Archive for the ‘Ben Bernanke’ Category

Ben Bernanke On QE2

Friday, November 5th, 2010

Ben Bernanke wrote an op-ed in The Washington Post yesterday titled, “What the Fed did and why: supporting the recovery and sustaining price stability.”

I could write very extensively about this piece as it is highly notable on several fronts.  For now, I will limit my comments.

My analysis indicates that the risks of QE lack recognition.  As well, the benefits appear highly overstated.  As such, we (as a nation) appear to have a mistaken understanding of the risk-reward ratio of large-scale QE.  This is especially problematical as I expect additional large-scale QE will be done in the future.  This belief is echoed by other prominent parties.

What I find interesting about Bernanke’s (and other Fed members’) comments about QE is that they seem very limited in discussing risks of QE.  This begs the question as to whether Fed members don’t think there is much risk in QE.  From what I have seen, the main risk Fed members have discussed is money supply issues / future inflation as well as the ability to gracefully (i.e. non-disruptively) exit such QE efforts.  Bernanke briefly mentions both of these items in his above-mentioned Washington Post op-ed.

However, I view those risks as being only two among a multitude of others.  As I wrote in the August 13 post, “There are an array of risks embedded in such QE efforts.”  In that post I discuss QE risks to the U.S. Dollar and QE’s role in fostering asset bubbles.

Another risk that receives little recognition is the risks embedded in the ever-increasing size of the Fed’s portfolio.   This is a very complex potential risk, entailing both large potential capital losses (driven in large part by rising interest rates) as well as other unintended (negative) consequences.  The potential capital losses aspect is well-documented in a Wall Street Journal editorial of today titled “High Rollers at the Fed.”

Both of these risks, as well as the multitude others, will only grow in importance if, as I suspect, additional (over and above Wednesday’s $600B announcement) large QE is performed in the future.

A Special Note concerning our economic situation is found here

SPX at 1222.43 as this post is written

Share

Thomas Hoenig Story

Monday, October 11th, 2010

The September 27-October 3 2010 issue of Bloomberg BusinessWeek has an interesting story titled “Thomas Hoenig is Fed Up.”

The story chronicles various views of Thomas Hoenig and how these views differ from those of others prominent within The Federal Reserve.

I found one line, referring to Hoenig’s views, particularly noteworthy given current (and likely future) Federal Reserve policies and reactions to them:

“The hard truth, in his view, is that there just isn’t much more the Fed can do to help, and we all ought to admit that.”

_____

A Special Note concerning our economic situation is found here

SPX at 1165.15 as this post is written

Share

Allan Meltzer Comment On “What Should the Federal Reserve Do Next?”

Sunday, September 12th, 2010

On September 9 The Wall Street Journal had various people respond to the question of “What Should the Federal Reserve Do Next?”

Among the various responses, I found this excerpt from Allan Meltzer’s response to be most interesting:

“In “A History of the Federal Reserve,” I concluded that the principal mistakes the Fed has made have resulted from giving excessive attention to current events and forecasts of highly uncertain near-term developments. By focusing on the short-term, the Fed neglects the longer-term consequences of its actions. The transcripts of FOMC show that the members are paying little attention to medium- and longer-term consequences.”

A Special Note concerning our economic situation is found here

SPX at 1109.55 as this post is written

Share

Ben Bernanke’s Comments On The Current Economic Forecast

Tuesday, June 15th, 2010

I found Ben Bernanke’s comments on the economic outlook, given last Wednesday (June 9), to be interesting.

Here are some excerpts, as published in this Wall Street Journal article of June 10:

“Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke offered guarded reassurances about the economy in testimony to the House Budget Committee Wednesday, saying a new recession is unlikely and that the Fed still expects the U.S. economy to grow at a 3.5% annual rate in the months ahead.”

also:

“”Forecasting is very difficult and I make no promises in any particular direction,” he said, “but it appears to us that the recovery has made an important transition from being supported primarily by inventory dynamics and by fiscal policy toward a recovery being led more by private final demand.” Still, he added, a double-dip recession couldn’t be “entirely ruled out.”"

back to <home>

SPX at 1089.63 as this post is written

Share

“Bonus For Bernanke?” Commentary

Monday, February 1st, 2010

I came across this commentary from Fareed Zakaria on CNN yesterday.  It is titled “Bonus For Bernanke?” :

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2010/01/31/gps.bernanke.bonus.cnn?iref=allsearch

I mildly or strongly disagree with most of the assertions made by Fareed Zakaria in this piece.   The reason that I post it is that it contains a very good, concise representation of ideas from supporters of Ben Bernanke’s performance.

back to <home>

SPX at 1073.87 as this post is written


Share

Ben Bernanke’s January 3rd Speech

Wednesday, January 6th, 2010

I would like to make a couple of comments regarding the speech Ben Bernanke gave on January 3.  It was titled “Monetary Policy and The Housing Bubble.” (pdf)

I could make a significant amount of comments regarding this speech, as I partly or fully disagree with many of the points presented.

I will, however, briefly comment on a couple aspects of the speech.  First, from page 21:

Although the house price bubble appears obvious in retrospect–all bubbles appear obvious in retrospect–in its earlier stages, economists differed considerably about whether the increase in house prices was sustainable; or, if it was a bubble, whether the bubble was national or confined to a few local markets.”

I agree with the general premise that bubbles aren’t always obvious.  As I said in my December 2 post, “Some bubbles are harder to spot than others.”  As far as the housing bubble was concerned, in my opinion it was a relatively easy bubble to identify as it occurred, based upon a variety of characteristics.

Second, from page 22:

That said, having experienced the damage that asset price bubbles can cause, we must be especially vigilant in ensuring that the recent experiences are not repeated. All efforts should be made to strengthen our regulatory system to prevent a recurrence of the crisis, and to cushion the effects if another crisis occurs.”

I think it can be strongly inferred from this excerpt, as well as other statements that he has recently made, that he doesn’t believe there are asset bubbles currently in existence.  My analysis indicates otherwise, as I discussed in my December 2 & December 16 posts.

back to <home>

SPX at 1136.43 as this post is written

Share

Two Notable Ben Bernanke Articles

Sunday, December 20th, 2009

Here are two articles on Ben Bernanke that I found interesting.  There is much I could comment upon in each.  I disagree or otherwise have differing opinions on various statements in these articles; however, I do feel the stories are valuable as they present an in-depth look at Ben Bernanke from a historical and philosophical perspective.

The first is the Time Magazine “Person of the Year” story of December 16:

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1946375_1947251_1947520-3,00.html

The second is titled “Bernanke’s Philospher” and is found in the December 2009 Reason.com:

http://reason.com/archives/2009/11/17/bernankes-philosopher

 

back to <home>

SPX at 1102.47 as this post is written

Share

The Federal Reserve’s Role

Tuesday, December 15th, 2009

In his December 7 speech, Ben Bernanke made the following comments with regard to the role of The Federal Reserve.  For now, I will post an excerpt I found notable, and may comment upon it at a later date:

“In all of these efforts, our objective has not been to support specific financial institutions or markets for their own sake. Rather, recognizing that a healthy economy requires well-functioning financial markets, we have moved always with the single aim of promoting economic recovery and economic opportunity. In that respect, our means and goals have been fully consistent with the traditional functions of a central bank and with the mandate given to the Federal Reserve by the Congress to promote price stability and maximum employment.”

 

back to <home>

SPX at 1113.69 as this post is written

 

Share

A Comment On Ben Bernanke’s December 7 Speech

Monday, December 14th, 2009

I would like to briefly comment on Ben Bernanke’s December 7 speech, that can be found at this link:

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/bernanke20091207a.htm

Here is one excerpt that I found notable:

“Economic forecasts are subject to great uncertainty, but my best guess at this point is that we will continue to see modest economic growth next year–sufficient to bring down the unemployment rate, but at a pace slower than we would like.”

I found this notable as he is reiterating his opinion that economic forecasting is inherently uncertain.  In his May 22 speech, which I commented upon in a June 17 post, he had spoken at length on this issue.

I think that this inherent uncertainty in economic forecasting is a very important point.  I have written about the topic, and have extensively detailed how accurate economic forecasting, especially since 2007 has proven incredibly difficult.  This issue doesn’t seem to gather much attention.  However, among other issues, it seems as if it should call into question the potential accuracy of current economic forecasts.

 

back to <home>

SPX at 1112.25 as this post is written

Share

Bubbles

Wednesday, December 2nd, 2009

from the November 3 FOMC Minutes:

“Members noted the possibility that some negative side effects might result from the maintenance of very low short-term interest rates for an extended period, including the possibility that such a policy stance could lead to excessive risk-taking in financial markets or an unanchoring of inflation expectations. While members currently saw the likelihood of such effects as relatively low, they would remain alert to these risks.”

 

from the book Meltdown, p8, by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.:

“The Fed’s policy of intervening in the economy to push interest rates lower than the market would have set them was the single greatest contributor to the crisis that continues to unfold before us.  Making cheap credit available for the asking does encourage excessive leverage, speculation, and indebtedness.” 

____

As one can see from the above two quotes, there is a considerable difference in philosophies regarding the probability of prolonged low interest rates in creating asset bubbles.  The top quote is from the November 3 Federal Open Market Committee Minutes, while the quote below it from Tom Woods Jr. and seems to offer a concise view of the Austrian philosophy on the low interest rate matter.

The issue of whether the ultra-low interest rate environment that has been put in place has fomented asset bubbles is a critical one.  For background on this matter, the November 30 BusinessWeek had a story titled “Is the Fed Creating New Bubbles?” and can be found at this link:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_48/b4157022781639.htm

My opinion on the matter is that there are currently multiple bubbles that have formed across various asset classes.  They are of various sizes and “vintages.”  Asset bubbles that burst can of course cause tremendous economic damage.  Perhaps the best example of this is “bursting” of the housing bubble.

Some bubbles are harder to spot than others.  Bubbles, almost by definition, include irrational behavior, and therefore can be hard to predict both in their formation as well as their ultimate size.  There are many factors that can come into play in order to cause bubbles.

I have addressed my thoughts as to whether Gold is in a bubble in a November 20 post.   Another question, that is critical  to both investors and the economy, is whether U.S. Treasury securities, especially the 10 Year, is in a bubble.   I believe the answer to this is “yes.”  The reasoning for my opinion is rather lengthy and complex; however, the previous post (from November 30) represents some of my thought on the issue.

 

back to <home>

SPX at 1112.28 as this post is written

Share