Allen Meltzer, an economist at Carnegie Mellon University, writes today in the Wall Street Journal about the Fed’s worrisome announcement that it will continue the easy-money policy of artificially low interest rates.
Professor Meltzer’s key point (at least to me) is that the economy is weak because of too much government intervention and too much federal spending, and you don’t solve those problems with a loose-money policy – especially since banks already are sitting on $1.6 trillion of excess reserves (why lend money when the economy is weak and you may not get repaid?).
Meltzer then outlines some of the reforms that would boost growth, all of which are desirable, albeit a bit tame for my tastes.
…the United States does not have the kind of problems that printing more money will cure. Banks currently hold more than $1.6 trillion of idle reserves at the Fed. Banks can use those idle reserves to create enormous amounts of money. Interest rates on federal funds remain near zero. Longer-term interest rates on Treasurys are at record lows. What reason can there be for adding more excess reserves? The main effect would be a further devaluation of the dollar against competing currencies and gold, followed by a rise in the price of oil and other imports. …Money growth (M2) reached 10% for the past six months, presaging more inflation ahead. …What we need most is confidence in our future. That calls for:
• Reducing corporate tax rates permanently to encourage investment (paid for by closing loopholes).
• Agreeing on long-term reductions in entitlement spending.
• A five-year moratorium on new regulations affecting energy, environment, health and finance.
• An explicit inflation target between zero and 2% to force the Fed to pay more attention to the medium term and to increase public confidence that we will not experience runaway inflation.
The president is wrong to pose the issue as more taxes for millionaires to pay for more redistribution now. That path leads to future crises because higher taxes support the low productivity growth of the welfare state, delay the transition to export-led growth, and do not reduce future budget liabilities enough.
Meltzer’s final point about the futility of class-warfare taxes is very important. He doesn’t use the term, but he’s making a Laffer Curve argument. Simply stated, if punitive tax rates cause investors, entrepreneurs, and small business owners to earn/declare less taxable income, then the government won’t collect as much money as predicted by the Joint Committee on Taxation’s simplistic models.
Of course, Obama said in 2008 than he wanted high tax rates for reasons of “fairness,” even if such policies didn’t lead to more tax revenue. That destructive mentality probably helps explain why not only banks, but also companies, are sitting on cash and afraid to make significant investments.
But if you really want to understand how Obama’s policies are causing “regime uncertainty,” this cartoon is spot on.
[…] Me critican estas políticas con Obama, sobre y por encima y más nuevo. […]
[…] criticized these policies under Obama, over and over and over […]
[…] of the blame on the Federal Reserve. Simply stated, I fear we have a bubble thanks to years and years (and years and years) of easy money and artificially low interest […]
[…] not blaming the Fed for trying to “normalize” today. Instead, the problem is all the easy-money policy earlier this […]
[…] “If you want to assign blame for economic downturns, the first place to look is monetary policy. […]
[…] If you want to assign blame for economic downturns, the first place to look is monetary policy. […]
[…] In other words, the best way of avoiding “tight money” is to not engage in periods of “easy money.” […]
[…] crisis, though, we saw the government interfere with this process. First, bad policies such as easy money from the Fed and corrupt Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac subsidies distorted market signals and caused a needlessly high […]
[…] crisis, though, we saw the government interfere with this process. First, bad policies such as easy money from the Fed and corrupt Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac subsidies distorted market signals and caused a needlessly high […]
[…] crisis, though, we saw the government interfere with this process. First, bad policies such as easy money from the Fed and corrupt Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac subsidies distorted market signals and caused a needlessly high […]
[…] are the policies that need to be fixed. Sadly, they are less likely to be addressed if politicians think they can paper over the problems by figuratively printing more money. Rate this:Share this:PrintEmailFacebookTwitterMoredeliciousDiggFarkLinkedInRedditStumbleUponLike […]
[…] 2. A “Central World Bank” is bureaucrat-speak for a Federal Reserve on steroids. But it would be even worse than that. In the current system, at least investors have the ability to dump dollars and euros and shift to currencies that are better managed, such as the Swiss Franc. A supra-national Fed, by contrast, will give the political elite more power to pursue bad monetary policy. […]
[…] before that it is difficult to identify the right monetary policy, but it certainly seems like this policy is – at best – an ineffective gesture. This is why the Fed’s various efforts to goose the economy with easy money have been […]
[…] before that it is difficult to identify the right monetary policy, but it certainly seems like this policy is – at best – an ineffective gesture. This is why the Fed’s various efforts to goose the economy with easy money have been […]
Ben Bernanke, who has dissected the Great Depression “every which way to Sunday” and has tried every means at the Fed’s disposal to restart the American “economic dynamo” will never admit to the fact that an economy, which is based 75% on consumer spending (mostly on foreign produced goods) is fundamentally flawed.
During the internet stock bubble, Alan Greenspan warned about “irrational exuberance.” He was widely pooh poohed by Wall Street and especially by the stock market gurus. Why didn’t Ben speak up when everyone was getting rich selling each other homes at grossly inflated prices with no money down using “other people’s money” during the housing bubble?