Category: Economics: Ch 19

This podcast is from the Library of Economics and Liberty’s EconTalk site. In it, Scott Sumner of Bentley University discusses with host Russ Roberts the role of monetary policy in the USA since 2007 and whether or not it was as expansionary as many people think.

In fact, Sumner argues that monetary policy was tight in late 2008 and that this precipitated the recession. He argues that the standard indicators of the tightness or ease of monetary policy, namely the rate of interest and the growth in the money supply, were misleading.

Sumner on Monetary Policy EconTalk podcast (9/11/09)

Questions

  1. Why is it important to look at the velocity of circulation of money when deciding the effect of interest rate changes or changes in the monetary base? Can the Fed’s failure to take velocity sufficiently into account be seen as a cause of the recession?
  2. Is there evidence of a liquidity trap operating in the USA in late 2008?
  3. How could the Fed have pursued a more expansionary policy, given that interest rates were eventually cut to virtually zero and the monetary base was expanded substantially?
  4. Why does Sumner argue that monetary policy should focus on influencing the growth in aggregate demand?
  5. How useful is the quantity equation, MV = PT (or MV = PY) in understanding the role and effectiveness of monetary policy?
  6. What is the Keynesian approach to monetary policy in a recession? How does this differ from the monetarist approach? Are both approaches focusing on the demand side and thus quite different from supply-side analysis of recession?
  7. Why is the consumer prices index (CPI) a poor indicator of a nominal shock to the economy? Should the central bank focus on nominal GDP, rather than CPI, as an indicator of the state of the economy and as a guide to the stance of monetary policy?
  8. What are the strengths and weaknesses of using a Taylor rule as a guide to monetary policy? Would nominal GDP futures be a better target for monetary policy?

After the November 2009 meeting of the Monetary Policy Committee, the Bank of England announced that it would keep Bank Rate on hold at 0.5%, at which rate it has been since March. It also said that it would spend a further £25 billion over the next three months on asset purchases, primarily government bonds, thereby pumping additional money into the economy: the process known as “quantitative easing“. This would bring total asset purchases under the scheme to £200bn.

But although this represents a further increase in money supply, the rate of increase is slowing down. In the previous three months, £50 billion of assets had been purchased. So does this imply that the Bank of England sees a recovery around the corner? Will money supply have been expanded enough to finance the desired increase in spending – on both consumption and investment?

A problem so far is that most of the extra money has not been spent on goods and services. Banks have been building up their reserves, with much of the money simply being re-deposited in the Bank of England as reserve balances (see Table A1.1.1 in “Bankstats). At the same time, households have been taking on very little extra debt – indeed, In July, total household debt actually fell (see “Payback time) and consumer debt (i.e. excluding mortgages) has continued to fall. If quantitative easing is to work, the money must be spent!

But with the monetary base having expanded so much, is there a danger that, once the recovery gathers pace, spending growth will return with a vengeance? Will inflation rapidly become a problem again with an overheating economy? The following articles examine the issues.

Interest rates held at 0.5 per cent (includes video) Channel 4 News (5/11/09)
Bank of England extends quantitative easing to £200bn Guardian, Larry Elliott (5/11/09)
What the economists say: Quantitative easing £25bn boost Guardian (5/11/09)
Bank of England faced with its biggest split on policy in a decade Independent, Sean O’Grady (4/11/09)
Bank of England expands money-printing programme to £200bn to fight downturn (includes video) Telegraph (5/11/09)
The one thing worse than quantitative easing would be no QE at all Telegraph, Edmund Conway (5/11/09)
BoE: It ain’t over till it’s over Telegraph, Edmund Conway blog (5/11/09)
Bank raises stimulus to £200bn to end recession Times Online, Grainne Gilmore (5/11/09)
Bank of England to inject another £25bn of stimulus money Management Today (5/11/09)
Extra £25bn to stimulate economy BBC News (5/11/09)
Quantitative easing ‘not working’ (video of DeAnne Julius: former MPC member) BBC News (5/11/09)
Boxed in BBC Stephanomics (5/11/09)
The BoE’s £25bn gambit Financial Times, Chris Giles blog (5/11/09)
US to reduce Quantitative Easing as rates kept low Telegraph, James Quinn (4/11/09)
Quantitative easing ‘unpleasant’ BBC Today Programme, Stephen Bell and Wilem Buiter (7/11/09)
Experts debate whether quantitative easing is working (video) BBC Newsnight (6/11/09)

Questions

  1. What has been happening to the velocity of circulation of (narrow) money in the past few months? Explain the significance of this.
  2. What is likely to happen to the velocity of circulation in the coming months if (a) the economy recovers quite strongly; (b) recovery is modest?
  3. What is the relationship between quantitative easing and the growth in broad money (i.e. M4 in the UK)? How will banks’ desire to build up their reserves affect this relationship?
  4. Is the UK economy in a liquidity trap? Explain.
  5. Why is it likely that the Bank of England may well engage in more quantitative easing next March and beyond? How is the fiscal situation likely to affect Bank of England decisions?
  6. Examine the argument for the Bank of England buying more private-sector debt (virtually all of the asset purchases have been of public-sector debt)?

CPI inflation in the 12 months to September 2009 fell to 1.1% (from 1.6% in the 12 months to August). RPI inflation for the same period was -1.3%. In other words, retail prices actually fell by 1.3% in the 12 months to September. According to the ONS, “By far the largest downward pressure affecting the change in the CPI annual rate came from housing and household services. This was principally due to average gas and electricity bills, which were unchanged between August and September this year but rose a year ago when some of the major suppliers increased their tariffs.” (See below for link.)

If the CPI inflation rate falls below 1% (or rises above 3%), the Governor of the Bank of England is required to write a letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer explaining why and also what the Bank of England intends to do about this. The Bank of England targets the forecast CPI inflation 24 months’ hence and attempts to achieve a rate of 2%. Normally, if the forecast rate is below 2%, the Monetary Policy Committee will decide to cut the rate of interest. The last Bank of England Inflation Report (August 2009) forecast CPI inflation of around 1.5% in 24 months’ time. If the November Inflation Report forecasts a similar figure, or even below, what can be done? Bank Rate is already at a historic low of just 0.5% and a further cut is unlikely to have much effect. Should the Bank of England, then, engage in another dose of quantitative easing? Perhaps the letter, if it has soon to be written, will make it clear.

UK consumer price inflation at 5-year low BusinessWeek (13/10/09)
Recession helps push inflation to five-year low Independent (14/10/09)
Inflation falls to lowest in five years Guardian (13/10/09)
Inflation dip likely to be short-lived Guardian (13/10/09)
Deflation, not inflation would be the bigger threat if the Conservatives do what they say Jeremy Warner blog, Telegraph (13/10/09)
Pound hit by falling UK inflation BBC News (13/10/09)
Pound hit by falling UK inflation (video) BBC News (13/10/09)
Pound pays price as inflation slides to five-year low Times Online (14/10/09)
Investors weigh risks of inflation and deflation Financial Times (12/10/09)
Wage ‘catch up’ for public sector BBC Today Programme (14/10/09)

Current data on UK Inflation (National Statistics)
Time series data (annual, quarterly and monthly) on UK prices and inflation Economic and labour Market Review (National Statistics)

Questions

  1. Why did the annual rate of CPI inflation fall so much in September 2009?
  2. Is the Bank of England Governor likely to have to write a letter (or letters) to the Chancellor in the coming months? Explain why or why not. What is likely to be the role of expectations in determining whether a letter has to be written?
  3. Why did the sterling exchange rate fall on the announcement of the inflation figure? What are likely to be the effects of this? What will determine the size of these effects?
  4. Why may additional amounts of quantitative easing be necessary in the coming months? How would a contractionary fiscal policy affect the desirability of additional quantitative easing?

With much attention focused on the UK’s rapidly rising public-sector debt, fiscal policy will have to be tightened once the economy is recovering. This will entail substantial cuts in government expenditure and possibly tax rises too, whoever wins the election next year. The danger, of course, is that if aggregate demand is cut, or its growth is severely curtailed, the economy could lurch back into recession. For this reason, it is likely that monetary policy will have to remain expansionary for some time to come. Interest rates will stay low and further quantitative easing could take place.

This was the conclusion of a report by the Centre for Economics and Business Research (see link below). The CEBR argued that Bank Rate will remain at 0.5% at least until 2011 and not reach 2% until 2014. “The forecasts show that the fiscal consolidation is likely to be matched with an unprecedented monetary relaxation. … Douglas McWilliams, one of the report’s authors and Chief Executive at CEBR, commented: ‘We are likely to see an exciting policy mix, with the fiscal policy lever pulled right back while the monetary lever is fast forward. Our analysis says that this ought to work. If it does so, we are likely to see a major rerating of equities and property which in turn should stimulate economic growth after a lag.’

The following articles look at the report and the implications of its predictions for economic growth and exchange rates.

Bank rate to ‘stay frozen’ for five years Times Online (11/10/09)
Mortgage rates to stay low until 2014 Telegraph (12/10/09)
Tax and spending squeeze to keep bank rate low David Smith’s EconomicsUK.com (11/10/09)
UK rates ‘to stay low for years’ BBC News (12/10/09)
Pound plunges as UK markets rally to year high Telegraph (11/10/09)
Tough times ahead as traders poised to offload their sterling Sunday Herald (11/10/09)

CEBR News Release (12/10/09)

Questions

  1. Under what conditions would a combination of a contractionary fiscal policy and an expansionary monetary policy be most effective in delivering economic growth?
  2. What would be the long-term effect on private-sector debt?
  3. How would such a policy mix affect the rate of exchange? Would this help to stimulate economic growth or dampen it?
  4. How will the size of these effects depend on the mobility of international financial capital?
  5. Explain the following: ‘Our analysis says that this ought to work. If it does so, we are likely to see a major rerating of equities and property which in turn should stimulate economic growth after a lag’.

In an attempt to stave off recession, countries around the world have made extensive used of fiscal stimuli. Combinations of tax cuts and increases in government expenditure have been used to boost aggregate demand and thereby to halt falling national income. “The G20 group of economies … have introduced stimulus packages worth an average of 2% of GDP this year and 1.6% of GDP in 2010.”

But how much will national income respond to a particular fiscal stimulus? It depends on the size of the fiscal multiplier for each type of government expenditure increase or tax cut. The bigger the multiplier for each expansionary measure, the more will national income rise. Clearly, to estimate the effects of their fiscal measures, governments would very much like to know the size of these multipliers. But that’s not so easy, as the following article from The Economist explains.

Much ado about multipliers The Economist (24/9/09)

Questions

  1. What are the formulae for (a) the government expenditure multiplier; (b) the tax multiplier?
  2. Why is the value of the multiplier likely to vary with the type of government expenditure increase or tax cut that is used? Which types of government expenditure increases and tax cuts are likely to have (a) the largest effects; (b) the fastest acting effects?
  3. Why is the size of any particular fiscal multiplier difficult to predict? How do expectations impact on the size of the multiplier?
  4. Under what circumstances are fiscal measures likely to be ‘crowded out’? How can monetary policy be used to prevent, or at least minimise, crowding out?