Showing posts with label EVIDENCE. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EVIDENCE. Show all posts

Friday, November 12, 2010

THE EARLY EVIDENCE: QE DOES MORE HARM THAN GOOD

What exactly has QE “lite” and the expectations of QE2 done for markets and the economy so far?? Two months following the initial rumors of of QE2 and well into QE “lite” we can make some early conclusions:

1) Equity markets have rallied, but this is of little significance.? There is no evidence supporting an equity market “wealth effect” according to Robert Shiller (see here) and James Bianco (see here). Bianco’s research actually finds that the corresponding commodity price increases are more likely to be a net negative for consumers.? And even if there is a “wealth effect” it only helps the rich because the middle class are only minority holders of equities on the whole.? Of course, this isn’t a crisis of the wealthy so this looks like another case of failing trickle down economics at best.? It’s also worth nothing that stock prices are nominal wealth so intentionally distorting prices from fundamentals is no recipe for sustained wealth.? Keeping equity prices “higher than they otherwise would be” only diminishes the Fed’s credibility while also creating distortions in markets.

2) The 10 year bond yield is HIGHER since the Jackson Hole speech. The 30 year bond yield is up 50 bps since the Jackson Hole speech. Therefore, there is unlikely to be a sustained refinancing effect and no increased demand to take on more debt (not that this would work in a balance sheet recession anyhow, but Mr. Bernanke fails to acknowledge that this is a demand side problem). 74% of all consumer debt is mortgage based so it’s baffling that they are targeting the short end of the yield curve.? Bernanke wants to stimulate borrowing, but his actions aren’t backing up his talk.? He is focusing his efforts on the short end of the curve where rates are already very low – astoundingly confusing and misguided policy.

3) Many commodities have rallied in recent weeks which will do nothing but put pressure on input costs and ultimately make life more difficult for the US consumer (assuming these costs even get passed along, which is unlikely due to weak end demand).? The consumer will either be hit with higher costs which they can’t afford to sustain or US corporations will continue to be hesitant to hire the millions that need jobs because they are too busy protecting their margins.? On the one hand, this one of the few certainties we have regarding QE – it hurts corporate margins by causing a speculative ramp up in commodity prices.

4) QE IS NOT MONEY PRINTING so there is no reason to believe that it will cause anything more than expectations of future inflation.? When the Fed implements a policy of QE they are merely purchasing an asset that already existed and swapping it with a deposit.? There is some debate over the price changes before these transactions take place and whether the Fed is buying at higher prices, but this is offset by the fact that the Fed is removing a high yielding asset for a lower yielding asset.? In this case, they are removing 1.2% paper (on average) in exchange for reserves that will earn just 0.25%.? Remember, in QE1 the Fed removed over ~$47.5B in interest income from the private sector.? So if anything, this has a marginal deflationary impact.

5) Borrowing didn’t pick-up after QE1 and there’s certainly no signs of a borrowing boom in recent data.? Of course, with real estate in the midst of a double dip there’s unlikely to be a surge in borrowing in the coming quarters anyhow.? As Robert Shiller detailed, the “wealth effect” of a housing boom can be quite substantial.? With home prices now declining again we’re actually seeing the opposite of a “wealth effect”. In other words, the majority of Americans don’t feel better because Wall Street rallies each and every day.? They feel worse because the asset they come home to every night, the asset that accounts for the majority of their net worth, has declined in value.

So just what exactly does QE do for the economy?? Even the people who are advocates of it don’t seem to know and certainly can’t back up their claims with any positive evidence.? Meanwhile the media and its misguided punditry are falling all over eachother to spread falsehoods and inaccuracies regarding this policy as they shower Ben Bernanke with praise for trying something.? I am not sure why Mr. Bernanke is worthy of any praise.? He did not foresee this crisis.? He responded too late when it was clear that a crisis was on our doorstep.? And when he finally did respond he saved the banking system and left the American public out to dry.? Thus far the evidence surrounding his latest tool looks poor at best and it in fact appears as though it could be causing more harm than good.

As for the markets there has been some interesting action in recent weeks.? It looks like the smart money markets (FX and fixed income) have slowly started coming around to the fact that QE won’t cause a dollar crash (because there is no interest rate effect and no “printed money”).? Meanwhile, risk markets (equities and commodities) are on fire as “buy the dip” and “don’t fight the Fed” become the motto on every trading desk.? The divergence here won’t last and given the early evidence it looks to me like a whole lot of investors are deep into the risk trade without the fundamentals to back it up.? They’ve placed a bet on a Fed Chief who has failed at nearly every step of his tenure.? A great deal of leveraged optimism has been priced into the market based on this “non-event“.? I do not know if I have ever seen the market rally so much around an event that involved more misguided and inaccurate analysis.

Mr. Bernanke has created dangerous distortions in many markets over a policy that appears to have no real economic impact.? He is playing games with the markets in an effort to give the appearance that he has not run out of policy tools.? This not only calls into question the independence of the Federal Reserve, but has to very seriously make one wonder whether Mr. Bernanke is fit to run the world’s most important Central Bank?? I have long maintained that he was never fit for this position and in my opinion the early evidence of QE only further confirms that belief.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————

The content on this site is provided as general information only and should not be taken as investment advice. All site content shall not be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any security or financial product, or to participate in any particular trading or investment strategy. The ideas expressed on this site are solely the opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the opinions of firms affiliated with the author(s). The opinions of all guest authors or contributors can and will differ from those of Mr. Roche. These opinions do not necessarily represent the opinions or investment decisions of Mr. Roche. The author(s) may or may not have a position in any security referenced herein and may or may not seek to do business with one another or companies mentioned via this website. Any action that you take as a result of information or analysis on this site is ultimately your responsibility. Consult your investment adviser before making any investment decisions.

A brief note on comments – The increase in users in recent months has resulted in an increase in unproductive comments. Any user who engages in the use of racial epithets or uses the comment section as a place to insult other users will be banned from the site. The comment section is welcome to all readers who are interested in asking pertinent questions and/or engaging in thoughtful, intelligent, and productive debate. In short, just be nice. Thanks.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Falluja's Cancer Catastrophe.


View the original article here

Friday, October 29, 2010

MORE EVIDENCE THAT WORKS EQ

I have a few good enough calls during the past few years, but I assign one of them to any sort of prescient, brightness or knowledge.? Most of these cases are simply the result I've studied a large part of the history of the market.

? When I said that the housing bubble has been the greatest risk to the markets of capital in 2006, it is largely due to the fact that the action of U.S. House prices was almost completely identical to the residential real estate in the Japan in the 80′s.? When I said, banks were probably a purchase on March 2009 10th it was mostly because I had studied the history of recent declines in class active (Nasdaq dropped by 93% from its peak in 2001 - same exact percentage lower bank sector decline).? When I said, that the rescue plan was likely to have a dummy impact on the recovery of main street, it was almost entirely due to the fact that the Japanese had implemented a similar plan in the 90′s with poor results.? Do not shine.? It is fair to the research.Anyone can the faire.Mais, here we are rethinking the impact of the quantitative easing when we have historical precedent, and in spite of poor outcomes most investors and policymakers seem to say "this time is different."?

? Of course, the theory behind QE revolves around the idea that the Central Bank may reduce interest rates in the long term.? If they can reduce the rate that they can make more attractive asset, they can create an effect of refinancing, they can encourage borrowing/lending and they can relieve pressure on debtors.? It theoretically help stimulate demand comprehensive and sustained recovery.It is that a single problem with any cela.Il is no historical evidence that QE actually works at low interest rates.? I've already highlighted two famous cases - the United States and Japan where interest rates is passed in the borrowing programs remained low and economies remained low.

? An instance that is less well documented, however, is the case of the quantitative easing in the United Kingdom.? The following table shows the duration of the programme and the effect of interest rates:?

? The conclusion is obvious.? Not reduced to a program of quantitative easing interest rates.? In fact, in all three cases I emphasized interest rose to program rates.? It is very important to understand because without the expected interest rates decline, there is simply no argument in favour of this policy.? There is no effect of refinancing, there is no reduced borrowing rates at, there is no fundamental change in the economy.? That is why, after all three cases, economies remain (ed) very weak.EQ is simply an exchange of assets Institute modifies private net financial assets.? It does reduce rates. It does create jobs.It does not increase aggregate demand.

So far, the only thing that QE appears to be is higher drive without being supported by underlying fundamental change in the .c asset prices ' is largely due to the psychological impact of EQ and the lie that QE = "printing money".So far, the psychological impact of QE has backfired on the Fed as inputs have if is past and the American Federal Reserve began inadvertently to reduce the margins of the undertaking if the objective here is to keep the "asset prices higher than they would otherwise be" then the Fed seems to be winning their bataille.Malheureusement, there is evidence showing that there is a fundamental reason why QE would justify such an approach. In fact, the market collapses following the end of all three main historical EQ programs seems to prove that it is bordering ponzi Central Bank and nothing more.

Mr. Bernanke appears to be ignoring the simple historical facts. And those who ignore history are destined to repeat.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————

The contents of this site is provided as general information only and should not be construed as investment advice.All content on the site should not be interpreted as a recommendation to buy or sell any security or financial product, or participate in any particular strategy of trade or investment.The ideas expressed on this site are solely the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the companies affiliated to the author (s).The opinions of all the guest authors or contributors and will differ from those of m. Roche.These opinions do not necessarily represent the views or Mr. Roche.Les authors investment decisions can or may not have a position in any security referenced herein are or may not ask to do business with one another or companies referred to by this site Web.Toute action you take information and analysis on this site is your responsabilité.Consultez ultimately your advisor placement before taking an investment decision.

A short note on the comments-the increase in users of recent months has led to increased improductifs.Tout user who engages in the use of racial epithets or uses the comment section as a place to insult other users is prohibited on the comments section site.La feedback is welcome to all readers interested in relevant questions and engage in a thoughtful, intelligent discussion and brief productive.En, just be agréable.Merci.

Post footer automatically generated by The Plugin add footer post for wordpress.

This entry transmitted via the service for full-text RSS - if this is your content and you read on someone to another site, please read our FAQ page fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Article five filters features: After Hiroshima - non-rapport Cancer Catastrophe of Fallujah.


View the original article here