MONETARY POLICY 15 CHAPTER The Central Bank: CB The Federal Reserve System, commonly known as “the Fed”, is the central bank of the United States. A Central Bank (CB) is the public authority that, typically, regulates a nation’s depository institutions and controls the quantity of the nation’s money. The degree of independence the central bank has from the government of the day varies a great deal from one country to another. The Central Bank: CB The CB’s Goals and Targets The CB conducts the nation’s monetary policy, which means that, among other things, it adjusts the quantity of money in circulation. The CB’s goals are to keep inflation in check, maintain full employment, moderate the business cycle, and contribute to achieving long-term growth. In pursuit of its goals, in the U.S., the Fed pays close attention to interest rates and sets a target for the federal funds rate that is consistent with its goals. The federal funds rate is the interest rate that commercial banks in the U.S. charge each other on overnight loans of reserves [“federal funds”]. In Canada, this rate is called the “Overnight lending rate”. In Bangladesh, it is called the “Call Money Rate”. Controlling the Quantity of Money The CB’s Policy Tools In theory, the CB could use three monetary policy tools: Required reserve ratios The discount rate Open market operations Controlling the Quantity of Money The CB sets required reserve ratios, which are the minimum percentages of deposits that depository institutions must hold as reserves. The CB does not change these ratios very often. The discount rate is the interest rate at which the CB stands ready to lend reserves to depository institutions. An open market operation is the purchase or sale of government securities —Treasury bills and bonds — by the CB in the open market. Controlling the Quantity of Money How Required Reserve Ratios Work An increase in the required reserve ratio boosts the reserves that banks must hold, decreases their lending, and decreases the quantity of money. However, this is a sudden discontinuous change, so can be disruptive. How the Discount Rate Works An increase in the discount rate raises the cost of borrowing reserves from the CB and decreases banks’ reserves, which decreases their lending and decreases the quantity of money. But banks try to avoid borrowing from the CB [why?], so discount rate changes act mainly as a signal. Controlling the Quantity of Money How an Open Market Operation Works When the CB conducts an open market operation by buying a government security, it increases banks’ reserves. Banks loan the excess reserves. By making loans, they create money. The reverse occurs when the CB sells a government security. Changing the supply of reserves to the banking system changes the interbank lending/borrowing rate, the interest rate at which banks lend and borrow reserves among themselves. So in practice, the CB announces a target rate for the interbank lending rate, and then uses Open Market Operations to get close to its target. The Demand for Money This Figure illustrates the demand for money curve. The demand for money curve slopes downward—a rise in the interest rate raises the opportunity cost of holding money and brings a decrease in the quantity of money demanded, which is shown by a movement along the demand for money curve. 8 The Supply of Money This Figure shows the supply of money as a vertical line at the quantity of money that is largely determined by the CB. The money supply is largely but not exclusively determined by the CB because both banks and the public are important players in the money supply process (as explained in earlier chapters). For example, when banks do not lend their entire excess reserves, the money supply is not as large as it is when they do. Money market equilibrium determines the interest rate. 9 Interest Rate Determination An interest rate is the percentage yield on a financial security such as a bond or a stock [or savings account]. The price of a bond and the interest rate are inversely related. If the price of a bond falls, the interest rate on the bond rises. If the price of a bond rises, the interest rate the bond yields falls. We can study the forces that determine the interest rate in the market for money. 10 Money Market Equilibrium This Figure illustrates the equilibrium interest rate. 11 Money Market Equilibrium If the interest rate is above the equilibrium interest rate, the quantity of money that people are willing to hold is less than the quantity supplied. They try to get rid of their “excess” money by buying financial assets. This action raises the price of these assets and lowers the interest rate. 12 Money Market Equilibrium If the interest rate is below the equilibrium interest rate, the quantity of money that people want to hold exceeds the quantity supplied. They try to get more money by selling financial assets. This action lowers the price of these assets and raises the interest rate. 13 Money Market Equilibrium Changing the Interest Rate This Figure shows how the CB changes the interest rate. If the CB conducts an open market sale, the money supply decreases, the money supply curve shifts leftward, and the interest rate rises. 14 Money Market Equilibrium If the CB conducts an open market purchase, the money supply increases, the money supply curve shifts rightward, and the interest rate falls. 15 Transmission Mechanisms Changes in one market can often ripple outward to affect other markets. The routes, or channels, that these ripple effects travel are known as the transmission mechanism. Monetary policy transmission mechanism: The routes, or channels, traveled by the ripple effects that the money market creates and that affect the goods and services market (represented by the aggregate demand and aggregate supply curves in the AD–AS framework). In this chapter we discuss two transmission mechanisms: the Keynesian and the Monetarist. Transmission Mechanisms The Money Market in the Keynesian Transmission Mechanism: Indirect If the CB increases money supply, the interest rate decreases. Then, three events follow: Investment and consumption expenditures increase. The value of the dollar in terms of foreign currency falls and net exports increase. Aggregate demand increases (through a multiplier effect). 17 Transmission Mechanisms The Keynesian Transmission Mechanism: Indirect This Figure summarizes these ripple effects. The final step depends on the shape of the aggregate supply curve 18 Transmission Mechanisms Transmission Mechanisms The Keynesian Mechanism May Get Blocked Interest-Insensitive Investment (a) If investment is totally interest sensitive, a change in the interest rate will not change investment; therefore, aggregate demand and Real GDP will not change. Transmission Mechanisms The Keynesian Mechanism May Get Blocked The Liquidity Trap (b) If the money market is in the liquidity trap, an increase in the money supply will not lower the interest rate. It follows that there will be no change in investment, aggregate demand, or Real GDP. Transmission Mechanisms The Keynesian View of Monetary Policy Transmission Mechanisms Bond prices, interest rates, and the liquidity trap Remember that The price of a bond and the interest rate are inversely related. So, when money supply increases, people use the extra money supply to buy bonds, price of bonds increases and interest rate falls. However, when interest rate is very low, this relationship may break down. At a low interest rate, the money supply increases but does not result in an excess supply of money. Interest rates are very low, and so bond prices are very high. Would-be buyers believe that bond prices are so high that they have no place to go but down. So individuals would rather hold all the additional money supply than use it to buy bonds. Transmission Mechanisms The Monetarist Transmission Mechanism: Direct The monetarist transmission mechanism is short and direct. Changes in the money market directly affect aggregate demand in the goods and services market. For example, an increase in the money supply leaves individuals with an excess supply of money that they spend on a wide variety of goods. Monetary Policy and the Problem of Inflationary and Recessionary Gaps Expansionary Monetary Policy: To reduce unemployment Monetary Policy and the Problem of Inflationary and Recessionary Gaps Contractionary Monetary Policy: To reduce inflation Monetary Policy and the Activist– Nonactivist Debate Activists argue that monetary policy should be deliberately used to smooth out the business cycle. They are in favor of economic finetuning, which is the (usually frequent) use of monetary policy to counteract even small undesirable movements in economic activity. Sometimes, the monetary policy they advocate is called either activist or discretionary monetary policy. Nonactivists argue against the use of activist or discretionary monetary policy. Instead, they propose a rules-based monetary policy. Sometimes, the monetary policy they propose is called either nonactivist, or rules-based, monetary policy. An example of a rulesbased monetary policy is one based on a predetermined steady growth rate in the money supply, such as allowing the money supply to grow 3 percent a year, no matter what is happening in the economy. Monetary Policy and the Activist– Nonactivist Debate The Case for Activist (or Discretionary) Monetary Policy 1. The economy does not always equilibrate quickly enough at Natural Real GDP. Activists argue that the economy takes too long to self-regulate and that in the interim too much output is lost and too high an unemployment rate must be tolerated (in case of recessionary gap). They believe that an activist monetary policy speeds things along so that higher output and a lower unemployment rate can be achieved more quickly. Monetary Policy and the Activist– Nonactivist Debate The Case for Activist (or Discretionary) Monetary Policy 2. Activist monetary policy works; it is effective at smoothing out the business cycle. Activists are quick to point to the undesirable consequences of the constant monetary policy of the mid-1970s. In 1973, 1974, and 1975, the money supply growth rates were 5.5%, 4.3%, and 4.7%, respectively. These percentages represent a nearly constant growth rate in the money supply. The economy, however, went through a recession during this time; Real GDP fell between 1973 and 1974 and between 1974 and 1975. Activists argue that an activist and flexible monetary policy would have reduced the high cost the economy had to pay in terms of lost output and high unemployment. Monetary Policy and the Activist– Nonactivist Debate The Case for Activist (or Discretionary) Monetary Policy 3. Activist monetary policy is flexible; nonactivist (rules-based) monetary policy is not. Activists argue that flexibility is a desirable quality in monetary policy; inflexibility is not. Implicitly, activists maintain that the more closely monetary policy can be designed to meet the particulars of a given economic environment, the better. For example, at certain times the economy requires a sharp increase in the money supply and at other times, a sharp decrease; at still other times, only a slight increase or decrease is needed. Activists argue that activist (discretionary) monetary policy can change as the monetary needs of the economy change; nonactivist, rulesbased, or the-same-for-all-seasons monetary policy cannot. Monetary Policy and the Activist– Nonactivist Debate The Case for Nonactivist (Rules-Based) Monetary Policy 1. In modern economies, wages and prices are sufficiently flexible to allow the economy to equilibrate at reasonable speed at Natural Real GDP. For example, nonactivists point to the sharp drop in union wages in 1982 in response to high unemployment. In addition, they argue that Government policies largely determine the flexibility of wages and prices. For example, when government decides to cushion people’s unemployment (e.g., through unemployment compensation), wages will not fall as quickly as when government does nothing. Nonactivists believe that a laissez-faire, hands-off approach by government promotes speedy wage and price adjustments and thus a quick return to Natural Real GDP. Monetary Policy and the Activist– Nonactivist Debate The Case for Nonactivist (Rules-Based) Monetary Policy 2. Activist monetary policies may not work if they are anticipated by the public If expansionary monetary policy is anticipated (thus, a higher price level is anticipated), workers may bargain for and receive higher wage rates. Possibly, the SRAS curve will shift leftward to the same degree that expansionary monetary policy shifts the AD curve rightward. Result: No change in Real GDP. Monetary Policy and the Activist– Nonactivist Debate The Case for Nonactivist (RulesBased) Monetary Policy 3. Activist monetary policies are likely to be destabilizing rather than stabilizing; they are likely to make matters worse, not better. In this scenario, the 𝑆𝑅𝐴𝑆 curve is shifting rightward (ridding the economy of its recessionary gap), but CB officials do not realize this is happening. They implement expansionary monetary policy, and the 𝐴𝐷 curve ends up intersecting 𝑆𝑅𝐴𝑆2 at point 2 instead of intersecting 𝑆𝑅𝐴𝑆1 at point 1′. CB officials end up moving the economy into an inflationary gap and thus destabilizing the economy. Nonactivist Monetary Proposals The five nonactivist (rules-based) monetary proposals are as follows: 1. Constant-money-growth-rate rule 2. Predetermined-money-growth-rate rule 3. The Taylor rule 4. Inflation targeting 5. (Nominal) GDP targeting Nonactivist Monetary Proposals 1. Constant-money-growth-rate rule Many nonactivists argue that the sole objective of monetary policy is to stabilize the price level. To this end, they propose a constant-moneygrowth-rate rule. One version of the rule is: “The annual money supply growth rate will be constant at the average annual growth rate of Real GDP” For example, if the average annual Real GDP growth rate is approximately 3.3 percent, the money supply should be put on automatic pilot and be permitted to grow at an annual rate of 3.3 percent. Nonactivist Monetary Proposals 1. Constant-money-growth-rate rule Some economists predict that a constant-money-growth-rate rule will bring about a stable price level over time because of the equation of exchange (𝑀𝑉 ≡ 𝑃𝑄). If the average annual growth rate in Real GDP (𝑄) is 3.3% and the money supply (𝑀) grows at 3.3%, the price level should remain stable over time. Advocates of this rule argue that in some years the growth rate in Real GDP will be below its average rate, causing an increase in the price level, and that in other years the growth rate in Real GDP will be above its average rate, causing a fall in the price level, but over time, the price level will be stable. Nonactivist Monetary Proposals 2. Predetermined-money-growth-rate rule Critics of the constant-money-growth-rate rule point out that it makes two assumptions: (1) Velocity is constant; (2) the money supply is defined correctly. Critics argue that velocity has not been constant in some periods. Also, not yet clear is which definition of the money supply is the proper one and therefore which money supply growth rate should be fixed: M1, M2, or some broader monetary measure. Largely in response to the charge that velocity is not always constant, some nonactivists prefer the following rule: “The annual growth rate in the money supply will be equal to the average annual growth rate in Real GDP minus the growth rate in velocity.” In other words, %∆𝑀 = %∆𝑄 − %∆𝑉 Nonactivist Monetary Proposals 2. Predetermined-money-growth-rate rule With this rule, the growth rate of the money supply is not fixed. It can vary from year to year, but it is predetermined in that it is dependent on the growth rates of Real GDP and velocity. For this reason, we call it the predetermined-money-growth-rate rule. To illustrate the workings of this rule, consider the following extended version of the equation of exchange: %∆𝑀 + %∆𝑉 = %∆𝑃 + %∆𝑄 Suppose %Δ𝑄 is 3% and %Δ𝑉 is 1%. The rule specifies that the growth rate in the money supply should be 2%. This growth rate would keep the price level stable; there would be a 0% change in 𝑃: %∆𝑀 + %∆𝑉 = %∆𝑃 + %∆𝑄 2 % + 1% = 0% + 3 % Nonactivist Monetary Proposals 3. The Taylor rule Economist John Taylor has argued for a middle ground, of sorts, between activist and nonactivist monetary policy. He has proposed that monetary authorities use a rule to guide them in making their discretionary decisions. His rule has come to be known as the Taylor rule, which specifies how policy makers should set the federal funds rate target. The economic thinking implicit behind the Taylor rule is that there is some federal funds rate target that is consistent with (1) stabilizing inflation around a rather low inflation rate and (2) stabilizing Real GDP around its fullemployment level. The aim is to find this target and then to use the Fed’s tools to hit it. Nonactivist Monetary Proposals 3. The Taylor rule Here is how John Taylor, for whom the Taylor rule is named, defines the particulars of the rule: The federal funds rate target “should be oneand-a-half times the inflation rate plus one-half times the GDP gap plus one.” Algebraically, the Taylor rule specifies: Federal funds rate target = 1.5 (inflation rate) + 0.5 (GDP gap) + 1 In this equation, the GDP gap measures the percentage deviation of Real GDP from its potential level. Let’s use the rule to find the federal funds rate target that Taylor recommends to the Fed. Suppose the inflation rate is 5 percent and the GDP gap is 3 percent. Putting these percentages in our equation, we get: Federal funds rate target = 1.5 (5%) + 0.5 (3%) + 1 = 7.5 + 1.5 + 1 = 10% Nonactivist Monetary Proposals 4. Inflation targeting Many economists recommend inflation targeting, which requires that the Fed try to keep the inflation rate near a predetermined level. Three major issues surround inflation targeting. The first deals with whether the inflation rate target should be a specific percentage rate (e.g., 2.5%) or a narrow range (e.g., 1.0– 2.5%). Second, whether it is a specific percentage rate or range, what should the rate or range be? For example, if it is specific percentage rate, should it be, say, 2.0 percent or 3.5 percent? The last issue deals with whether the inflation rate target should be announced or not. In other words, if the CB adopts an inflation rate target of, say, 2.5 percent, should the target be disclosed to the public? Nonactivist Monetary Proposals 4. Inflation targeting Numerous central banks in the world practice inflation targeting, and they announce their targets. For example, the Bank of Canada has set a target of 2 percent (inflation), and it has been announcing its inflation target since 1991. For an inflation rate target approach, the Fed would undertake monetary policy actions to keep the actual inflation rate near or at its target. For example, if its target rate is 2% and the actual inflation rate is, say, 5%, it would cut back the growth rate in the money supply (or the absolute money supply) to bring the actual inflation rate nearer to the target. The proponents of inflation targeting argue that such a policy is more in line with the CB’s objective of maintaining near price stability. The critics of inflation targeting often argue that such a policy would constrain the CB at times, such as when it might need to overlook the target to deal with a financial crisis. Nonactivist Monetary Proposals 5. (Nominal) GDP targeting A new economic school arose in the late 2000s: market monetarism. It originated not in the academic journals or in a university economics department, but in the blogosphere. Market monetarists argued that the 2007-09 recession was caused by monetary policy that was too tight or not expansionary enough. Economist Scott Sumner (Bentley University) strongly advocates market monetarist ideas in his blog The Money Illusion. Sumner, like other market monetarists, argues that the optimal monetary policy is for the Fed to set a nominal GDP target, such as a rise in nominal GDP of 5 to 6 percent a year, and then to adjust money supply growth in such a way as to hit the target. Nonactivist Monetary Proposals 5. (Nominal) GDP targeting We can understand the policy prescription in terms of the equation of exchange which states that the money supply times velocity must equal (nominal) GDP: 𝑀 × 𝑉 ≡ 𝐺𝐷𝑃. Now suppose a financial crisis occurs, and as a result, people try to hold more money (spend less). This reaction is likely to reduce velocity, and if the Fed doesn’t sufficiently offset this decline in velocity, GDP will decline. If velocity declines by, say, 8%, and the money supply rises by 6%, GDP will decline by 2%. If the objective is to raise GDP by 5%, an 8% decline in velocity would obligate the Fed to increase the money supply by 13%. Any less of an increase would prompt market monetarists to argue that the monetary policy is “too tight.”
© Copyright 2024