Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Economy
In reply to the discussion: Weekend Economists Host a Lion July 5-7, 2013 [View all]Demeter
(85,373 posts)10. Chart of the day, Fed-tightening edition By Felix Salmon
http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/06/29/chart-of-the-day-fed-tightening-edition/

This chart comes from Gavyn Daviess excellent post on Fed tightening, which ought to be required reading for all members of the FOMC. He demonstrates the effect of the Feds tapering warnings in two ways: by showing that the expected short-term interest rate in mid-2016 is now about 100bp higher than it was at the beginning of May; and also, with the chart above, by showing that the market is now expecting rates to start rising much earlier than it had previously anticipated. This chart isnt, strictly, a tapering chart: it shows when people expect the Fed to start raising interest rates, rather than slowing down on QE. But that all-important first rate hike now has a 65% probability of taking place in 2014, according to the market up from less than 15% in the NY Feds April survey.
Which raises the trillion-dollar question: given that the Fed hasnt changed its messaging on rate hikes at all, what has caused this enormous change in expectations? Davies explains:
Put another way, you and I and Ben Bernanke might think that QE works because when you drop money from helicopters and that money is used to buy bonds and take them out of circulation, the price of those bonds goes up and their yield goes down. But in fact, the main reason that yields fell has nothing to do with the mechanistic consequences of buying bonds as generations of investors have found out, buying up assets generally has only a very short-term and modest effect on the price of those assets....Rather, QE turns out to be a surprisingly effective way of signalling to the market that rates are going to stay at zero for a very long time. And when you say that QE isnt likely to stay in place much longer, the market takes that as tantamount to saying that rates are not going to stay at zero for nearly as long as they had thought...Fed officials are desperately making a concerted attempt to tell the markets that theyre wrong, but history tells us that when policymakers rail against the markets, the markets smell blood and often end up turning out to be right. The markets dont care about forward guidance; they consider the Feds deeds to be more important than its words. As a result, so long as the Fed says that tapering is on the horizon, were never going to return to the interest rates we were seeing just a month or two ago.

This chart comes from Gavyn Daviess excellent post on Fed tightening, which ought to be required reading for all members of the FOMC. He demonstrates the effect of the Feds tapering warnings in two ways: by showing that the expected short-term interest rate in mid-2016 is now about 100bp higher than it was at the beginning of May; and also, with the chart above, by showing that the market is now expecting rates to start rising much earlier than it had previously anticipated. This chart isnt, strictly, a tapering chart: it shows when people expect the Fed to start raising interest rates, rather than slowing down on QE. But that all-important first rate hike now has a 65% probability of taking place in 2014, according to the market up from less than 15% in the NY Feds April survey.
Which raises the trillion-dollar question: given that the Fed hasnt changed its messaging on rate hikes at all, what has caused this enormous change in expectations? Davies explains:
The markets have rationally taken the Fed statements on tapering as a signal that their thinking on monetary policy is changing. This signal of Fed intentions may be more powerful than the other forms of forward guidance they have given about their intentions.
There is evidence that this signalling effect of Fed balance sheet changes might be very powerful. If the Fed is not willing to put its money where its mouth is by buying bonds, then the market might take its promises to hold short rates at zero less seriously than before. According to this recent research by the San Francisco Fed, it is possible that a sizeable proportion of the total effect of QE on bond yields came from these signalling effects rather than the portfolio balance effects which have usually been emphasised by the central banks.
There is evidence that this signalling effect of Fed balance sheet changes might be very powerful. If the Fed is not willing to put its money where its mouth is by buying bonds, then the market might take its promises to hold short rates at zero less seriously than before. According to this recent research by the San Francisco Fed, it is possible that a sizeable proportion of the total effect of QE on bond yields came from these signalling effects rather than the portfolio balance effects which have usually been emphasised by the central banks.
Put another way, you and I and Ben Bernanke might think that QE works because when you drop money from helicopters and that money is used to buy bonds and take them out of circulation, the price of those bonds goes up and their yield goes down. But in fact, the main reason that yields fell has nothing to do with the mechanistic consequences of buying bonds as generations of investors have found out, buying up assets generally has only a very short-term and modest effect on the price of those assets....Rather, QE turns out to be a surprisingly effective way of signalling to the market that rates are going to stay at zero for a very long time. And when you say that QE isnt likely to stay in place much longer, the market takes that as tantamount to saying that rates are not going to stay at zero for nearly as long as they had thought...Fed officials are desperately making a concerted attempt to tell the markets that theyre wrong, but history tells us that when policymakers rail against the markets, the markets smell blood and often end up turning out to be right. The markets dont care about forward guidance; they consider the Feds deeds to be more important than its words. As a result, so long as the Fed says that tapering is on the horizon, were never going to return to the interest rates we were seeing just a month or two ago.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
61 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
So far the only compelling argument I've heard that in fact comprehensive public surveillance is true
Hugin
Jul 2013
#20
Taxpayer money where someone somewhere is making a 20% guaranteed profit for doing nothing.
Hugin
Jul 2013
#47
What Did These Idiots Think Would Happen If We Hired Contractors To Handle Spying?
Demeter
Jul 2013
#27
Other than people who read forums, who pays attention to what is going on anyway?
DemReadingDU
Jul 2013
#35
Crisis Chronicles: 300 Years of Financial Crises (1620–1920) James Narron and David Skeie
Demeter
Jul 2013
#15
Ex-official: CIA Helped Jail Mandela By Joseph Albright and Marcia Kunstel, Cox News Service.
Demeter
Jul 2013
#41
What's it going to take to get most Americans in the streets like in Egypt, or Turkey, or Brazil
DemReadingDU
Jul 2013
#60