World
Quantitative easing myths debunked

Quantitative easing is a powerful monetary policy tool to revive markets and the economy. However, recent analysis has shown that there is no difference on how it affects economy. If at all, central banks’ policies has made markets more volatile than before with Warren Buffet stating that if QE is halted it will be the “shot heard around the world”

 
Yesterday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell from the peak of 15,535 to close at 15,307. S&P 500 too corrected sharply to 1,655 from the peak of 1,687. However, the worst hits were Asian markets today. The Japanese Nikkei 225 Index plummeted more than 7%, down almost 10% from the top while the BSE Sensex was down nearly 2%. Hong Kong’s Hang Seng was down over 2% as well. European markets are trading sharply lower, down between 2%-3%. This comes on the heels of a big hit that commodities like gold, silver and copper have taken in April as the dollar rallied against all calculations. What is roiling the global markets?
 
The worry is that the US Federal Reserve could “taper off” its quantitative easing program (QE) or simply wind it down in a phased manner, though the decision would be taken in June, when the Federal Reserve holds its Federal Open Markets Committee meet (FOMC). In other words, the American central bank is slowing down its stimulus program to revive America’s economy. This has spooked the markets.  The assumption that the liquidity that is coursing through the global markets will shrivel and risk assets will have no takers. Warren Buffet has even remarked that if the stimulus program to revive America’s economy stops it will be the “shot heard around the world”. 
 
QE has become a hotly debatable subject in both the academic quarters as well as among top investors and analysts in Wall Street (and the world over as well). Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman, praised QE as an effective tool for fighting recession. In his prepared speech before the Senate’s Joint Economic Committee he said yesterday that, “Over the nearly four years since the recovery began, the economy has been held back by a number of headwinds. Some of these headwinds have begun to dissipate recently, in part because of the Federal Reserve's highly accommodative monetary policy (QE).” Furthermore, he warned that if the QE was to stop, it would lead to repercussions. He said, “A premature tightening of monetary policy could lead interest rates to rise temporarily but would also carry a substantial risk of slowing or ending the economic recovery and causing inflation to fall further.”
 
However, during the question & answer session after that speech he sang a different tune. In reply to a question he suddenly said that the Federal Reserve would be prepared to cut back on QE. He said, “We will in steps respond to that (the ‘improved’ economic strength) by reducing the amount of accommodation in a way that’s appropriate.” And this could be within months. The moment he said, this, US stocks started falling like a stone.
 
Ben Bernanke has cited that higher stock market prices are a reflection of the successes of the QE program, which was initiated in 2008 after Lehman Brothers went kaput. Indeed, the market has reacted positively each time the QE program was launched. There has been three QEs and an “Operation Twist” programs since, each of which propelled the S&P to newer highs. Last night S&P reached a record high of 1687. Yet, the US labour market continues to remain weak (i.e. high unemployment) and inflationary expectations remain subdued still. 
 
For the uninitiated, the “quantitative easing”, or popularly known as QE, is nothing but buying bonds by the US Federal Reserve from the banks to create liquidity for them, which in turn will be used to help businesses and entrepreneurs, and which in turn will help the United States economic revival. However, it is assumed most of money has gone to support stocks and commodities and when this is stopped markets will suffer withdrawal symptoms. Thus the “tapering off” in question means less printing money and less supply to the economy which is in need of cash for revival. 
 
There are mixed views on the effects of QE on world markets. Some top investors feel that the QE has nothing to do with the economic recovery. Bill Gross of PIMCO feels that corporate fundamentals were the key to recovery and not QE (even though QE may have helped ‘indirectly’). In a newsletter to the clients, he said, “Based on our analysis, QE has not been the driving force behind rising equity prices in recent years. We found that since 2009, corporate profits have had a more direct relationship to stock prices.” He advises investors to look at corporate profits instead of worrying too much about the impact of QE.
 
An incisive analysis of QE comes from Mark Dow, who writes a blog. According to Dow, there is absolutely no difference in printing dollars and money supply. In other words, the effect of QE has little or no bearing on the economy as a whole and is simply a placebo effect. Typically, QE should increase money supply and lead to higher inflation. However, Dow had found out that credit reserves held by banks with the Federal Reserve actually decreased between 1981 and 2006! He says, “From 1981 to 2006 total credit assets held by US financial institutions grew by $32.3 trillion (744%). How much do you think bank reserves at the Federal Reserve grew by over that same period? They fell by $6.5 billion.” 
 
According to Dow, financial deregulations and innovation over the years significantly changed the way at which the monetary policy mechanism worked. Increased collateral lending and securitisation meant different numbers on the books and determined the real extent of supply, not the reserves held by banks with Federal Reserve. In other words, banks decide the amount of money supply and not the Federal Reserve. The latter simply decides the extent of liquidity while it is up to the former to decide whether to lend capital or not. More interestingly, Dow also found that printing money had little or no effect on inflation. A graph below shows how scattered the data is, implying no relationship between money supply and CPI (inflation).
 
If this is the case, why is the Fed doing this QE? According to Dow, it is more of a psychological than fundamental. The Federal Reserve is simply providing ‘comfort’ to investors by keeping rates low enough for investors to borrow (and refinance) to put money back into the economy vis-à-vis new businesses, consumerism, etc. So ingrained is the psychological effects of QE on investors worldwide, particularly American investors, that talks of “tapering off” has already spooked the markets. Investors have become too used to the notion of “easy money”, especially with S&P is scaling new highs, for four long years, and investors are clamouring for more. 
 
Because the Federal Reserve, and central banks world over, have created conditions such that investors have no place to put money elsewhere but back into the markets, since fixed income yields too little,. Therefore, money has to go somewhere else—into the markets—and therefore made the global economy far more volatile, dangerous and artificial. 
 
Some intellectuals feel that QE stimulus has helped the American economy while others think that once stopped, it is a disaster waiting to happen. Ultimately, it may all be psychological and behavioural. Unless the Fed comes in and assures investors that QE will continue, markets may continue to fall. May be that is what the Fed wanted after all. All global markets had become too frothy and all Bernanke probably wanted to do is to cool them a bit!
 

User

COMMENTS

Naresh Nayak

4 years ago

People can talk QE but we also have to address velocity of money. Draconian regulations like FATCA are driving the velocity of money down in the US. People are hesitant to move funds because of IRS reporting now. QE without velocity is a dead duck which is why you can't see hyperinflation in the US. You wont see it anytime soon and STAGFLATION is the flavour of pain to come and nor hyperinflation. The banks will park QE funds in the Fed discount window and earn interest until they are able to lend.

The crack in the Nikkei is the beginning of the end of Japan and the beginning of war and Abe-ism. Capital is fleeing Japan and Europe into the dividend yield SAFETY of US stocks. Even central banks are buying dividend yield stock ETFs. Capital flight to the DOW is a function of safety and within US borders because of the taxation witch hunt the velocity of money is collapsing rapidly which is why there is no run away inflation.

http://nareshnayak.wordpress.com

Vinay Joshi

4 years ago

Will the author respond to this post? IF CAN?! For ML, yes talk!

Can the author question Warren Buffet?

On which date Dow Jones was at it’s peak & S&P? Answer.

Let us forget other drops, WHY BSE/NSE were down? Any cue of others?

Sadly mistaken as stated. It fell on FII worries!?

For commodities it’s a ‘super cycle’, Try understand what it is, tho’ the present is at lower end of its range with a decade to go. [read UN economics dept. paper.]

What does flagging commodities super cycle mean for the investors? Answer.

As well tell about pull in growth from resource hungry countries. Leave this in isolation.

When & how unemployment can be got to 6% accepted from 7.5% or at least to 6.5?
What measures? How can it be done?

RBI also practices in bigger manner w/o announcing, cue is from FinMin.

NONE HAVE EVER STATED, that many central banks are buying equity?

Returns on riskier assets in US have become more attractive, than bond yields.

BoA has tracked a return of 5.4% in high yield junk bonds [-0.3% treasury.]

Had Ben Bernanke not been aggressive in economic stimulus, in FED’s hundred year history, to spur growth from the deepest recession, US economy would be in tatters with global – BUT TEMPORARILY- a phenomenon & further US$ delinked, EURO & RMB linked it would meet it nemesis! Naysayers would vanish.

Today PRC can very easily unleash this financial coupe. The Asian giants will follow it, EU no choice. Isolated US will have to mint trillion $ coins to get its economy back, of no use!

DJ & S&P rose on Bernanke’s strategy.

The author of the above said article put forth w/o understanding the sustainability of low interest rates has not followed it, it will be useless talking ‘Abenomics’.

What has FOMC done & can do? How can short terms results be expected?

Any student of economics can tell that high unemployment with low inflation needs more stimuli. No employment, payrolls increased so Fed will definitely consider balance sheet expanding from 3.35trn & will & has initiated steps in the right direction.

The session on fiscal stimulus with Bill Gates & Bill Clinton apart from Ben’s Chicago address seems to be unknown to the author.

What skills the unemployed have?

I don’t hesitate to say that premature Fed tightening will endanger recovery – I second Ben’s statement before Joint Congress Economic committee, Wednesday.

Regards,




Chandragupta Acharya

4 years ago

QE is disaster. The growth induced by QE - a couple of percentage points - is negligible compared to the amount of increase in Central Bank Balance Sheet. QE is like a dose of steroids - you have to keep taking it to keep going. The moment you stop it, everything around you will collapse. The purpose of QE is to avoid this collapse so long as you are in office - then leave the bagful of problems to your successor!

Info Commission directs Railways to share service record of a TC

The CIC has directed the PIO of Western Railway to provide copy of service book of one of its ticket checkers after deleting his personal information

 
In a significant and landmark judgement, the Central Information Commission has directed the Public Information Officer (PIO) of Western Railway to provide copy of the service record of a ticket checker (TC).
 
While disposing of an appeal, Annapurna Dixit, the Information Commissioner (IC), said, “...the public authority is obligated under section 4(1)(b) the Right to Information (RTI) Act to disclose information related to the service of its employees. The Commission is not convinced by Allan D'Costa’s (the TC) argument that such disclosure will endanger his physical safety as all this information is anyway expected to be placed in the public domain.” 
 
Mumbai-based RTI activist Chetan Kothari had filed an RTI seeking information against six points with regard to information on action taken on his complaint against TCs Allan D'Costa and SR Shukla, including copy of the service book and confidential report of Allan D'Costa.
 
While the PIO furnished the information on all six queries asked by Kothari, he denied copy of service book of D'Costa. Even, the First Appellate Authority (FAA) ordered the same.
 
Kothari then filed his second appeal before the Commission.
 
During the hearing, the PIO submitted that when he sought submission under Section 11(1) of the RTI Act, D'Costa objected to the sharing of his service book stating that the disclosure of his service details would endanger his physical safety and that of his family members.
 
Ms Dixit, the IC, however was not convinced by this argument. She then directed the PIO to supply a copy of  the service record of Allan D'Costa  to Kothari within four weeks after invoking Section 10(1) of the RTI Act to sever all those portions that are exempt from disclosure u/s 8(1)(j) of the Act as personal information. (File No: CIC/AD/A/2012/002874)
 

User

COMMENTS

B Pugazhendhi

4 years ago

It is a funny order! If what all considered as 'personal information' are deleted/severed from the Service book and only the remaining portion is giver, it will be more or less a blank book! Of what interest or use will it be for the info-seeker?

National Consumer Forum asks Shriram Finance & Citicorp to pay Rs25,000 as punitive cost

Upholding judgements of the district and state forums, the National Consumer Commission directed Shriram Finance Co and Citicorp Finance to pay a punitive cost of Rs25,000 for inordinate delay in filing their appeal

 
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) while upholding the judgement of the district and state forum directed Shriram Finance Company (Shriram Finance) and Citicorp Finance (I) (Citicorp) to pay a punitive cost of Rs25,000 for inordinate delay in filing the appeal.
 
In an order on 21 May 2013, VB Gupta, presiding member and Rekha Gupta, both members of the NCDRC bench, said, “...grounds stated in the application (filed by Shriram Finance and Citicorp) cannot constitute sufficient cause so as to condone the inordinate delay of 128 days in filing of the appeal. Even otherwise, the district forum decided the complaint of the respondent about four and a half years ago and if such type of application for condonation of delay is allowed, then it would defeat the very object of the Act which provide for expeditious justice to the consumer."
 
The case relates to forceful possession and sale to a third party of a vehicle bought on loan by Panvel (Navi Mumbai) based Aziz Miya Patel. After his vehicle was taken over, Patel filed a complaint against Shriram and City Finance before the district forum. He stated deficiency in service in providing advance for purchase of the vehicle and taking forcible possession of the vehicle without the consent/ notice and prior intimation as reason for his complaint.
 
While allowing the complaint, the district forum on 6 December 2008 directed Shriram Finance and Citicorp to pay Rs8.55 lakh for causing damage and loss due to forcible possession of two vehicles and selling it to third party without prior notice or intimation to Patel.
 
The forum also directed the lender to pay Rs10,000 as compensation and Rs5,000 as cost to Patel.
 
Aggrieved by the order of the district forum, Shriram and City Finance filed their first appeal along with a miscellaneous application for delay. The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission vide an impugned order, dismissed the application for condonation of delay and consequently the appeal was not entertained.
 
While rejecting the application of Shriram Finance and Citicorp, the state commission observed “To support the application for condonation of delay, affidavit of Nityanand S Vazhakulath (the concerned employee of Shriram Finance) dated 18 February 2011 is filed. This is nothing but the verification affidavit to the application for condonation of delay. Neither this application nor the affidavit speaks about the circumstances under which this employee suddenly required to leave for his native place and why he could not make arrangement regarding filing of appeal or brought it to the notice of his employer. Therefore, such statement itself is vague.”
 
The lenders then challenged the impugned order before the National Consumer Forum.
 
During the hearing, the counsel of Shriram Finance contended that delay caused in filing of the appeal was not intentional, since the concerned employee had to proceed suddenly to his native village due to some family problem and as such he has kept all the relevant documents of this case in his locker. After that employee returned to the office, immediately thereafter the appeal was filed, the lawyer said.
 
The NCDRC also noted that in his affidavit Nityanand S Vazhakulath nowhere specified the reason for his sudden departure to his native place; however, he tried to put the entire blame on their previous lawyer. “I say that the delay of 128 days in filing the appeal was not intentional but due to various circumstances and misguidance given by our earlier advocate,” the affidavit said.
 
The NCDRC bench said, under the Consumer Protection Act, a special period of limitation has been provided to ensure expeditious disposal of cases. Complaint has to be disposed of within 90 days from the date of filing where no expert evidence is required to be taken and within 150 days where expert evidence is required to be taken.  
 
The bench also pointed out that Shriram Finance and Citicorp have filed application for bringing on record additional grounds in the case. It however, said, at this stage it cannot take into consideration the additional grounds that Shriram City wanted it to take now.
 
“We do not find any infirmity or illegality in the impugned order and there is no reason to disagree with the findings given by the state commission.  Accordingly, the present revision petition, being not maintainable, is hereby dismissed with punitive cost of Rs25,000 and the same shall be paid by the petitioners to the respondent by way of demand draft in his name, within eight weeks," the NCDRC said in its order.
 

User

COMMENTS

SUJIT KATYAL

4 years ago

Very positive judgement.

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)