NP - The Fed's Priorities

[Charles Albert]

Yes....there is an issue with "transmission", much of the money pumped out
by the Fed has gone into "excess reserves"....there have been suggestions
that a cure for this problem would be for the Fed to "pay" a negative
interest rate on such, thereby stimulating banks to put them to more
productive uses......Yglesias doesn't address the question of whether or
not there is a demand for credit.....I'm of the opinion that, absent the
likelihood of an boost in consumer spending, that the demand for credit
will remain subdued.

In devising the remedy for the Wages of Supply Side Idiocy, Part Deux, too
many resources were devoted to reinflating bank capital, too little to
helping households repair their balance sheets....

love,
cfa

On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 11:51 AM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:

> The Fed is a part of the problem:
>
>
> http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/08/03/the_monetary_base_is_irrelevant.html
>
> What you see [in the chart - link!] is the evolution of two things
> over the past 25 years. One is the monetary base, and the other is the
> monetary base once you strip "excess reserves" (money banks are
> keeping parked at the Fed over and above what regulations require them
> to keep) out of data. As you can see, for most of the period there's
> absolutely no divergence between the trends. Then in 2008, Ben
> Bernanke decided that the Fed should start paying interest on excess
> reserves and also embarked on a large increase in the monetary base.
> The chart makes clear, however, that relative to trend all of this
> money creation has just gone into excess reserves.
>
> This is wonky and boring, but it gets at my two monetary pet peeves.
> On the one hand you have tight money advocates who say that the Fed
> has printed oodles of money. What the chart shows is that they haven't
> really. Or, rather, all the money that's been created is sequestered
> from the actual economy and may as well not exist for most purposes.
> On the other hand you have monetary policy skeptics who argue that
> further stimulus would somehow be merely "pushing on a string." On the
> contrary, as these charts show, there's a veritable avalanche of money
> the Fed could unleash upon the economy were it not deliberately paying
> banks to keep the money out of play.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20120806/d382e9df/attachment.html>