Thursday, November 02, 2006

I am obviously not the only one...can someone send this to our idiotic board members.

Fed Official Says Bad Data
Helped Fuel Rate Cuts,
Housing Speculation

By GREG IP
November 3, 2006; Page A6

In an apparent and rare in-house critique, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas said that because of faulty inflation data, the Fed kept interest rates too low for too long earlier this decade, fueling speculative housing activity.

A number of critics have said the Fed under former chairman Alan Greenspan kept monetary policy too easy from 2003 to 2004. But Richard Fisher's remarks to the New York Association for Business Economics yesterday mark the first time some Fed watchers could recall a sitting Fed policy maker making such comments.

Mr. Fisher said from 2002 to early 2003, inflation, as measured by the price index of personal consumption expenditures (PCE) excluding food and energy, was running below 1%. That suggested that a serious shock to the economy could turn inflation to deflation, or generally falling prices. Deflation makes it much harder for the Fed to boost growth by engineering deeply negative real, that is inflation-adjusted, interest rates.

To reduce the risk of deflation, the Fed lowered its target for the Fed funds rate -- charged on overnight loans between banks -- to 1% in June 2003 and held it there until mid-2004. It has since raised it to 5.25%.

Mr. Fisher noted that subsequent revisions show PCE inflation was actually a half a percentage point higher than originally estimated. "In retrospect, the real Fed funds rate turned out to be lower than what was deemed appropriate at the time and was held lower longer than it should have been," Mr. Fisher said.

"In this case, poor data led to a policy action that amplified speculative activity in the housing and other markets. Today...the housing market is undergoing a substantial correction and inflicting real costs to millions of homeowners across the country. It is complicating the [Fed's] task of achieving...sustainable noninflationary growth."

Mr. Fisher, who took office in April last year, said in an interview that his speech wasn't meant to be a criticism of the decisions Mr. Greenspan and the FOMC made then. He said: "I wasn't at the table at the time -- it's easy to look at things with 20-20 hindsight. The point is we need to continue to improve our ability to develop and work with better data."

Jan Hatzius, chief U.S. economist at Goldman Sachs, called Mr. Fisher's remarks "pretty striking," while noting it is Mr. Fisher's style to be opinionated. He added that while he agrees the Fed's policy from 2002 to 2004 fueled speculative housing-bubble activity, it was still reasonable "knowing what you knew at the time. You take out some insurance against a really bad, low-probability outcome, and after the fact you regret having paid the insurance premium."

Mr. Fisher said inflation, at about 2.5% now, is still higher than his "comfort zone," but it is possible it "has peaked and is finally heading lower."

Fed governor Susan Bies echoed that sentiment in a speech to Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa, saying, "inflation appears poised to decelerate in coming months... but the risks to that outlook seem tilted toward the upside."

23 Comments:

Blogger MattKelly54 said...

Fisher is looking like a fool. I also remember when we were in the 9th inning of rate hikes. This loud mouth thinks he is a celebrity, but he is the Dallas Fed govenor. I can't believe reporters quote this guy. He is turning into the T.O. of the fed.

1:13 PM  
Blogger Not Sure if Al Gore or Global Warming is a Bigger Joke said...

Then am I the T.O. of ASAP???

3:00 PM  
Blogger blog_name said...

No, your actually more of the Patrick Byrne of ASAP...:)

3:31 PM  
Blogger Fresh said...

I'm on board with the idea that CPI and the PCE don't accurately capture inflation. But who cares?

I'm not interested in the levels. It's the change that matters. And I've yet to see anything that indicates that changes in the CPI/PCE don't represent changes in inflation.

At any rate, I'm calling for possibly significant wage inflation now that unemployment is 4.4% and the Democrats are about to take the house and senate. One of the first items on their agenda will be to raise minimum wage.

If you held a gun to my head, I'd likely say that rates will stay at the current level for some time. That said, I'm certainly biased towards higher rates over lower rates.

3:43 PM  
Blogger MattKelly54 said...

My observation is that people only spin the conspiracy to match their current outlook. Some smart people think that CPI overestimates inflation. I personally do not know how you make it any better. Before it was the owner equivalent rent was masking inflation, now rents are blowing out, but it is food and energy are low. The fed barely looks at this stuff anyway. It is in the past. It already happened. Doesn't matter anymore. It is finished. What is going to happen in the future is what matters.

I am sure that the conspiracy will continue. What should we use for inflation measurements? Commodities are not the largest part of prices, labor is. But according to my boy Mauldin, unemployment is a trailing indicator and broke after the last recession. Everyone is a critic, but very few people are solving these problems. You can apparently look smart by just complaining about problems, but not offering up any solutiond.

11:21 AM  
Blogger Not Sure if Al Gore or Global Warming is a Bigger Joke said...

Calculate the way we used to calculate it. What is wrong with that? What is wrong with that is that it tracks prices in reality much better than the current equation and results in much higher welfare program distributions (more debt for gov't), higher wages for lower level employees whose wages are reset based on CPI, higher coupon payments for TIPS, higher interest rates in general.

All of these things are bad for the FED, the politicians, and for rich people in general.

Also, Doug don't you realize that CPI / PCE are first order measures? Meaning, unlike interest rates or asset prices, they are not levels but changes themselves. Maybe you change in the change, i.e. second derivative type stuff. And if you are looking at that then you seeing accelerating inflation as inflation y/y numbers are increasing. Wage inflation is good argument.

1:16 PM  
Blogger Fresh said...

I realize that. My initial point is worded poorly.

That said, the Fed manages towards a certain number for PCE. The only thing that matters is how much actual PCE differs from the number they are managing towards. It doesn't matter what real inflation is if the Fed is managing towards the PCE. It doesn't matter if the PCE accurately measures inflation or not as long as the Fed believes that it does.

3:14 PM  
Blogger Nomad-amus said...

Labor has been the largest component of inflation and commodities are now a low cost of sales for, say P&G. But this is in the past and a result of a bear market in commodities...

understand the global economy, not US centric economy.

6:19 PM  
Blogger MattKelly54 said...

Back when H.W. was president I paid 1K for a Commodore 64. And $12 for a cassette tape of Run DMC.

10:20 PM  
Blogger MattKelly54 said...

In the world economy labor is not the dominant force of inflation?

Where is that data?

10:25 PM  
Blogger MattKelly54 said...

I have never fully understood the logic of the conspiracy. Is it this:

1. The government lies and games the data to make inflation seem low.

2. This allows them to lower interest rates therefore increasing the money supply

3. Shadow inflation is out there, yet the government continues to keep rates low because the gamed data says that prices are still low

4. The government also gets to pay lower amounts for payments indexed to inflation

5. Prices are going to the stratosphere, yet the gamed data does not pick it up so the government never has to pay more.

6. Money is essentially worthless, yet the government is still gaming the data because they don't want to pay more for welfare with their worthless paper.

This just does not make sense to me. If the government truely wants to save money don't they have incentive to keep inflation low no matter how you measure it. How big of a percentage are TIPS in the total debt load of the gov. If "real" inflation goes up wouldn't bond yields go up forcing the gov to pay higher interest costs.

I just never get it. If you ask 1000 people on the street what PCE is, I wonder how many people would know. And the people that do know what it is are probably smart enough to figure out what inflation really is, and will not accept ultra low bond yields. I feel that the incentive is actually very low to somehow game the inflation numbers because it truelly does not even matter what they are. Bond vigalantes are to viligant to get fooled, and people are too stupid to even care. That is my contention.

MK

10:52 PM  
Blogger MattKelly54 said...

One more question: Would you care if someone came out on Tuesday and said "Hey guys by the way inflation was actually 10% for the last 100 years. We fooled you. Ha-Ha."

My contention is that you would not give 2 shits. You would say "great does that change the fact that I need to get up, drag my ass to work, and feed my family. No. Who cares."

No one cares what inflation was, they care what it is going to be. In my opinion, deflation is the current threat. There is way to much world capacity, and there will soon not be enough world demand.

10:57 PM  
Blogger Odoacer said...

Matt,

Please elaborate on your deflation thesis. I am interested in hearing more.

GT

11:35 PM  
Blogger MattKelly54 said...

Tamer-

I'm probably too stupid to talk about it with any sophistication, but when I look at the deals that are getting done in the leveraged loan market, it makes me think that credit and capital is really easy. If that dries up which normally happens when the yield curve is tightened as many times as it recently has been, I think that demand may fall off for goods and services.

I guess you could make the point that as the boomers go towards spending their savings and they become unproductive, that demands for goods and services will skyrocket causing inflation. These are the kindergarten mental models that I operate with.

10:22 AM  
Blogger Nomad-amus said...

MK, tell me how the U.S. will pay off its debt. Indebt and inflate is the MO of CBs and a reflection of Greshem's Law. The good money is unencumbered tangible assets or perpetual natural resources.

3:20 PM  
Blogger Not Sure if Al Gore or Global Warming is a Bigger Joke said...

Wait,

GReg now you are interested in a deflationary argument that credit is too cheap and that once money becomes expensive not only will asset prices deflate, but goods and services demand will drop off, which is already happening if you look at inventory data.

To PS's point, the argument for print money to pay off debt in a ponzi scheme is a hyperinflationary argument. Very viable path as well.

6:49 PM  
Blogger Odoacer said...

Ben

I am interested in all sorts of points of view. In fact, the more a view diverges from my opinion the more I am interested in it. Knowing the opposing pov either causes me to reevaluate or reinforces my own view. Healthy debate is excellent tool to improve one's knowledge of a subject.

GT

10:15 PM  
Blogger MattKelly54 said...

Bush is cutting the deficit. Thats a number one priority. Duh.

10:56 PM  
Blogger MattKelly54 said...

Gambling on voting is super fun. The volatility on Tradesports is fast and furious. Virginia is up in the air and that threw the Senate vote in the air. The market is definitely not efficient.

12:21 AM  
Blogger Fresh said...

Let me preface my statement by saying that I also believe that government debt is out of control, that there is too much money in the system, and that I am biased towards a modest increase in inflation rather than a substantial decrease. I think that once the markets get shocked, the money will have to go somewhere... either out of the country or into goods and services. Either one will cause an increase in inflation.

That said, I'm not sure we'll ever have to deal with repaying our debt because the Asians seem to have a never ending appetite for it. Of course, that could change in an instant... but I'm not sure we're anywhere close to a breaking point.

11:35 AM  
Blogger MattKelly54 said...

Ben - did you ever look into Japan having higher gov debt/GDP than the U.S. but lower interest rates.

Maybe I am a slow learner, and you guys have been saying this all along, but it seems that when the U.S. debt per GDP has been going up inflation has been low, but in the 70s and in the 90s when the government paid off the debt commodity and asset prices went into bubble mode. It seems to hold with Japan, which has ultra low interest rates and also unmanageable debt load.

Are you guys already all over this?

12:06 PM  
Blogger Not Sure if Al Gore or Global Warming is a Bigger Joke said...

Debt is deflationary inherently. So as debt increases, it makes sense that inflation is tame.

Doug,

All that money doesn't go anywhere, it disappears. Asset values that have been propped up by loose capital will magically disappear once credit is cut....which btw look at consumer credit number. That is good datapoint for slowdown in spending and credit.

3:14 PM  
Blogger MattKelly54 said...

There you have it we simply just keep adding debt and inflation will be tame. We never have to pay it back. Duh.

3:32 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home