US Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke may finally announce today that he is about to start weaning the world off quantitative easing (QE). If so, no one can claim to be surprised. He has spent the past four months carefully laying the groundwork for the idea that the Federal Reserve’s monster bond-buying spree can’t last forever.
Most Fed-watchers believe any first move towards “tapering” is likely to be symbolic, rather than drastic: perhaps a US$10 billion or US$15 billion reduction in the size of monthly spending on US Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities.
Tapering would be a vote of confidence: The US housing market appears to have turned and new jobs are being created at a steady rate. However, a decision to start withdrawing the drug of super-cheap money is also a recognition that, as the Bank of International Settlements warned recently, it may be doing more harm than good.
QE on the unprecedented scale unleashed by the world’s central banks since the 2008 crisis was always a vast and risky experiment. Withdrawing it is the next, equally untried, step and there are hazards on all sides. It could go wrong in at least four ways.
First, while Bernanke plans to control the process carefully (that’s why it’s called a taper), markets trade on prediction and extrapolation and tend to run ahead of themselves. The moment tapering is under way, there is always a risk that investors will “run for the door,” as the IMF put it earlier this year — dumping bonds, forcing up interest rates and choking off the recovery.
The second risk relates to another current in the market: the so-called “commodity supercycle.” Russell Jones of Llewellyn Consulting suggested last week that, with Chinese growth easing, there is early evidence that the supercycle may be coming to an end.
While it has been impossible to disentangle the influence of QE from other causes of high raw-materials prices in the past couple of years, it seems certain that at least some of the billions poured into Wall Street must have found their way into commodity speculation. If the “supercycle” turns, Jones argues, central bankers could find themselves confronting the risk of deflation with few tools left to fight it.
Third, on the flipside, tapering may be so modest that it will barely be noticed by consumers and businesses out in the real economy. If confidence continues to flood back, reawakening Americans’ animal spirits, the Fed could find itself rushing to catch up as inflation takes off. While it can ratchet up interest rates rapidly, flogging off trillions of dollars’ worth of assets to suck cheap money back out of the economy cannot be done overnight.
Monetary policy is always a balancing act, but as HSBC’s chief US economist Kevin Logan pointed out last week, after collecting assets for much of the past five years the Fed’s balance sheet, at close to US$3 trillion, is now so huge as to create problems of its own — not least the risk of sustaining huge losses if bond prices plummet. Indeed, he suggested that this concern may contribute to any decision to taper this week.
“As time goes on, the balance-sheet costs and risks increase. That gradually lowers the bar for what is acceptable in terms of progress on job gains and economic growth,” Logan said.
The fourth reason to be wary — as has already been vividly illustrated by the chaos inflicted on a succession of emerging markets since tapering was first mooted in May — is that there are likely to be painful unintended consequences thousands of miles away.
India, Indonesia, Turkey, Brazil: Governments across the emerging world have been battling to contain the risks of a full-blown financial crisis as the hot money that poured in as a result of QE drains back out again. To some extent, it is not Bernanke’s job to worry about that and it will be left to the IMF to clear up the mess with loans if the worst does happen. As the events of 2008 and 2009 showed so clearly, the inevitable consequence of globalization is that causation flows every which way through the world economy.
An isolated ripple or two in countries with specific, well-known challenges, such as India, might be containable (though devastating at home); a more widespread downturn among emerging economies would be likely to hit the US itself, potentially forcing the Fed to reverse course.
Bernanke’s successor is expected to be announced in the next couple of months. The frontrunner was once Larry Summers, the Ivy League professor who was a cheerleader for financial deregulation and had won US President Barack Obama’s support with his staunch defense of the president’s economic stimulus policies. However Summer’s withdrew from consideration for the post on Sunday.
For Bernanke, who built his reputation on studying the policy pitfalls that marked the runup to the Great Depression and the “lost decade” in Japan, it would be a neat swansong to announce the beginning of the end for QE, which he was instrumental in dragging out of the textbooks and into the real world.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past