, for all his efforts, seems vastly underappreciated.

CNBC recently asked people, “Do you have confidence in the way Ben Bernanke is handling the economy?” Ninety-five percent of the respondents said no.

Yes, the CNBC survey was hardly scientific. Nonetheless, it reflected the deep unease that many Americans feel about our central bank and its policies. Critics on both the left and right see much to dislike in how Mr. Bernanke and his Fed colleagues have been doing their jobs.

Let’s review the complaints.

Critics on the left look at the depth of the recent recession and the meager economic recovery we are experiencing and argue that the Fed should have done more. They fear that the United States might slip into a long malaise akin to Japan’s lost decade, in which unemployment remains high and the risks of deflation deter people from borrowing, investing and returning the economy to its potential.

Critics on the right, meanwhile, worry that the Fed has increased the nation’s monetary base at a historically unprecedented pace while keeping interest rates near zero — an approach that they say will eventually ignite inflation. Some in this camp have gone so far as to propose repealing the Fed’s dual mandate of simultaneously maintaining price stability — that is, holding inflation at bay — while maximizing sustainable employment. Better, these people say, to replace those twin goals with a single-minded focus on inflation.

Yet Mr. Bernanke’s record shows that the fears of both sides have been exaggerated.

Mr. Bernanke became the Fed chairman in February 2006. Since then, the inflation measure favored by the Fed — the price index for personal consumption, excluding food and energy — has averaged 1.9 percent, annualized. A broader price index that includes food and energy has averaged 2.1 percent.

Either way, the outcome is remarkably close to the Fed’s unofficial inflation target of 2 percent. So, despite the economic turmoil of the last five years, the Fed has kept inflation on track.

Of course, this record could come undone in future years. Yet the signals in the financial markets are reassuring. The interest rate on a 10-year Treasury bond, for instance, is now about 2.8 percent. A 10-year inflation-protected Treasury bond yields about 0.4 percent.

The difference between those yields, the so-called “break-even inflation rate,” is the inflation rate at which the two bonds earn the same return. That figure is now a bit over 2 percent, a sign that the market does not expect inflation in the coming decade to differ much from that experienced over the last five years. Inflation expectations are anchored at close to their target rate.

Could the Fed have done substantially more to avoid the recession and promote recovery? Probably not. The Fed used its main weapon against recession — cuts in short-term interest rates — aggressively as the depth of the downturn became apparent. And it turned to various unconventional weapons as well, including two rounds of quantitative easing — essentially buying bonds — in an attempt to lower long-term interest rates.

A few economists have argued, with some logic, that the employment picture would be brighter if the Fed raised its target for inflation above 2 percent. They say higher expected inflation would lower real interest rates, thus encouraging borrowing. That, in turn, would expand the aggregate demand for goods and services. With more demand for their products, companies would increase hiring.

Even if that were true, a higher inflation target is a political nonstarter. Economists are divided about whether a higher target makes sense, and the public would likely oppose a more rapidly rising cost of living. If Chairman Bernanke ever suggested increasing inflation to, say, 4 percent, he would quickly return to being Professor Bernanke.

What the Fed could do, however, is codify its projected price path of 2 percent. That is, the Fed could announce that, hereafter, it would aim for a price level that rises 2 percent a year. And it would promise to pursue policies to get back to the target price path if shocks to the economy ever pushed the actual price level away from it.

Such an announcement could help mollify critics on both the left and right. If we started to see the Japanese-style deflation that the left fears, the Fed would maintain a loose monetary policy and even allow a bit of extra inflation to make up for past tracking errors. If we faced the high inflation that worries the right, the Fed would be committed to raising interest rates aggressively to bring inflation back on target.

MORE important, an announced target path for inflation would add more certainty to the economy. Americans planning their retirement would have a better sense about the cost of living a decade or two hence. Companies borrowing in the bond market could more accurately pin down the real cost of financing their investment projects.

Mr. Bernanke cannot remove all of the uncertainty that households and businesses face, but he can eliminate one small piece of it. Less uncertainty would, other things being equal, encourage spending and promote more rapid recovery. It might even raise Mr. Bernanke’s approval ratings a bit.

N. Gregory Mankiw is a professor of economics at Harvard. He is advising Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, in the campaign for the Republican presidential nomination.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=43be0c53fa728a9b66e51c9db374af37

Filed Under: Economy News Tagged With: , ,