About the Author: Karen Petro is the Managing Partner at Federal Financial Analytics and author of The Engine of Inequality: The Fed and the Future of Wealth in America,
The day Jerome Powell won his second term as chairman of the Federal Reserve, he Told He could not promise a soft landing and did not want his fellow policymakers to commit to only a fifty basis-point increase. He has also walked away from his insistence that inflation is fleeting and the economy “strongWe’ve gone from whatever-monetary policy we take to anything we can think of.
A major reason for this mess is that the Fed’s models and objectives rely on chronological assumptions that America has a vibrant middle class. Once we did; Now we don’t. With a deep middle class, policy is effectively channeled through the economy; Without one, it cannot happen. We urgently need a new approach to central banking that fully takes into account inequality and thus protects sustained, shared prosperity.
Fed policy is ineffective because it is based largely on two transmission channels blocked by economic inequality. First, the Fed expects ultra-low rates for households to borrow. But this channel doesn’t work because most American households are in high-cost debt to handle day-to-day consumption. The bottom 50% of US households now have as much as 162% in debt durable asset such as automobiles and furniture. Inequality puts households in debt that is unresponsive to monetary policy, except when rates rise and many households benefit more with only debt that provides opportunity rather than fosters growth. Ultra-low rates—and rates are still ultra-low despite the Fed’s hikes to take inflation into account—incentivize some borrowing, but the bulk of it is by older households who already have a home. . This fuels housing-price bubbles that do nothing for low-income households, even though they increase the risk of financial-crisis.
Second, the combination of an economy in which most households have little left over and a financial market that—thanks in large part to the Fed—has long believed nothing can go wrong, a recipe for financial woes. which sets the equality even further back. This dynamic makes the recession longer and deeper, and is sure to make Americans even more furious. More equitable economies can prosper in tandem with their financial markets, but this requires more than a small minority of households in order for the market to thrive. In America, they don’t. The top 1% now owns 54% of the US equities And thus get rich very quickly, even though their consumption fuels massive asset-price bubbles, not shared, steady growth.
Fixing what’s broken in Fed policymaking starts with meaningful data and useful models. To know what it is doing, a central bank must base its conclusions about growth on “distribution” indicators, in other words, those that measure real income and wealth holdings for different households and their economic power. reflect. These indicators describe how households are likely to behave under different interest rates, Fed-portfolio levels, and economic or financial stress. These data and models cannot rely on gross GDP and must judge employment by looking at labor force participation and inflation-adjusted wages and must understand price stability through the lens of what it really takes to meet most households. How much does it cost
In addition to models that ignore inequality, the Fed relies on the Beige Book, a routine survey of economic conditions in each Federal Reserve district. In line with its top-down focus, the Fed’s Beige Book surveys bankers and business executives, not households. These insights are certainly important, but they are only part of the macroeconomic picture. The rest is perverse until the Fed considers necessary reforms that would provide equality-focused data.
The Fed actually has a lot of this data. For example, its triennial consumer finance survey and its new, fast-acting distribution financial accounts Give the Fed good data. The Fed just needs to get them to use up quickly.
The next step for the Fed is to make interventions that backstop shared prosperity, not financial-market profitability. A new economic-parity assessment from the central bank of Central bank Arrives at a valuable conclusion: fiscal and monetary stimulus proved ineffective as income and wealth inequality became worse. The Bank for International Settlements Research thus recommends “automatic stabilizers,” economic or financial-market guardrails that pop up as soon as real-time data shows significant risk of a severe recession or market crisis.
Monetary-policy automatic stabilizers in the US will be relatively simple to devise. The Federal Reserve already has the discretion to intervene when it finds that “urgent or unusual circumstancesThe current law also gives the Fed the authority to impose counter-cyclical capital buffers on banks. The Financial Stability Oversight Council may create more broadly uniform counter-cyclical standards across the financial system.
For example, the Fed can create a liquidity Facility To support short-term, small-dollar lending when a crisis hits. Sudden layoffs to reorganize their liquidity will get the same relief the Fed has long provided to the financial markets. To ensure that these facilities are automatic stabilizers, the Fed will set itself binding rules to trigger these interventions when a defined crisis situation occurs in good time.
With inflation rising, most Americans struggling, and financial markets faltering, the lack of effective monetary policy to increase equity is a dangerous vulnerability. It took fifty years for America to experience the financial crisis after the Great Depression. Now, they seem as common as thousand-year floods as climate change becomes increasingly regular. The longer a bad policy lasts, the greater the risk. If the Fed won’t fix itself, Congress should demand more.
Such guest comments are written by writers outside of Barron’s and Marketwatch newsrooms. They reflect the perspective and views of the authors. Submit commentary proposals and other feedback to [email protected]
Credit: www.marketwatch.com /