The secular bull market in U.S. Treasury bonds has once again resumed in full force, probably driven by short-covering. Meanwhile, risk markets are in disarray. The main question for markets is predicting when these trends will be broken. Since I do not give market forecasts, I will keep this article short, as I will just outline what I think what needs to be kept in mind....Bond Economics
One of the enduring myths that mainstream macroeconomists and the politicians that rely on their lies to depoliticise their own unpopular actions continue to propagate is that of ‘central bank independence’. This is the claim that macroeconomic policy making improved in the ‘neoliberal’ era following the emergence of Monetarism because monetary policy was firmly in the hands of technocratic bankers who were not part of the political cycle. As such, they could make decisions based on fundamentals rather than the requirements of the political cycle. The corollary was that vote-greedy politicians, who operate on short-term political cycles, would be willing to compromise the ‘longer-term’ health of the economy to splurge on populist programs that might increase their chances of re-election. As a result of the mismatch between the political cycle and the, longer, economic cycle, the neoliberal solution was to make monetary policy independent of the political cycle. Except, of course, it didn’t and cannot. The latest scaremongering about the ‘loss’ of central bank independence was published in the UK Guardian last week (February 28, 2020) – From the Fed to Bank of England, central banks must up their game. The author is a former deputy governor of the Bank of England Board and former director general of the CBI. The interesting point about the article was not the further elaboration of the myth, but, rather, his assessment that the chances of reforming the European Union treaties in any direction “are vanishingly small”. Read: zero. From the mouth of the elites. I hope our Europhile Left colleagues absorbed that bit, at least....Bill Mitchell – billy blog
One topic of research that keeps popping up is the question of what the central bank objective function should be. In simpler terms, what is the target of the central bank? (At present, most central banks have an inflation target, possibly with secondary objectives.) This is a preoccupation of many "conventional" economists -- those in the neoclassical tradition, as well as those that are somewhat out of the mainstream (e.g., Market Monetarists are pushing for a Nominal Gross Domestic Product Level Target (NGDPLT). If one sticks to the usual Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) story, this is not really a topic of interest. However, even if I take my MMT hat off, I think these discussions are putting the cart before the horse....All you need to know: "Until model error is taken seriously, the debate about the mathematical definition of the central bank target is very much akin to debating the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin."
Interview with Ms Christine Lagarde, President of the European Central Bank, in "Challenges" magazine, conducted by Mr Pierre-Henri de Menthon and Ms Sabine Syfuss-Arnaud, and published on 8 January 2020.BIS
The economics of money is back in the limelight. Even five years ago, I cannot imagine that a lecture on money and the payment system could have been a subject for an event like today’s. Theoretically speaking, money is a social convention. People accept money in the expectation that everyone else will do the same. According to this bare-bones definition, anything could serve as money provided that everyone, as it were, buys in. In economic parlance, this equilibrium analysis gives rise to a theoretical notion of a currency area consisting of users in a community, as shown in a recent paper by our host Markus Brunnermeier and his co-authors. In giving further texture to the analysis of money as a convention, economists and central bankers have learned over the years that the institutional details matter when it comes to how durable and how efficient any economic arrangement can be. To define money as a self-sustaining convention is not the same as nailing down the nitty-gritty details of the monetary system’s architecture."...money is a social convention. People accept money in the expectation that everyone else will do the same." Right. As David Graeber showed in Debt: The First 5000 Years, the concept of "money" arose from prehistoric tribal societies that operated on the "gift economy," when gifts were considered social obligations to be reciprocated. Adherence to such customs generated social trust, not only for "money" as a social construct but also for the rule of law (justice) over the rule of men (power) as a matter of reciprocity and fairness, in addition to utility.
The monetary system is founded on trust in the currency. This is something that only the central bank can provide. Like the legal system and other public goods, the trust underpinned by the central bank has the attributes of a public good.3 To coin a phrase, I would like to refer to “central bank public goods”.This is a huge step in the right direction. The state's power to create currency is delegated to the central bank as the government's fiscal agent. This power derives from the constitution of the state. Thus, the currency issued on this fashion is a public good rather than a private good.
Last Friday (October 4, 2019), a group of former central bank governors and/or officials in Europe, issued a statement damming the conduct of the European Central Bank. You can read the full text at Bloomberg – Memorandum on ECB Monetary Policy by Issing, Stark, Schlesinger. The timing of the intervention is interesting given the change of boss at the ECB is imminent. As I explain in what follows, the Memorandum should be disregarded. Its central contentions are mostly correct but the alternative world it would have Europe follow would be a disaster for many of the Member States and the people that live within them. It would almost certainly result in the collapse of the monetary union – which would be a good outcome – in the face of massive income and job losses and the social and political instability that would follow – which would be a bad outcome. What it tells me is that the monetary union is a massive failure. It would be far better to dissolve it in an orderly manner to avoid those massive income and job losses and to support the restoration of full currency sovereignty and national central banks. That would be the sensible thing to do....
Joe Weisenthal has been causing a stir on Twitter discussing "yield bugs": people who have an ideological belief that bond yields out to be positive. This Bloomberg opinion piece discusses this, as well as some other comments on negative yields coming to the United States. I have not followed that debate too closely, as I initially assumed that there was not a whole lot of people who believed that bond yields ought to be positive. This is because bond yields are essentially determined by central bank expectations, and there is not a lot stopping central banks from pushing short rates to negative values....Bond Economics
Gold buying like this functions as ‘off balance sheet deficit spending’. It’s off balance sheet as the payments by the CB don’t count as fiscal expenditures as they are accounted for as CB asset. And it’s functionally state deficit spending as the purchases add income in the form of net financial assets to the non government sectors:
China’s on a bullion-buying spree. The world’s second-largest economy expanded its gold reserves for the fourth straight month, adding to optimism that central banks globally will continue to build holdings.
The People’s Bank of China raised reserves to 60.62 million ounces in March from 60.26 million a month earlier, according to data on its website. In tonnage terms, last month’s inflow was 11.2 tons, following the addition of 9.95 tons in February, 11.8 tons in January and 9.95 tons in December.
China, the world’s top gold producer and consumer, is facing signs of a slowing economy, even as some progress is being made in trade negotiations with the U.S. The latest data from the PBOC indicate that the country has resumed adding gold to its reserves at a steady pace, much like the period from mid-2015 to October 2016, when the country boosted holdings almost every month. Should China continue to accumulate bullion at that pace over 2019, it may end the year as the top buyer after Russia, which added 274 tons in 2018.
Governments worldwide added 651.5 tons of bullion in 2018, the second-highest total on record, according to the World Gold Council. Russia quadrupled its reserves within the span of a decade amid President Vladimir Putin’s quest to break the country’s reliance on the U.S. dollar, and data from the central bank show that holdings rose by 1 million ounces in February, the most since November.So far, it's only the MMT folks that I have seen saying that central bank gold buying is "off balance sheet deficit spending."
It is Wednesday so very little blog writing today. One question I often get asked is what would happen if the bond market investors in a nation stopped bidding for the debt instruments being offered in the regular auctions. Interestingly, overnight I was sent some news from a Deutsche Bank information service written by their New York-based Chief International Economist, who signs himself off as “Torsten Sløk, Ph.D”. It related to these issues. The problem is that Dr Sløk seemed to want to take a snide shot at Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) and just made a fool of himself. It goes on. This is what the point is....
On the other hand, a number of central banks have taken the dangerous approach of simply tailoring their message based on their audience: when speaking to technical experts, say one thing, and when speaking to the public, say another. The janus-faced SNB is a case in point. This rhetorical duplicity is important as it allows central banks to both assuage popular concerns over the stability of money, by fostering the illusion that they maintain control over price stability and monetary conditions, while similarly soothing markets with the impression that they possess a nuanced and empirically accurate framework of how credit creation works. For both audiences, this produces a sense of institutional commitment which sustains both public and market trust in money under conditions of uncertainty.
Yet this newfound duplicity in central bank communications is perilous, and risks further undermining public trust in money should they not succeed in straddling this fine line. Continuing to play into folk theories of money as these drift further and further away from the reality of credit creation will inevitably have unsettling ramifications. For example, it might lead to the election of politicians keen to exploit and pressure central banks, or the production of crises in the form of bank runs.
Some of the most interesting of that new work is from, and about, central banks. As an example, here is a remarkable speech by BIS economist Claudio Borio. I am not sure when I last saw such a high density of insight-per-word in a discussion of money and finance, let alone in a speech by a central banker. I could just say, Go read it. But instead I’m going to go through it section by section, explaining what I find interesting in it and how it connects up to a larger heterodox vision of money....J. W. Mason's Blog
The world’s central banks have acquired a record amount of gold in the third quarter of 2018 since 2015. The biggest buyer was Russia’s Central Bank, according to the World Gold Council (WGC) report.
Over the past three months, global gold purchases totaled more than 148,000 tonnes, up 22% year-on-year, reports the World Gold Council.
The leaders in purchases were Russia (99.2 tonnes of gold) and Turkey (18.5 tonnes).
Russia’s central bank gold reserves surpassed 2,000 tonnes for the first time. Currently, Russia accounts for 17% of the world’s reserves. The value of Russian gold is estimated at more than $78 billion.
Kazakhstan, India and Poland also increased their gold reserves. Hungary increased its gold reserves tenfold in the last quarter (from 3.1 to 31.5 tonnes).…
Professor Moscone explained: “Russia especially has solid reasons for dropping dollars in exchange for gold.
“As Russia is facing political sanctions from western countries in general, it may want to play it safe and bet on gold.
“Unlike currencies, gold cannot be declared ‘worthless’.”...Fort Russ News
Among the many legacies that US President Donald Trump received from his predecessors is a "secondary sanctions" regime that allows the US to bar malign actors from most of the global economy. Under Trump, however, this sophisticated set of tools has become a bludgeon with which to threaten allies...Russia Insider
If we abolish money from economic theory, what replaces it? The answer is: financial assets. Although this might be viewed as a superficial change, there are important implications. In particular, the central bank can manipulate the amount outstanding of some types of financial assets, but it cannot control all of them. We end up with a more realistic view of central bank power. They no longer control “money” and hence all commerce, rather they are reduced to worrying about setting interest rates.…This is short, simple to understand and very important for getting MMT, which deals with "financial assets" rather than "money." Financial assets appear on accounting statements, not "money." Understanding this removes a lot of confusion.
The dangers of distorting free market interest rates is one of the bits of market folklore that keeps getting passed around. There is actually not a whole lot of data to defend this view; it is best viewed as faith-based reasoning. This topic is particularly interesting in the case of Japan. I am somewhat agnostic on this issue; I do not see particular risks from manipulating the yield curve in the current environment, yet I can see some plausible dangers.
This article was triggered by the article "Bank of Japan once again shows who calls the shots," by Bill Mitchell, one of the leading Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) economists. In addition, I had a discussion about this topic with someone doing some research awhile ago. Rather than re-hash Professor Mitchell's points from the MMT perspective, I will put on my "generic market analyst" hat and give a description of the issue from a more theory-agnostic perspective....Bond Economics
