Mr. Kevin Warsh, a former member of the Federal Reserve board, now a distinguished visiting fellow in economics at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, pens a damning Commentary of the Federal Reserve in today’s US print edition of the Wall Street Journal.
In “The Federal Reserve Needs New Thinking“, he slams the Fed for “….[T]he economics guild push[ing] ill-considered dogmas into the mainstream of monetary policy. The Fed’s mantra of data-dependence causes erratic policy lurches in response to noisy data. It’s medium term policy objectives are at odds with its compulsion to keep asset prices elevated. It’s inflation objectives are are far more precise than the residual measurement error. It’s output-gap economic models are troublingly unreliable.”
If that were not enough he adds: “And it expresses grave concern about income inequality while refusing to acknowledge that its policies unfairly increased asset inequality.”
Wow- this is a damning perspective from a ex-member of the Fed. I have to say that I tend to agree with his perspective. However the Comment falls short of the title: there is little new policy offering or suggestion to warrant any ‘new thinking.’ The challenge is to query what could or should the Fed and other central banks do differently.
One odd idea I toyed with a few months ago (see The ghost of Keynes haunts our global leaders and economic conditions today) is to globally reset interest rates as if a new normal had been established. What I mean to say is that central banks around the world should all raise their interest rates at the same time by an agreed amount in order to:
- Preserve current interest rate differential between central bank authorities
- Establish a more natural rate in order to reestablish normal market and investment operations
If we had nearer-normal interest rates the following would happen:
- Private capital investment decisions might once again take on a normal demand curve and pattern, thus contributing and steering toward increased productivity
- The cost of money will rise and so private firms will stop issuing bonds or taking out cheap loans only to increase share buy-backs, thus decreasing the inequality in invest class assets
- M&A levels would fall to more normal competitive levels
- Consumers will start to save again
- Pension funds will have their unfunded portion of their liability reduced
All in all that would be a good day at the office. But it only works if the Fed and central banks in UK, Canada, Europe, Japan, and China agree and collaborate closely. Additionally the IMF probably needs to leed this effort.
The other problem is the large overhang of debt that central banks now have on their balance sheets. These acquisitions represent government (and some private) debt. These enlarged balance sheets also distort the market. The problem is that central banks have no idea how to jettison these debts without completely upsetting the market again.
So I guess the only option might be to collaborate with other central banks and agree some kind of normalized write-off. If all central banks agreed to write-off 75% of the government debt they hold, it would free up government spending (since they can start up again, hopefully on the right things this time like education and infrastructure) and the market prices will be balanced. This is of course a silly idea. But how else can we make progress with this challenge?
Yes, new thinking is needed. And a lot more collaboration. The solution will not be found in one central bank. We are too connected. We need a new Bretton Woods 2.0 agreement.