The Fed fools have just told the political fools to let the good times (for them, not the economy) to continue to roll
At the last Fed meeting, Bernanke’s decision to not taper even a little bit
damaged what little credibility he and his Fed have left. If one discounts
stupidity (not something that should be relinquished easily when dealing with
government decisions), then what remains for an explanation of such
strange behavior?
As I see it, the most likely justifications and the ones most frequently
used in the past no longer hold:
- The government needs the
Fed to continue buying in order to keep paying its bills.
- The Fed believes it is
helping the economy with this policy.
The first reason is not plausible, at least in the short-term. For a while,
Fed bond buying appeared to be necessary (indeed was almost equal to the
government deficits) in order to fund the government’s shortfalls. Deficits
have dropped recently, providing room for a token taper. Had the Fed wanted,
they could have tapered without putting undue pressure on the federal
government’s ability to fund its deficits. Indeed, putting some pressure on
Congress would probably have been wise.
The second reason is also invalid. The Fed has fired
most of its weapons (zero interest rates, money creation, etc.) at various
levels of intensity for five years. It quadrupled its balance sheet during this
period. The economy remains stalled. There is little evidence that the Fed
boosted the economy. Of course one cannot know what would have happened or
where we would be had the Fed’s actions been less aggressive.
Regarding Fed effects, there is no question that they saved banks who would
have (perhaps should have) failed. In doing so, they
prevented a collapse of the financial system and the ensuing havoc that would
have occurred in the economy. But saving these banks was done in the beginning
of the crisis. The last several years presumably has been targeted at
the economy with no apparent effect.
Sadly, these same banks are now bigger than they were when they were deemed
too big to fail. No meaningful regulation or policies were enacted to downsize
them and prevent the same scenario from recurring. Next time it will be
on a larger scale.
If neither of these reasons explain Fed behavior, consider two
other possibilities:
- The Fed sees something
more sinister coming than the rest of us.
- The Fed has unilaterally
chosen to expand its mandate and influence.
I don’t mean to discount the possibility of something quite sinister ahead.
I for one believe that something very bad comes our way. However, I
reject this consideration as the basis for recent Fed policy. History shows us
quite clearly that the Fed never sees the future with clarity. They seem
clueless and well behind whatever curve markets throw at them. Mr. Bernanke
never even saw the housing crisis coming.
The second possibility is plausible, whether understood by the Fed or not.
Ben Hunt provides his opinion in a recent email (see his Epsilon Theory website) on this matter
(my emboldening):
...the Fed’s use of QE as an insurance program against whatever fiscal policy errors they believe Congress might make in the future is not only a problematic expansion of the Fed’s governmental authority, but is also myopic on its own terms.
If you want Congress and the White House to establish “good” fiscal policy, then the last thing you want to do is provide an incredibly expensive insurance program against “bad” fiscal policy.
It’s moral hazard in the first degree, which any competent politician (and these are very competent politicians) will use to their professional benefit. I’m sure that FOMC members believe in their hearts that they are doing the responsible thing by “protecting” the economy from the “risks” posed by smash-mouth politics in Washington.
But I believe that they have (again) misunderstood the behavioral context in which their signals are understood. Twice since June the Fed has missed the market context of their communications. Now I think they’ve done it with Washington.
The irresponsibility of Congress and the rest of the
political class cannot be understated. Underwriting this behavior is equivalent
to the Fed providing a teenager with a bottle of whiskey and the keys to an
automobile.
In a context where the Fed could have done no harm by
tapering, they instead created a huge moral hazard that will be exploited by
politicians of all stripes. They also exceeded
their charter and acted without any apparent authority in assuming a new
responsibility.
The chances of Congress reining the Fed in for this behavior are highly
improbable, likely equivalent to the teenager declining the car keys.
Batten down the hatches. The Fed fools have just told the political fools
to let the good times (for them, not the economy) to continue to roll.
No comments:
Post a Comment