Easy-money policies are used to stimulate bank lending and spending by consumers and businesses at times when the economy is in a recession and unemployment is unusually high. If the easy-money policies cause aggregate demand to increase, real output will rise more rapidly and unemployment will decline.
These beneficial effects of easy money are, however, not automatic. If the economy is in quite severe recession and expectations regarding the future are gloomy, consumers and businesses may be reluctant to borrow and spend money. Also, the banks may choose to hold some excess reserves rather than make loans that might prove risky due to poor economic conditions. Thus, easy money merely increases the banks’ reserves and makes more loans possible; it does not automatically create money and boost aggregate demand. This problem has been likened to “pushing on a rope,” which suggests that easy money by itself may not always be sufficient to lift the economy out of a recession. For this reason, many people believe that easy money should be combined with federal budget deficit, which can provide a more direct boost to aggregate demand and can thereby start the economy on its way toward recovery.
When easy money does generate higher aggregate demand, the results are not totally beneficial: a side effect of the increased total spending may be more rapid inflation. While the reduced unemployment from the easy money policies may make some additional inflation acceptable, this side effect does place a limit on the use of easy money.
How To Reduce A Trillion Dollar Deficit Stanford professor John Taylor had an alarming op-ed piece in the Financial Times on the Trillion Dollar deficits "I believe the risk posed by this debt is systemic and could do more damage to the economy than the recent financial...
How Much Does Your Money Matter to You? If you were to ask anyone on the street that question, odds are the majority would answer, “very much.” However, these same people will easily turn around and drop a small fortune on something without a second thought as to...
Terms From Wall Street That Make Me Laugh Well, I'm in a bit of a humorous mood today, so we're going to do something a little different. There are any number of weird and wacky words and phrases that are used by investors to help describe the investment...
Which Candidate Is Better For The Economy? With November getting nearer by the day, it's hard to avoid at least hearing if not participating in heated debates over which candidate would do better on this or that issue. Everybody has their opinion on which candidate would be...
For many years following the Great Depression of the 1930′s, the focus on economics was on recession, and the main concern of economic policy was to combat recession. The key elements of this elements were “Keynesian” fiscal policies, particularly budget deficits to boost aggregate demand and lift the economy out of recessions. Fiscal policy was regarded as the active ingredient of economic policy, whereas monetary policy was seen as playing a secondary role, attracting much less attention.
Since the early 1970′s, however, the importance attached to the money supply and to the Bank of Canada’s monetary policies has increased dramatically. This is because the most serious problem of this period has been severe inflation, associated with exceptionally rapid increases in the money supply. This has drawn critical attention to the Bank of Canada’s monetary policies, which its critics see as having caused severe inflation by allowing excessively rapid growth of the money supply. These critics are often called “monetarists,” and their theories “monetarism” – a term subject to varying interpretations. In its milder forms, it refers simply to an increased emphasis on controlling the growth of the money supply in order to restrain inflation. Its more extreme proponents insist that only excessive increases in the money supply cause inflation, that only curbs on money-supply growth can combat inflation, and that the government should never increase the money supply at rates above a specified limit.
Protecting Yourself Against Inflation While the debate between inflation and deflation keeps on going, I'm firmly in the camp of inflation. And so is Warren Buffett, as are many other investment advisors. So how do you protect yourself and your investments from the effects...
Review - The 4 Hour Work Week by Timothy Ferriss I had some pretty high expectations going into this book. It rocketed to the top of the best seller list within days of its release and all the buzz surrounding it prepared me for a read that was going to...
Dodging the Credit Card Punishment You may have been reading about record low interest rates on mortgages and thinking "Wow, credit is cheap right now!" You would be wrong, at least as to that ubiquitous source of lifestyle support: credit cards. The credit card issuers...
Do I Think About Money Too Much? Do You? Is it Unhealthy? I don’t think I have a good balance with thinking about and not thinking about money. From the moment I wake up on Monday morning until the moment I mentally check out on Friday, I have money on the mind...
The third of three episodes in a major natural experiment in monetary policy that started more than 80 years ago is just now coming to an end. The experiment consists in observing the effect on the economy and the stock market of the monetary policies followed during, and after, three very similar periods of rapid economic growth in response to rapid technological change: to wit, the booms of the 1920s in the U.S., the ’80s in Japan, and the ’90s in the U.S.
The prosperous ’20s in the U.S. were followed by the most severe economic contraction in its history. In our “Monetary History” (1963), Anna Schwartz and I attributed the severity of the contraction to a monetary policy that permitted the quantity of money to decline by one-third from 1929 to 1933. Since 1963, two episodes have occurred that are almost mirror images of the U.S. economy in the ’20s: the ’80s in Japan, and the ’90s in the U.S. All three episodes were marked by a long period of rapid economic growth, sparked by rapid technological change and the emergence of new industries, and accompanied by a stock market boom that terminated in a crash. Monetary policy played a role in these booms, but only a supporting role. Technological change appears to have been the major player.
These three episodes provide the equivalent of a controlled experiment to test our hypothesis about what we termed the Great Contraction. In this experiment, the quantity of money is the counterpart of the experimenter’s input. The performance of the economy and the level of the stock market are the counterpart of the experimenter’s output, i.e., the variables whose relation to input the experimenter is seeking to determine. The three boom episodes all occurred in developed private enterprise market economies, involved in international finance and trade, and with similar monetary systems, including a central bank with power to control the quantity of money. This is the counterpart of the controlled conditions of the experimenter’s laboratory.
The Money Supply: In addition, history has provided a close counterpart to the kind of variation in input that our hypothetical experimenter might have deliberately chosen. As Fig. 1 shows, monetary policy, as measured by the behavior of the quantity of money, was very similar in the three boom periods, and very different in the three post boom periods, with settings that might be described as low, medium, high.
To measure the quantity of money, I use M2 in the U.S. and the conceptually equivalent M2 plus certificates of deposit in Japan. To express the data for the two countries and the widely separated periods in comparable units, I use as an index of the money stock the ratio of the quantity of money to its average value for the six years prior to the cycle peak. The peak quarter of the relevant business cycle is the third quarter of 1929 (29.3) for the earlier U.S. episode; the first quarter of 1992 (92.1) for Japan; and the first quarter of 2001 (01.1) for the second U.S. episode (see Table 1). Finally, the data are plotted to align the dates at the cycle peak.
Fig. 1 shows a striking contrast between the period before the cycle peak and the period after the cycle peak. There are some differences before the peak — money growth is slowest on the average for the earlier U.S. episode, fastest for Japan — but the differences are small and there is reasonably steady money growth in all three episodes. The contrast with the period after the cycle peak could hardly be greater. Money supply declines sharply after the cycle peak in the first episode, goes from stable to rising mildly in the second, and rises steadily and sharply in the third. Our hypothetical experimenter planned his experiment well.
The GDP:The results of the third episode of this natural experiment are now all in. Fig. 2 shows how GDP in nominal terms (dollars or yen in current prices) behaved during the boom and post boom periods. I use nominal GDP rather than real GDP because M2 is also a nominal magnitude. How changes in nominal GDP are divided between prices and output is an important question but one that is not directly relevant to this experiment. One further preliminary comment: I believe the erratic behavior of nominal GNP during the ’20s and ’30s is largely a statistical artifact. The data for that period are scarce and of poor quality.
As in Fig. 1, there is a striking contrast between the boom and the post-boom periods: roughly similar growth during the booms, widely variable growth during the post-boom. Both before and after the cycle peak, nominal GDP growth paralleled monetary growth. During the boom, money and nominal GDP grew most rapidly in Japan, most slowly in the first U.S. episode, and at an intermediate rate in the second U.S. episode. Table 2 shows the ratio of the money stock at the cycle peak to its value six years earlier (the initial date in the figures) and the corresponding ratio for GDP. In the first two rows of the table, the ratios are highest for Japan, lowest for the U.S. 1920s.
After the cycle peak, money fell sharply in the first episode and so did nominal GDP; money growth stagnated in the second episode and so did GDP; money grew at a rapid rate in the third episode and, after a brief lag (corresponding to the mild 2001 recession) so did GDP. Table 3 shows the ratio of the money stock at the terminal date plotted to its value at the cyclical peak and the corresponding ratio for GDP. Both ratios are decidedly lowest for the U.S. 1920s, and decidedly highest for the U.S. 1990s.
The Stock Market: The peak of the stock market, as measured by S&P’s index, coincided with the cycle peak in the first episode, both occurring in the third quarter of 1929 (29.3). However, that was not the case in the later episodes. In Japan, stock prices as measured by the Nikkei peaked in the fourth quarter of 1989 (89.4), nine quarters before the cycle peak. In the second U.S. episode, stock prices as measured by S&P 500 peaked in the third quarter of 2000 (00.3), two quarters prior to the cycle peak. Accordingly, Fig. 3 plots the data to align the series at the stock market peak.
The near identity of the three stock market series during the boom is truly remarkable. Yet even the minor deviations that exist reflect to some extent the differences in monetary growth, as Table 2 makes clear. Money growth was highest in Japan, and the Nikkei shows the largest rise in the stock market. The other two do not conform: Money rose more in the ’90s than in the ’20s, while stock prices rose slightly less, as shown by the ratio of peak to initial value in Table 2.
Of more interest for our purpose is what happened after the peak. For a year after, the three stock-price series fell in tandem, responding to the inner dynamics of a collapsing bubble. Then, the differences in monetary policy began to have an effect. Beginning in late 1930, the S&P index started falling away from the others under the influence of a collapsing money stock. For another year and a half, the other two indexes move in tandem. Then the much more expansive policy of the Fed in the ’90s than of the Bank of Japan in the ’80s takes effect and pulls the S&P 500 away from the Nikkei, which stabilizes in response to the passive monetary policy of the Bank of Japan (as shown by Table 3).
The results of this natural experiment are clear, at least for major ups and downs: What happens to the quantity of money has a determinative effect on what happens to national income and to stock prices. The results strongly support Anna Schwartz’s and my 1963 conjecture about the role of monetary policy in the Great Contraction. They also support the view that monetary policy deserves much credit for the mildness of the recession that followed the collapse of the U.S. boom in late 2000.
Mr. Friedman, who died yesterday, was the 1976 Nobel Laureate in economics. He was a senior research fellow at the Hoover Institution and professor emeritus at the University of Chicago.
Kill the 401(k)? I read an article in last Sunday's Boston Globe titled "During a bear market, future of the 401(k) is questioned." The author gives us some data points such as "about one in four 401(k) participants ages 56 to 65 had...
5 Lessons Potential Home Buyers Can Learn from Median Income vs Median Home Price The NY Times recently published a very powerful interactive graphic comparing median income vs. median home prices from a wide selection of American cities dating back to 1979. At first glance, it really does appear all that sensational. However, as...
Investing in a Crisis With so much uncertainty currently present in the marketplace, one of the most vital things that you can do to invest safely in a crisis market is simply to learn from mistakes in the past. Certain sectors of the market...
How to Be Successful at Collecting Old Paper Money There are plenty of currency collectors who focus in on coin collecting and fail to think about collecting old paper money. This is incredibly unfortunate, as paper money can be one of the more interesting collections to have. Paper currency...
Related Websites