Tags: bernanke

TWIST & Shout – Andy Sutton

The mainstream media is abuzz this morning, Wednesday September 21st, about the federal reserve, who is once again plotting to save the USEconomy from certain disaster. Really, haven’t we heard this many times before? If it was that easy, shouldn’t it have been done a few years ago when all the problems started? If that is the case, we’ve got little more than a bunch of incompetent bankers on our hands. That is bad enough. However, I think most people are starting to understand that it is much worse a problem than just plain vanilla incompetence. It is about collusion and corruption and I am being very generous in that assessment.

The Latest Ploy

The fed is expected to announce this week that it is going to reach back 50 years into its bag of tricks and pull out some manipulations that will save us. This latest cockamamie scheme is to shift its $1.7 Trillion in short term USBond holdings (monetized debt) to longer-term holdings in an effort to drive down the long end of the yield curve even further. Apparently, the current monetization efforts haven’t been good enough. They have been driving the long end down for three years now, either directly through direct rate intervention or by subsidies aimed at the end products resulting from those rates such as mortgages.

The obvious rationale is that driving down rates on debt will rescue the economy, since people will be able to take on even more debt to spend more money on more imported trinkets from China and elsewhere. Again, haven’t we heard this before? We still haven’t really felt the full impact from the last raft of malfeasance when the fed went on an overt $600 Billion bond-buying spree. For those who haven’t yet connected the dots, that is called monetization of debt. A very inflationary measure. The dollar has paid the price. Don’t be fooled by the ridiculous assertions that the dollar is ‘stronger’ because the dollar index has gone up. The only reason that has happened at all is because Europe is on the brink of total collapse and disintegration. There is no way anyone can conduct a sane examination of the dollar’s fundamentals and conclude there is anything that represents ‘strength’ at this point. At best it is status quo and the capitalization of another’s even more dire circumstances.

On the surface, all this might look very appealing. Lower interest rates across the board. Sure, there will be another wave of refinancing of mortgages. If you can qualify. If you’re not underwater. Maybe. The subsidies aimed at the housing market so far have been an absolute and total failure. That dog won’t hunt anymore. Game over for real estate for at least a decade. So as usual, we’re left to ask Cui bono? Who benefits. Well the bankers of course. The fed dropped short-term rates into the basement in 2008 and has held the hammer down. This punished savers around the country. All those baby boomers who are retired/retiring (maybe) are going to need income from their meager savings to make up for the rising prices that have resulted from the fed’s malfeasance and lack of stewardship of the dollar. They won’t get much in the way of income from traditional low-risk investment vehicles, that is for sure. The proverbial ‘riskless’ asset pays nothing after taxes. Nothing. And it isn’t riskless. Put it another way – would you be willing to give the USGovt a loan for 90 days? 180? 10 years? How about 30 years? At maybe 2.5% per annum? That is a foolish proposition on even the best of days. The savers get creamed again. Bernanke is so worried about the economy, but yet he’ll purposefully and deliberately undertake policies that will gut the one component of the economy that is capable of spurring growth – savers. And this is not the first time either. And he is not the first guy to do it. This has been a pattern for quite a long time now.

The All-Important Question – Cui Bono?

So who benefits again? The banks, obviously. The lower the yield curve, the higher the spread, the higher the profit margin. All actions done so far have been to protect and enrich the banks and their precious financial system – all at the expense of the economy and all done intentionally, in my opinion, with malice and aforethought. Just think back to TARP, TALF, TSLF, and the other multi-trillion dollar rescue packages. Think about the $500 billion (minimum) in swaps done between the fed and the ECB in 2008-09 that Bernanke was grilled on and claimed not to know the recipients thereof. Think about the latest harebrained stunt aimed at saving European banks. More unlimited dollar bailouts for foreign banks. More protection of the financial oligarchy. More inflation. Less purchasing power for the dollar. More pain for consumers. Less economic growth.

At the bottom of this issue is that the Keynesian way is still in full force, which guarantees that things will not get any better. Two of the biggest pillars of the Keynesian way are to punish savers because saving is a bad activity – all monies should be spent on consumption to maximize current ‘growth’. Never mind future growth; all actions are to be geared towards the short run. The second big pillar is deficit spending and debt accumulation at all levels of the economy. Again, forget about the long-term consequences. All focus is dedicated to the short run. That is the Keynesian way in a nutshell.

The Consequences

We’re already seeing firsthand the catastrophic failure of that policy pathway in Europe. It is an unmitigated disaster. We’ll reap the full whirlwind here in America before too long. Instead of focusing on debt reduction across the board, the central planners, our new economic politburo, are undertaking policies that will accelerate debt accumulation at all levels. Consumers are back on the credit card big time as unemployment remains high and people are forced to continue borrowing to make ends meet. They were in over their heads to begin with and now for many, there is no way out. The house is underwater. The job is gone. The unemployment check isn’t enough and it is going to run out soon anyway. These people end up running full speed to the bankers who are more than willing to accommodate with rates of usury that would make the mafia blush.

The ‘cuts’ that are forthcoming from our new unconstitutional ‘super congress’ will almost certainly be from social programs, not the sacred cows such as the Pentagon budget, bank bailout monies, or subsidies paid for keeping jobs out of America. The lobbyists have already guaranteed that. I’ll say it again – the American people are the only ones who don’t have someone lobbying for them to the members of that ill-conceived and very illegal group. It is terribly ironic that the one group who is going to bear the full burden of all of this does not even have one representative in the process. We know what Jefferson said about that. If we don’t, then shame on us for not knowing our history.

The bottom line is that our debt is already unpayable. Our bonds are junk. Our country is several orders of magnitude deeper into this mess than Greece. According to Laurence Kotlikoff, the net present value of our obligations relative to GDP is 14 times greater. Greece’s multiple is only 12. Yet we had people surprised when our debt rating was cut by one single notch. It was an affront to our perception of American superiority. That is gone, people. We’ve allowed it to be squandered – all for the satisfaction of short-run desires and an economic philosophy that was brought into the world in the worst possible manner: half improvised, half compromised. The policymakers of the day provided the compromise; Keynes was more than happy to provide the rest. In a way, he got off easy; his demise came long before that of a world that decided to throw away prudence in pursuit of his unattainable utopia.

Bernanke: Here Comes the Inflation!

Editor’s Note: Just a modest uptick in inflation? Oh wait, these guys don’t count the trillions they’ve printed from nothing to bail out their banker buddies as being inflationary. Our bad.

The Fed cut its growth estimate for 2011 to between 3.1 percent and 3.3 percent from a January forecast of 3.4 percent to 3.9 percent.

The Fed also raised its estimate of inflation this year to a range of 2.1 percent to 2.8 percent, taking into account a recent surge in oil prices. However, it bumped its core inflation forecasts only marginally to a 1.3 percent to 1.6 percent range.

As for unemployment, it lowered its forecast but said it would stay elevated over its three-year forecast period. For 2011, the Fed said it expects the unemployment rate to land in a 8.4-8.7 percent range, better than a range of 8.8-9.0 percent forecast in January.

“The markdown of growth in 2011, in particular, reflects the somewhat slower than anticipated pace of growth in the first quarter,” Bernanke said in prepared remarks before he took reporter questions.

But he added: “I would say that roughly that most of the slowdown in the first quarter is viewed by the committee as being transitory.”

Bernanke faced broad questioning, including on the falling value of the dollar for which the Fed is getting some blame because of its efforts to broaden credit availability. In the currency markets Wednesday, the U.S. dollar fell to a fresh 3-year low against major currencies while Bernanke spoke.

While deferring to currency policy as an issue for the Treasury Department, Bernanke said a strong, stable dollar was in the interests of the United States and the world economy. He said a growing economy would be helpful for the dollar.

Bernanke also said the first step in tightening interest-rate policy could occur when the Fed stops reinvesting the proceeds of its bond holdings.

Bernanke would not be specific about when that might occur. He said it will depend on inflation and economic growth, adding that step would be a relatively modest one. But it would constitute the Fed’s first tightening because it would allow interest rates to creep up.

Wednesday’s event marks the first regularly scheduled news conference by a Fed chairman in the central bank’s 97-year history.

U.S. stocks extended gains as Bernanke spoke, probably because “there’s no curve ball,” Jeremy Zirin, chief U.S. equity strategist at UBS Wealth Management, told CNBC.

“This is brand new territory,” Zirin said, adding he believed Bernanke “has done a very, very good job of explaining in layman’s terms the process the Fed goes through in establishing policy. To some degree, they are giving Bernanke a thumbs up.”

Mohamed El-Erian, co-chief investment officer at PIMCO, also gave the Fed chairman a nod for his handling of the event.

“After what seemed as a tentative start, he gained momentum and hit his stride very well and effectively,” El-Erian told Reuters. “He addressed a good mix of questions, combining economic and policy issues as well as domestic and international ones.”

In an earlier post-meeting statement, the Fed modestly upgraded its assessment of the jobs market, say it was “improving gradually.” A month ago it said simply that it appeared to be improving.

Importantly, it again expressed confidence that a surge in the cost of oil and other commodities would be transitory and not spark broader inflation.

“Inflation has picked up in recent months, but longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable and measures of underlying inflation are still subdued,” it said.

The statement marked the conclusion — at least for now — of the massive expansion of the Fed’s balance sheet that helped pull the economy out of its deep recession.

“On policy, the statement confirms that (the bond buying) is over but otherwise leaves everything on the table subject to regular review ‘in light of incoming information,’” said Stephen Stanley, chief economist at Pierpont Securities.

Still, the central bank said it would continue to reinvest proceeds from maturing securities it holds to keep its economic support in place, ensuring it would remain a big buyer in debt markets.

Some investors, such as Bill Gross from PIMCO, the world’s biggest bond fund manager, have predicted a bond market sell-off when the Fed steps out of the picture.

Where are the Cuffs?

Editor’s  Note: This is no April Fools joke. I played on a prior podcast several months ago a clip of Bernanke being asked by Rep. Alan Grayson who got the TARP and rescue monies. Bernanke stammered and said ‘central banks’. When asked which ones, he said “I don’t know.” Obviously he was lying. Where are the calls from Congress for perjury charges?

April 1 (Bloomberg) — U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke’s two-year fight to shield crisis-squeezed banks from the stigma of revealing their public loans protected a lender to local governments in Belgium, a Japanese fishing-cooperative financier and a company part-owned by the Central Bank of Libya.

Dexia SA, based in Brussels and Paris, borrowed as much as $33.5 billion through its New York branch from the Fed’s “discount window” lending program, according to Fed documents released yesterday in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. Dublin-based Depfa Bank Plc, taken over in 2007 by a German real-estate lender later seized by the German government, drew $24.5 billion.

The biggest borrowers from the 97-year-old discount window as the program reached its crisis-era peak were foreign banks, accounting for at least 70 percent of the $110.7 billion borrowed during the week in October 2008 when use of the program surged to a record. The disclosures may stoke a reexamination of the risks posed to U.S. taxpayers by the central bank’s role in global financial markets.

“The caricature of the Fed is that it was shoveling money to big New York banks and a bunch of foreigners, and that is not conducive to its long-run reputation,” said Vincent Reinhart, the Fed’s director of monetary affairs from 2001 to 2007.

Commercial Paper

Separate data disclosed in December on temporary emergency- lending programs set up by the Fed also showed big foreign banks as borrowers. Six European banks were among the top 11 companies that sold the most debt overall — a combined $274.1 billion — to the Commercial Paper Funding Facility.

Those programs also loaned hundreds of billions of dollars to the biggest U.S. banks, including JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc. and Morgan Stanley.

The discount window, which began lending in 1914, is the Fed’s primary program for providing cash to banks to help them avert a liquidity squeeze. In an April 2009 speech, Bernanke said that revealing the names of discount-window borrowers “might lead market participants to infer weakness.”

The Fed released the documents after court orders upheld FOIA requests filed by Bloomberg LP, the parent company of Bloomberg News, and News Corp.’s Fox News Network LLC. In all, the Fed released more than 29,000 pages of documents, covering the discount window and several Fed emergency-lending programs established during the crisis from August 2007 to March 2010.

Public Outrage

“The American people are going to be outraged when they understand what has been going on,” U.S. Representative Ron Paul, a Texas Republican who is chairman of the House subcommittee that oversees the Fed, said in a Bloomberg Television interview.

“What in the world are we doing thinking we can pass out tens of billions of dollars to banks that are overseas?” said Paul, who has advocated abolishing the Fed. “We have problems here at home with people not being able to pay their mortgages, and they’re losing their homes.”

David Skidmore, a Fed spokesman, declined to comment. Fed officials have said all the discount window loans made during the worst financial crisis since the 1930s have been repaid with interest.

The Monetary Control Act of 1980 says that a U.S. branch or agency of a foreign bank that maintains reserves at a Fed bank may receive discount-window credit.

“Our job is to provide liquidity to keep the American economy going,” Richard W. Fisher, president of the Federal Reserve’s regional bank in Dallas, told reporters today. “The loans were all paid back and they were well-collateralized.”

Wachovia’s Loans

Wachovia Corp. was the only U.S. bank among the top five discount-window borrowers as the crisis peaked.

The company, based in Charlotte, North Carolina, borrowed $29 billion from the discount window on Oct. 6, in the week after it almost collapsed, the data show. Wachovia agreed in principle to sell itself to Citigroup Inc. on Sept. 29, before announcing a definitive agreement to sell itself to Wells Fargo & Co. on Oct. 3. The Wells Fargo deal closed at the end of 2008.

Wells Fargo spokeswoman Mary Eshet declined to comment on Wachovia’s discount-window borrowing.

Bank of Scotland Plc, which had $11 billion outstanding from the discount window on Oct. 29, 2008, was a unit of Edinburgh-based HBOS Plc, which announced its takeover by London-based Lloyds TSB Group Plc in September 2008.

The borrowings in 2008 didn’t involve Lloyds, which hadn’t completed its acquisition of HBOS at the time, said Sara Evans, a spokeswoman for the company, which is now called Lloyds Banking Group Plc.

‘Historic’ Use

“This is historic usage and on each occasion the borrowing was repaid at maturity,” Evans said. “The discount window has not been accessed by the group since.”

Other foreign discount-window borrowers on Oct. 29, 2008, included Societe Generale SA, France’s second-biggest bank; and Norinchukin Bank, which finances and provides services to Japanese agricultural, fishing and forestry cooperatives. Paris- based Societe Generale borrowed $5 billion that day, and Tokyo- based Norinchukin borrowed $6 billion.

Jim Galvin, a spokesman for Societe Generale, declined to comment.

“We used it in concert with Japanese and U.S. authorities in the purpose of contributing to the stabilization of the market,” said Fumiaki Tanaka, a spokesman at Norinchukin.

Bank of China

Bank of China, the country’s oldest bank, was the second- largest borrower from the Fed’s discount window during a nine- day period in August 2007 as subprime-mortgage defaults first roiled broader markets. The Chinese bank’s New York branch borrowed $198 million on Aug. 17 of that month.

“It was just routine borrowing,” said Dale Zhu, head of the Bank of China New York branch’s treasury.

Two Deutsche Bank AG divisions borrowed $1 billion each, according to a document released yesterday.

Arab Banking Corp., then 29 percent-owned by the Libyan central bank, used its New York branch to get at least 73 loans from the Fed in the 18 months after Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. collapsed. The largest single loan amount outstanding was $1.2 billion in July 2009, according to the Fed documents.

The foreign banks took advantage of Fed lending programs even as their host countries moved to prop them up or orchestrate takeovers.

Dexia received billions of euros in capital and funding guarantees from France, Belgium and Luxembourg during the credit crunch.

‘High-Quality’ Collateral

The Fed loans were “secured by high-quality U.S. dollar municipal securities,” and used only to fund U.S. loans, bonds and other financial assets, Ulrike Pommee, a spokeswoman for the company, said in an e-mail.

“The Fed played its role as central banker, providing liquidity to banks that needed it,” she said, adding that Dexia’s outstanding balance at the Fed has been reduced to zero. “This information is backward-looking.”

Depfa was taken over in October 2007 by Hypo Real Estate Holding AG, which in turn was seized by the German government in 2009.

“Since the end of May 2010, Depfa is not making use of the Federal Reserve Discount Window,” Oliver Gruss, a spokesman for the bank, said in an e-mailed statement. He declined to comment further.

Dollar Assets

Many foreign banks own large pools of dollar assets — bonds, securities and loans — funded by short-term borrowings in money markets. The system works when markets are calm, said Dino Kos, former executive vice president at the New York Fed in charge of open-market operations. In times of stress, banks can be subject to sudden liquidity squeezes, he said.

“They are playing with fire,” said Kos, a managing director at Hamiltonian Associates Ltd. in New York, an economic research firm. “When the market dries up, and they can’t roll over their funding — bingo, you have a liquidity crisis.”

The potential for dollar shortages remains. As the Greek fiscal crisis roiled financial markets last year, the Fed had to open swap lines with the European Central Bank, the Swiss National Bank, the Bank of England and two other central banks to make more dollars available around the world. That move was partially the result of U.S. money market funds shrinking their exposure to European bank commercial paper.

Fed Finally Being Blamed for Inflation

Editor’s Note: Even though this article tried to make a mockery of the issue, it is a somewhat tacit admission of what thinking people have known for a long time: inflation is a monetary event and central banks are in fact responsible for the concomitant loss in purchasing power.

Food riots, deposed Middle Eastern despots and now this? Last week, a Texas man brandishing an assault rifle was involved in a three-hour shoot-out with police and had to be subdued with tear gas after ordering seven Beefy Crunch Burritos at a Taco Bell drive-through and being informed that their price had risen from 99 cents to $1.49.

Late night comedians and serious pundits alike had a field day with the story, opining on issues like fast-food culture, obesity (the seven burritos contain 3,600 calories, double the recommended daily intake) and gun control.

With his petty gripe, the gunman, Ricardo Jones, is no Muhammad al Bouazizi, the self-immolating Tunisian fruit seller who inspired millions across the region to throw off the yoke of tyranny, but 50 per cent is 50 per cent in San’a or San Antonio. Food inflation is a global phenomenon.

Taco Bell may well not be the villain here. It was recently alleged in a class-action lawsuit that only 35 per cent of what the fast-food chain describes as “beef” meets the strict technical definition (meat from a cow). The remaining 65 per cent is claimed to be made from fillers such as potassium lactate, modified corn starch, malto-dextrin and autolyzed yeast extract. Taco Bell has said it vigorously disputes the allegations made about its food – but if the class action claims were proved to be true, it could be seen as an ingenious attempt to hold the line on meat price rises. However, it is not only the price of meat that is rising alas, but also fuel, flour, vegetables and even autolyzed yeast extract.

The finger of blame is increasingly pointing toward central banks and the US Federal Reserve in particular. By printing money through quantitative easing, there are supposedly more dollars, yen and pounds chasing the same number of Beefy Crunch Burritos. Fed chairman Ben Bernanke actually was asked during a speaking engagement last month whether the central bank was culpable for the revolution in Egypt.

“I think it’s entirely unfair to attribute excess demand pressures in emerging markets to US monetary policy because emerging markets have all the tools they need to address excess demand in those countries,” said the clearly annoyed banker.

But an increasingly common view is that, with the very best intentions, he is at fault. Critics regularly cite the words of Milton Friedman, who said that “inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon”.

The great economist’s words and work are being misinterpreted though. The monetary base has indeed mushroomed but, in the quantity theory of money, it is not a simple increase in the base that causes inflation. It is an excess supply of money, which is not the case – not yet anyway. At the moment, the money shows up as excess reserves on bank balance sheets, for which they receive interest.

If the Fed were to reduce or eliminate what it pays banks to park those reserves at the Fed, or if banks decided to expand balance sheets rapidly, then things would change. A little of this might be welcome but, if the Fed were too slow to put the brakes on a surge in lending out of fear of harming the recovery, serious inflation could result.

QE is not entirely off the hook though. Even if there is actually not more money in the economy chasing assets, the market’s anticipation of future recklessness and the opportunity cost for investors of holding low-yielding cash has increased the appeal of real assets. The Fed is happy to see this when it comes to shares or homes as this creates a benign wealth effect. Commodities are a different matter.

Even so, the price of oil, or of burritos for that matter, corresponds much more closely to supply and demand than, say, a share of Apple, which is not consumed and whose value is in the eye of the beholder. Rising affluence of developing market consumers – the so-called “march of the Chinese meat-eaters” – is the chief culprit. This is exacerbated by distorted currency regimes such as China’s, as Mr Bernanke hinted.

Just don’t shoot the messenger. Or the drive-through employee for that matter.

Fed Robber Barons to Flush US Economy?

March 16 (Bloomberg) — Federal Reserve officials signaled they’re unlikely to expand a $600-billion bond purchase plan as the recovery picks up steam and the threat that inflation will fall too low begins to wane. – Propaganda

The economy is on a “firmer footing, and overall conditions in the labor market appear to be improving gradually,” the Federal Open Market Committee said in a statement yesterday after a one-day meeting in Washington. While commodity prices have “risen significantly,” inflation expectations have “remained stable.”

U.S. equities pared losses as Fed policy makers looked past threats to growth such as higher oil prices, unrest in the Middle East and the earthquakes in Japan. Their statement reveals confidence that the plan to buy Treasury securities through June will be enough to achieve the self-sustaining expansion that they say is vital before reversing record stimulus, said analysts including Josh Feinman, global chief economist for DB Advisors, a unit of Deutsche Bank AG.

“The hurdle for them doing more on the asset purchase program is pretty high,” said Feinman, whose New York-based firm manages $231 billion in assets. “It’s not like they say things are booming, but you don’t need a rip-roaring boom to end the asset purchase program.”

The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index fell 1.1 percent to 1,281.87 in New York trading while 10-year Treasury yields declined 0.05 percentage points to 3.30 percent.

Too Slow

Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and his Fed colleagues removed language from their January statement which said that the recovery is “disappointingly slow” and that “tight credit” is holding back consumer spending. They also dropped references to “modest income growth” and “lower housing wealth.”

“Certainly, this is the most optimistic Fed officials have sounded since asset purchases began in November and, at a minimum, that’s consistent with the expectation there will be no third round of purchases,” said Jim O’Sullivan, chief economist at MF Global Inc. in New York.

Even so, the statement echoed caution from the January release, saying that “the unemployment rate remains elevated, and measures of underlying inflation continue to be somewhat low, relative to levels that the Committee judges to be consistent, over the longer run, with its dual mandate” for stable prices and maximum employment. Policy makers also said they’ll “pay close attention” to inflation trends.

‘Easy Policy’

“Inflation is rising and they are running an easy policy,” said Julia Coronado, North America chief economist at BNP Paribas in New York. “They are betting their credibility that inflation expectations won’t become unhinged. They had to balance that against global developments taking the wind out of sails.”

The Fed left its benchmark interest rate in a range of zero to 0.25 percent, where it’s been since December 2008, and retained a pledge in place since March 2009 to keep it “exceptionally low” for an “extended period.” Officials next meet April 26-27 in Washington.

The average U.S. retail price of regular unleaded gasoline rose to $3.56 a gallon this week, the highest since October 2008.

“Commodity prices have risen significantly since the summer, and concerns about global supplies of crude oil have contributed to a sharp run-up in oil prices in recent weeks,” the Fed said.

Preferred Price Gauge

The Fed’s preferred price gauge, which excludes food and fuel, rose 0.8 percent in January from a year earlier, matching December’s year-over-year gain, the lowest in five decades of record-keeping. Fed officials aim for long-run overall inflation of 1.6 percent to 2 percent.

Payrolls have increased by an average 134,000 a month for the past five months and the unemployment rate has dropped by almost 1 percentage point over three months to 8.9 percent in February, the lowest since April 2009.

“They were buoyed by the last employment report,” said Mark Gertler, a New York University professor who has co-written research with Bernanke. “Except for what is going on in Japan, and that is a big exception, all the pieces were coming together. The last missing piece of the puzzle was the employment number.”

Among the companies anticipating an improving economy is Pleasanton, California-based Safeway Inc. The fourth-largest U.S. supermarket chain by stores expects that 2011, “while it will be a challenging year,” will be “much better” than 2009 or 2010, Chief Executive Officer Steven Burd said March 8.

“The economy will improve, but only moderately,” Burd said at the company’s investor conference. “We’re not looking for any kind of a hockey-stick curve here.”

Unanimous Decision

The FOMC decision was unanimous for a second consecutive meeting. That means Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher and Philadelphia Fed President Charles Plosser, both skeptics of the second round of so-called quantitative easing who voted for the statement today, don’t disagree strongly enough with the path of policy to dissent.

“The next meeting in late April is the last chance they have to bring QE2 to an early halt, and if that was going to happen I’d expect one or two of the more hawkish members to have dissented,” said Brian Levitt, an economist at OppenheimerFunds Inc. in New York, which has $184.4 billion in assets under management as of Feb. 28.

The central bank, through the New York Fed’s traders, has enlarged its balance sheet by $304 billion through its Treasury purchases since Nov. 12. Including securities bought by reinvesting proceeds of maturing mortgage debt the Fed has purchased $426 billion of Treasuries.

‘Very Cautious’

Atlanta Fed President Dennis Lockhart said in a March 7 speech that he doesn’t expect consumer-price inflation to accelerate because of the rise in food and energy costs. Speaking to economists in Arlington, Virginia, Lockhart said he is “very cautious” about further asset purchases, while not ruling out the possibility because turmoil in the Middle East and Africa risks slowing the U.S. economy.

“They certainly understand what the risks are out there and the risks are greater than they were 60 days ago: from the Middle East and oil prices to Japan and how that could affect financial markets and regional growth,” said Paul Ballew, a former Fed economist and senior vice president at Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. in Columbus, Ohio. “It’s not a surprise they’re going to keep their powder dry and see how things play out.”

Fed Pledges, Bonds Plunge

Rex at MW hit it on the head this time. We do in fact have a deplorable labor market. And every time Bernanke opens his mouth about monetizing debt, bond investors race for the exits. The 10-year yield is up 96 bps since our November 2nd alert to subscribers!

The Federal Open Market Committee kept its policy steady at Tuesday’s meeting, as expected. The target interest rate is still 0% to 0.25%, and the FOMC affirmed its intentions to buy $600 billion in Treasurys over the next few months as part of its extraordinary quantitative easing to boost economic growth. Read our full story on the FOMC.

The statement contained no surprises and very few changes. Read the full text.

One notable change in emphasis came in the very first sentence, where no one could miss it: “The economic recovery is continuing, though at a rate that has been insufficient to bring down unemployment,” the FOMC said. Last time, the Fed had said that “the pace of recovery in output and employment continues to be slow.”

Markets get lift from data

Investors are dealing with a busy schedule of economic indicators and news, while preparing for the Federal Open Market Committee policy announcement at 2:15 pm. Stocks got an early lift on strong retail sales data, but Best Buy swooned on a poor earnings report. Donna Kardos Yesalavich, Kathleen Madigan and Michael Casey report.

Same meaning, but with a heightened focus on jobs.

The new wording is the clearest statement yet that the Fed’s top concern is high unemployment.

There was no hint that members of the FOMC were regretting their decision to push more liquidity into the economy through bond purchases. Since that decision in early November, bond yields have soared, exactly the opposite reaction the Fed was hoping for from its second quantitative easing program.

We won’t know for three weeks (with the release of the truncated minutes) whether members debated scaling back the QE2 program. We do know that Fed governors and presidents have been fairly reluctant to air their differences in public over the past month.

For now, it seems that Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and his colleagues remain focused on the deplorable state of the job market, and not on gyrations in financial markets.

Bernanke ‘Makes the Case’ – Inflation is TOO LOW

Published on: 10/15/2010
Categories: Current Events, Economics
Comments: 1 Comment

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said additional monetary stimulus may be warranted because inflation is too low and unemployment is too high.

“There would appear — all else being equal — to be a case for further action,” Bernanke said today in the text of remarks given at a Boston Fed conference. He said the central bank could expand asset purchases or change the language in its statement, while saying “nonconventional policies have costs and limitations that must be taken into account in judging whether and how aggressively they should be used.”

He didn’t offer new details on how the Fed would undertake those strategies or give assurances the central bank will act at its Nov. 2-3 meeting.

Bernanke and his central bank colleagues are considering ways they can stimulate the economy as the unemployment rate holds near 10 percent and inflation falls short of their goals. After lowering interest rates almost to zero and purchasing $1.7 trillion of securities, policy makers are discussing expanding the Fed’s balance sheet by purchasing Treasuries and strategies for raising inflation expectations, according to the minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee’s Sept. 21 meeting.

“At current rates of inflation, the constraint imposed by the zero lower bound on nominal interest rates is too tight” and the “risk of deflation is higher than desirable,” Bernanke said. “High unemployment is currently forecast to persist for some time.”

Low Inflation

Futures on the Standard & Poor’s 500 index of stocks rose, with futures expiring in December climbing 0.2 percent to 1,176.30 at 8:17 a.m. in New York. The yield on the 10-year Treasury note fell three basis points to 2.48 percent as of 8:34 a.m., according to data compiled by Bloomberg. A basis point is 0.01 percentage point.

Fed officials, concerned that expectations of lower inflation will become self-fulfilling, are debating whether to encourage Americans to believe that prices will start rising at a faster pace so that they would spend more of their money now, the minutes from last month’s meeting showed. That would reduce inflation-adjusted interest rates and stimulate the economy.

“Central bank communication provides additional means of increasing the degree of policy accommodation,” Bernanke said. “A step the Committee could consider, if conditions called for it, would be to modify the language of the statement in some way that indicates that the Committee expects to keep the target for the federal funds rate low for longer than markets expect.”

‘Sufficient Precision’

Still, it “may be difficult to convey the Committee’s policy intentions with sufficient precision and conditionality,” he said.

The central bank could also expand its securities holdings, which has in the past been “successful” at lowering interest rates, Bernanke said. The Fed doesn’t have much experience with that tool, which makes it difficult to decide the “appropriate quantity and pace of purchases and to communicate this policy response to the public,” he said.

Bernanke said that “despite these challenges, the Federal Reserve remains committed to pursuing policies that promote our dual objectives of maximum employment and price stability.”

The Fed’s September statement was the first in almost two years of near-zero interest rates to say that too-low inflation would merit looser monetary policy. Prices excluding food and energy rose at a 1 percent annual pace in the three months through August, below Fed officials’ long-term preferred range of about 1.7 percent to 2 percent.

“Overall economic growth has been proceeding at a pace that is less vigorous than we would like,” Bernanke said. “Consumer spending has been inhibited by the painfully slow recovery in the labor market” and “with long-run inflation expectations stable and with substantial resource slack continuing to restrain cost pressures, it seems likely that inflation trends will remain subdued for some time.”

To contact the reporters on this story: Caroline Salas in New York at csalas1@bloomberg.net; Joshua Zumbrun in Washington at jzumbrun@bloomberg.net.

Bernanke ‘Not Straightforward’ on Lehman

Published on: 09/02/2010
Comments: No Comments

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said he regretted not saying in congressional testimony shortly after the failure of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. in 2008 that the central bank had no authority to save the firm.

The testimony at the time “has supported this myth that we did have a way of saving Lehman,” Bernanke said in response to questions during a Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission hearing in Washington today. “I regret not being more straightforward there because clearly it has supported the mistaken impression that in fact we could have done something.”

Bernanke made the remarks to explain the disparity between his September 2008 testimony that the Fed and Treasury “declined to commit public funds to support the institution” and later statements that the government had no option to save Lehman because of inadequate collateral. The Fed decided at the time against saying Lehman was unsalvageable because it may have risked further panic in financial markets, Bernanke said today.

“It was a judgment at that moment, with the system in tremendous stress and with other financial institutions under threat of a run or panic, that making that statement might have even reduced confidence further and led to further pressure,” Bernanke said today.

In September 2008, Bernanke told the Senate Banking Committee that the Fed and Treasury “declined to commit public funds to support the institution” and that investors and counterparties had enough time to prepare for the firm’s failure.

‘Catastrophic’ Failure

The bankruptcy intensified the worst financial crisis and recession since the Great Depression. Bernanke said he believed that a Lehman failure would have been “catastrophic” and that the government, which was trying to arrange a private merger, should do all it could to avert that outcome.

“This is my bread and butter,” said Bernanke, a former Princeton University economist who studied the Great Depression before joining the Fed as a governor in 2002.

Members of the commission, including Peter Wallison, co- director of financial policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, and Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former director of the Congressional Budget Office, pressed Bernanke on why the central bank didn’t exercise emergency powers to prevent Lehman’s failure as it did with Bear Stearns Cos. and American International Group in 2008.

The Fed chief said he was prepared to ask the Board of Governors to approve aid to Lehman, then backed off when he was informed that the central bank wouldn’t get sufficient collateral to back any loan. Lehman probably would have failed even with Fed assistance, Bernanke said.

“It was the judgment made by the leadership of the New York Fed and the people who were charged with reviewing the books of Lehman that they were far short of what was needed to get cash to meet the run,” Bernanke said. “That was the judgment that was given to me.”

To contact the reporter on this story: Scott Lanman in Washington at slanman@bloomberg.net.

Bernanke is not the Problem

Published on: 12/04/2009
Comments: No Comments

Yesterday a poll was released that only 21% of Americans support giving Helicopter Ben Bernanke a second term as chairman of the US Fed. This compared to 41% thinking that someone else should be given the job. I must say this is quite an improvement. I wonder if Rasmussen would have been able to say 2 years ago that 21% of Americans even knew who Bernanke was? If nothing else, the financial crisis and economic debacle of the past two years have certainly shone some much-needed but unwanted light on the Fed and its clandestine activities. As much as I disapprove of Bernanke’s policies and his handling of virtually every aspect of what has gone on, I’ll be the first to admit that Big Ben isn’t the problem. No, it isn’t him or Greenspan, or Volcker. It’s the institution itself that is the problem.

Mandate #1 – Price Stability

When the private Federal Reserve was chartered in 1913 by the unconstitutional Act of the same name, it stated two specific mandates: maximum employment and price stability. Those were to be the Fed’s areas of activity. However, with virtually no accountability to the American people (except vis a vis the President who appoints the Chairman and the Congress who invariably rubber-stamps such appointments), the Fed was turned loose on the undefended US Dollar.

Dollar Destruction

For years, the American public has been duped into thinking that inflation is necessary for economic growth. This outright lie will likely compete for the title of biggest financial fraud in history. Aided by this unawareness, we have seen a fairly standard 5% rate of annual inflation institutionalized into our economic system. For quite a while, this inflation went virtually undetected as it feasted mainly on the prosperity America had achieved, particularly after the Great Depression. As a nation, we began to spend away our surpluses and attach claims on future economic activity through the great society programs of the 1960’s and the perpetuation of New Deal programs such as Social Security.

Purchasing Power Lost

By the 1970s, however, we’d run short of real money and dealt the global financial system the shock of accepting paper dollars in settlement of our out of control deficit spending. This resulted in a period of increased instability in the 1970s and twin severe recessions. By this time, the devalued Dollar had destroyed enough of our purchasing power that it became necessary in many cases for a second breadwinner to work to maintain the standard of living. In the 1980s and 1990s, Americans began to rely increasingly on consumer credit to bridge the gap left by the waning dollar, and for much of the first decade of this new century, the house became the ATM as another gap filler.

It is no wonder that the recent contraction in consumer credit isn’t touched by the mainstream press; it is that critical to economic growth. This contraction is one of the biggest reasons the federal government has stepped in with record deficit spending. To keep the economic charade going, it has had to.

Contraction!!

The above bevy of charts and data should make it perfectly clear that the Fed has failed in spectacular fashion in terms of price stability. The only thing it has been successful in is ensuring that the devaluation of the Dollar occurred gradually, over time, so as not to alarm Main Street.

Mandate #2 – Maximum Employment

The second part of the dual mandate was maximum employment. In this regard, the central bank has done only a slightly better job. America in general has ranked fairly high globally in terms of low unemployment. However, one thing that must be noted is the Fed’s role in assisting with the exportation of American industry and the high paying manufacturing jobs that went with it. How did the Fed do this? Conventional wisdom would assert that it was solely government trade policies and agreements such as GATT and NAFTA that ruined our manufacturing base. That is certainly true, but these government policies had plenty of help.

A consistently weaker dollar means export advantages. However, there was (and still is, albeit a smaller one) a significant gap between labor costs in foreign countries like much of Asia and the US. So US-based companies could export their manufacturing activities abroad to take advantage of the cheap labor while having export advantages over their foreign competitors because of the weak dollar.
While the bottom line was certainly money and power, it is debatable whether the de-industrialization was done to flood America with cheap imported goods to mask the loss of the Dollar’s purchasing power or if it was done merely to consolidate global power by knocking down the standard of living of the first world. I realize this is going to be a difficult point to argue when one can walk into a store almost anywhere in the country and purchase a myriad of items at ‘Rollback’ prices. However, if you take a look around you and imagine what would be there if it weren’t for the debt load, I think you’ll get a pretty good picture of what is going on here.

What is undeniable is the transition from a goods-producing economy to a service-oriented one. The biggest problem with a country full of employees performing services is that many of these services cannot be exported to pay for the goods we now must import. Despite the technological developments of the past 10 years, a haircut still cannot be exported to China. To be honest, the Fed’s direct impact on the job market has traditionally been much less than its impact on price stability. However, the fact that there has been a covert move to de-industrialize the first world cannot be denied. The fact that much of the impetus for this move came from the policies of the IMF and World Bank with assistance from regional central banks is equally real. A good take home message from this is that central planning almost always works against personal liberty and human rights.

Ramifications

Unfortunately, what has taken place over the years is that the Fed has used these two broad mandates to create for itself a battalion of illicit activities, to the point where mere disclosure of what these activities are would cause an instant depression if you listen to Ben Bernanke, Frederic Mishkin, and others. Attempts to shine the light of day on the Fed’s activities are painted as being ‘dangerous’. I’m sure they are dangerous – to the status quo. Even more disturbing is the Fed’s ability to buy out the entire country while Congress worries about state dinner party crashers and how many subpoenas should be issued. Few commentators have bothered to mention that when the Fed buys $852 Billion in mortgage bonds, it is buying the mortgages of American homes. Maybe your mortgage is now held by an offshore banking cartel even though your mortgage contract was with Countrywide, BAC or any of a thousand originators. Does that bother you? It should.

No, this is not a problem of a single rogue Fed Chairman. It is a problem of a rogue institution, which has stretched way beyond its original charter – and an unconstitutional charter at that. Recent moves to audit the Fed, while noble, will only go so far. I had the opportunity to chat with G. Edward Griffin about this very topic and share his concern that the audit movement will act as a lightning rod for public outrage while allowing the institution itself to continue in a business as usual manner. Congress has the power to yank the Federal Reserve’s ticket; it is about time they used it to give the Fed a 100th birthday present – a pink slip.

Addendum It should come as little surprise to anyone that a truly out of nowhere jobs report comes out just as Bernanke is ‘under fire’ on Capitol Hill. It would be nearly impossible to count all the times this has happened over the past year or so when either the stock market or some political figure has needed a boost. What must be noted is that goods-producing jobs continue to disappear, and that much of the ‘good news’ in the jobs report comes from the fact that temp agencies signed on 52,000 workers in November. Much ballyhooed about this trend is the fact that temp agencies have been adding staff for the last 4 months now. What should be of concern is that there appears to be almost no conversion of those temp jobs into permanent positions at this point in time.

A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words

Published on: 12/01/2009
Categories: Current Events, Economics
Comments: 1 Comment

Just another in the stepping stones along the Road to Financial Ruin for the US Dollar. And also a measure of the stability of our financial system despite what the bleating dimwits on CNBC have to say.

Gold at $1200

page 1 of 2 »

Welcome , today is Sunday, 02/05/2012