12 December 2012 – The Aleph Blog

Redacted Version of the December 2012 FOMC Statement

Posted on 12 December 2012 by David Merkel

Comments

I really think the FOMC lives in a fantasy world.? The economy is not improving materially, and inflation is rising. Note that the CPI is over their 2.2% line in the sand.? TIPS-implied inflation 1X1 (one year ahead for one year) is 2.01%, and 5X5 is 2.97% annualized.? Both of these measures have continued to rise since the last meeting.
Current proposed policy is an exercise in wishful thinking.? Monetary policy does not work in reducing unemployment, and I think we should end the charade.
In my opinion, I don?t think holding down longer-term rates on the highest-quality debt will have any impact on lower quality debts, which is where most of the economy finances itself. When this policy doesn?t work, what will they do?
Also, the investment in Agency MBS should have limited impact because so many owners are inverted, or ineligible for financing backed by the GSEs, and implicitly the government, even with the recently announced refinancing changes.
The key variables on Fed Policy are capacity utilization, unemployment, inflation trends, and inflation expectations.? As a result, the FOMC ain?t moving rates up, absent increases in employment, or a US Dollar crisis.? Labor employment is the key metric.
GDP growth is not improving much if at all, and the unemployment rate improvement comes more from discouraged workers.

A Statement to Dr. Bernanke:

More debt will not get us out of this crisis.? The Great Depression ended when enough debts were compromised, paid off, or cancelled, which from my study is 1941, before World War two started.

Your policies further aid the growth of the budget deficit, and encourage malinvestment in housing and banking, two things in a high degree of oversupply.? The investments in MBS only help solvent borrowers on the low end of housing, who don?t really need the help.? Holding down longer-term rates on the highest-quality debt does not have any impact on lower quality debts, which is where most of the economy finances itself.

The problems with unemployment are structural, not cyclical.? Labor force participation rates continue to decline.? There is greater labor competition around the world, forcing down wages on the low end.? There is nothing that monetary policy can do to change this.? You can create stagflation through your policies, but not prosperity.

When inflation does arrive, the FOMC is going to find it very hard to raise Fed Funds or shrink its balance sheet.? The banks will not react well as you try to shrink, and the long rates that you have held down will react violently.

You haven?t thought through all of the ?second order? effects of your policy.? Even the ?first order? effects, which favor the rich over the poor, seem to elude you.? Assets rise, helping the rich.? Interest rates fall, helping the rich who can borrow.? Commodity prices rise, harming the poor.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result.? When will you realize that the policies of the Fed aren?t helping, and need to be abandoned?

Post 2000

Posted on 12 December 2012 by David Merkel

This has been a lot of fun.? This has been a lot of work.? This has been a “labor of love.”

When I wrote for RealMoney, I would sometimes say to my editor Gretchen, “Here’s another labor of love piece,” to which she would give a hearty response, because she liked editing me.? She told me she always learned a lot from me.? I liked working with her a lot.

Unlike some writers at RealMoney, I would sometimes troll through the comments on Cramer’s blog.? Sometimes I would defend him, at minimum I would try to explain him.

At the time, there were some financial blogs that I liked a lot — Jeff Miller, Barry Ritholtz, Roger Nusbaum, Steven Randy Waldman, Eddy Elfenbein, Alea… I know there are more, but I can’t remember now.? I resisted starting a blog for 1-2 years, because I felt RealMoney was my blog.? I especially liked participating in the Columnist’s Conversation.? (Note: if RealMoney would like to invite me back, I am open to the idea.? That said, the CFA Institute has encouraged me to blog for them as well — just don’t know how much content I can produce, because everyone wants original content.)

But I realized that RealMoney and I had different goals, and in talking with some of those that commented at Cramer’s blog, I decided to launch Aleph Blog.? Why call it Aleph Blog?? Many reasons, as noted in the link, but part of the fun was getting to read Borges, who I had not previously read.

When I launched Aleph Blog, I had no idea what I was getting into, and I did not intend on leaving RealMoney.? I liked the editorial freedom, though, and liked the broader interaction with many voices across the internet, rather than only RealMoney columnists, good as they were.? I did research when I started, and so I created my own domain, signed up with Seeking Alpha, and launched just prior to the mini-crisis where the Chinese stock market crashed in Shanghai.? When that happened, I wrote a popular piece that Seeking Alpha picked up that my friend Cody Willard promoted as well.

And off we went!? A grand experiment, allowing me to spread my wings more wide than at RealMoney.? My goal was to do a brain dump of areas where I thought I had competence.? I didn’t want to be like many bloggers where over 50% of their post is quoting others — I wanted to write from my heart, expressing my views on a wide number of topics relating to economics, finance and investment, from my unusual framework, which is Evangelical Christian, mostly libertarian (but not for financials), actuarial, value investor, doubting neoclassical economics and modern portfolio theory.

I was recently at a Baltimore CFA Society meeting, when a few people came up to me telling me how much they liked my blog.? Some quoted to me recent pieces I had written.? This was new; I was surprised.? I have never had local people come to me and say that.? Yes, stats for Maryland on my blog are above average, but my work helping the local CFA Society always seemed to be detached from other things that I do.? My worlds are merging, maybe.

My worlds are also merging from the many evangelical Christians who write to me.? This is a blog written by a Christian, not a Christian blog.? I’m here to serve everyone, but my views on ethics will color all that I write.

At the beginning, I tried focused linkfests, where I drew together posts on a hot topic, and narrated them to give my thoughts.? Those were a lot of work.? Today, my linkfests occur through Twitter.

Twitter: it took me even more pain to decide to do Twitter.? Given that my blogging is more long-form than most — why should I do Twitter?!? My answer for today is simple: to have good conversations, and push good content to readers.? And, for those who don’t do Twitter, they can read my weekly sorted tweets.? I got the idea from History Squared, a newer blog that I like.? Sorting the tweets makes them more useful to readers, so if it takes half an hour to do so each week, it is worth it.

But now I have more followers on Twitter than on RSS.? 6000 vs 5300.? I prefer RSS because people see the whole post, but I understand how the lower bandwidth on Twitter allows people to choose what attracts them.? Twitter makes us all epigram writers in AOL-ese.? It is challenging to do, but I like a good challenge.

I’ve written a number of series that have been significant:

I’m sure there are more, but I can’t think of them now.? At the same Baltimore CFA Society meeting as mentioned before, one person asked me, “How do you write about the wide variety of topics that you do?”

Part of it is my varied career, and educational background.? I have worked in a large number of areas, and have not been afraid to branch out and try things slightly outside my grasp.? You only learn when you fail.? I’ve learned a lot. I’ve failed a lot.

If you don’t take reasonable chances, you won’t grow.? Look for opportunities to expand your abilities — who can tell where you will go?!? Opportunities go to those who are there, grab hold of them, and win.? If you don’t try, you won’t win.

I know that my blog is an acquired taste, and best for professionals and advanced amateurs.? If you are a beginner, best you should focus on my personal finance category.

My goal has been to give something back to my readers.? I’ve had an interesting career, with many unusual and entertaining experiences.? I don’t have to have more fame or clients.? I enjoy relating the truths of the markets to others, whether they are beautiful or ugly.

To my readers: I don’t know if I will last another thousand posts, but I appreciate that you read me, eclectic as I am.? The one thing I promise: I will do my best for you, poor as that may be.

Your Servant,

David

PS — I know that my views on Fed policy and economics will win me few friends, but someone has to point out that the paradigm is broken.? Same for Modern Portfolio Theory….

October 2012	December 2012	Comments
Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in September suggests that economic activity has continued to expand at a moderate pace in recent months.	Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in October suggests that economic activity and employment have continued to expand at a moderate pace in recent months, apart from weather-related disruptions.	Remember when the FOMC cited the Tsunami in Japan for economic weakness that would soon go away?? More grasping at straws.
Growth in employment has been slow, and the unemployment rate remains elevated.	Although the unemployment rate has declined somewhat since the summer, it remains elevated.	So long as discouraged workers increase, this is a meaningless statement.
Household spending has advanced a bit more quickly, but growth in business fixed investment has slowed.? The housing sector has shown some further signs of improvement, albeit from a depressed level.	Household spending has continued to advance, and the housing sector has shown further signs of improvement, but growth in business fixed investment has slowed.	No real change ? just word order differences
Inflation recently picked up somewhat, reflecting higher energy prices.? Longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable.	Inflation has been running somewhat below the Committee?s longer-run objective, apart from temporary variations that largely reflect fluctuations in energy prices. Longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable.	Shades down their view of inflation, blaming energy prices. TIPS are showing rising inflation expectations since the last meeting. 5y forward 5y inflation implied from TIPS is now at 2.97%.? The FOMC is wrong on inflation.
Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability.	Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability.	No change. Any time they mention the ?statutory mandate,? it is to excuse bad policy.
The Committee remains concerned that, without sufficient policy accommodation, economic growth might not be strong enough to generate sustained improvement in labor market conditions.	The Committee remains concerned that, without sufficient policy accommodation, economic growth might not be strong enough to generate sustained improvement in labor market conditions.	Emphasizes that the FOMC will keep doing the same thing and expect a different result than before. Monetary policy is omnipotent on the asset side, right?
Furthermore, strains in global financial markets continue to pose significant downside risks to the economic outlook.	Furthermore, strains in global financial markets continue to pose significant downside risks to the economic outlook.	No change.
The Committee also anticipates that inflation over the medium term likely would run at or below its 2 percent objective.	The Committee also anticipates that inflation over the medium term likely will run at or below its 2 percent objective.	No change. CPI is at 2.2% now, yoy, so that is quite a statement.
To support a stronger economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at the rate most consistent with its dual mandate, the Committee will continue purchasing additional agency mortgage-backed securities at a pace of $40 billion per month.	To support a stronger economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at the rate most consistent with its dual mandate, the Committee will continue purchasing additional agency mortgage-backed securities at a pace of $40 billion per month.	No change. Does not mention how the twist will affect those that have to fund long-dated liabilities. Wonder how long it will take them to saturate agency RMBS market?
The Committee also will continue through the end of the year its program to extend the average maturity of its holdings of Treasury securities, and it is maintaining its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments from its holdings of agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in agency mortgage-backed securities.	The Committee also will purchase longer-term Treasury securities after its program to extend the average maturity of its holdings of Treasury securities is completed at the end of the year, initially at a pace of $45 billion per month. The Committee is maintaining its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments from its holdings of agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in agency mortgage-backed securities and, in January, will resume rolling over maturing Treasury securities at auction.	Operation Twist continues.? Additional absorption of long Treasuries commences.? Fed will make the empty ?monetary base? move from $3 to 4 Trillion by the end of 2013.
These actions, which together will increase the Committee?s holdings of longer-term securities by about $85 billion each month through the end of the year, should put downward pressure on longer-term interest rates, support mortgage markets, and help to make broader financial conditions more accommodative.	Taken together, these actions should maintain downward pressure on longer-term interest rates, support mortgage markets, and help to make broader financial conditions more accommodative.	No real change.
The Committee will closely monitor incoming information on economic and financial developments in coming months.	The Committee will closely monitor incoming information on economic and financial developments in coming months.	No change. Useless comment.
If the outlook for the labor market does not improve substantially, the Committee will continue its purchases of agency mortgage-backed securities, undertake additional asset purchases, and employ its other policy tools as appropriate until such improvement is achieved in a context of price stability.	If the outlook for the labor market does not improve substantially, the Committee will continue its purchases of Treasury and agency mortgage-backed securities, and employ its other policy tools as appropriate, until such improvement is achieved in a context of price stability.	Explicitly says that they will buy more long Treasuries.
In determining the size, pace, and composition of its asset purchases, the Committee will, as always, take appropriate account of the likely efficacy and costs of such purchases.	In determining the size, pace, and composition of its asset purchases, the Committee will, as always, take appropriate account of the likely efficacy and costs of such purchases.	The FOMC promises what it cannot know or deliver.
To support continued progress toward maximum employment and price stability, the Committee expects that a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy will remain appropriate for a considerable time after the economic recovery strengthens.	To support continued progress toward maximum employment and price stability, the Committee expects that a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy will remain appropriate for a considerable time after the asset purchase program ends and the economic recovery strengthens.	No change. Promises that they won?t change until the economy strengthens.? Good luck with that.
In particular, the Committee also decided today to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and currently anticipates that exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate are likely to be warranted at least through mid-2015.	In particular, the Committee decided to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and currently anticipates that this exceptionally low range for the federal funds rate will be appropriate at least as long as the unemployment rate remains above 6-1/2 percent, inflation between one and two years ahead is projected to be no more than a half percentage point above the Committee?s 2 percent longer-run goal, and longer-term inflation expectations continue to be well anchored.	Not a time limit but economic limits from inflation and employment. Just ran the calculation ? TIPS implied forward inflation one year forward for one year ? i.e., a rough forecast for 2014, is currently 2.01%.? The FOMC has only 0.49% of margin in their calculation if they are being honest, which I doubt. Next time, I will provide a graph.
	The Committee views these thresholds as consistent with its earlier date-based guidance.	New sentence, and it is not accurate.
	In determining how long to maintain a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy, the Committee will also consider other information, including additional measures of labor market conditions, indicators of inflation pressures and inflation expectations, and readings on financial developments.	New sentence.? Giving yourself an out clause on the hard-and-fast promises made above?
	When the Committee decides to begin to remove policy accommodation, it will take a balanced approach consistent with its longer-run goals of maximum employment and inflation of 2 percent.	New sentence. So what?
Voting for the FOMC monetary policy action were: Ben S. Bernanke, Chairman; William C. Dudley, Vice Chairman; Elizabeth A. Duke; Dennis P. Lockhart; Sandra Pianalto; Jerome H. Powell; Sarah Bloom Raskin; Jeremy C. Stein; Daniel K. Tarullo; John C. Williams; and Janet L. Yellen.	Voting for the FOMC monetary policy action were: Ben S. Bernanke, Chairman; William C. Dudley, Vice Chairman; Elizabeth A. Duke; Dennis P. Lockhart; Sandra Pianalto; Jerome H. Powell; Sarah Bloom Raskin; Jeremy C. Stein; Daniel K. Tarullo; John C. Williams; and Janet L. Yellen.	No change
Voting against the action was Jeffrey M. Lacker, who opposed additional asset purchases and disagreed with the description of the time period over which a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy will remain appropriate and exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate are likely to be warranted.	Voting against the action was Jeffrey M. Lacker, who opposed the asset purchase program and the characterization of the conditions under which an exceptionally low range for the federal funds rate will be appropriate.	Lacker sharpens his hopeless dissent against a flock of doves.? I like that he is opposing the QE, as well as the foolish promises regarding Fed funds. Unlike the rest, he cares about the institutional reputation of the Fed, and thus opposes asset-side policies.