[HN Gopher] The Fed's Doomsday Prophet Has a Dire Warning About ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The Fed's Doomsday Prophet Has a Dire Warning About Where We're
       Headed
        
       Author : hodgesrm
       Score  : 34 points
       Date   : 2021-12-28 18:06 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.politico.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.politico.com)
        
       | throwawaymanbot wrote:
        
       | jdhn wrote:
       | He mentions that asset prices (primarily stocks, but also
       | housing) was rising during the earlier portion of the last
       | decade, but I'm curious to know what is take would be on why we
       | didn't see a lot of inflation outside of those assets until the
       | supply chain issues due to covid popped up. Perhaps the supply
       | chain issues were the match that lit the inflation fire?
        
         | HarryHirsch wrote:
         | I think the supply chain problems are a separate issue. The
         | reason that the stocks-and-housing asset inflation hasn't
         | spilled over into the monetary economy yet is that not much of
         | it has been sold so far. God help us when the retirees will
         | have to cash out.
        
           | JamesBarney wrote:
           | Inflation of assets and goods and services are two completely
           | different phenomenon's with different causes.
           | 
           | Inflation of assets are caused by lowered by interest rates,
           | they don't spiral and they don't effect the cost of living.
           | Just a straightforward result of net present value
           | calculations.
           | 
           | Inflation of goods is caused by a supply shock or too much
           | demand (too much spending chasing two few resources).
        
             | HarryHirsch wrote:
             | Everyone needs a roof over the head, and the proportion of
             | household income that went into housing has been steadily
             | going up since the 1980's. So it's not correct that asset
             | inflation does not affect everyday cost of living.
        
               | JamesBarney wrote:
               | We need to disentangle housing the good the thing you pay
               | rent for, from a house an asset that produces housing.
               | 
               | Why would low interest rates cause rent to increase?
               | Intuitively I would think that low interest rates would
               | make it cheaper to fund the creation of new housing
               | lowering rents.
               | 
               | I imagine the increase in rents is because we've made it
               | more difficult to build things because of zoning,
               | permitting etc..., and we're building better houses that
               | are more insulated, fire proof, more outlets, etc...
               | 
               | We also haven't made builders that much more productive
               | over the last 40 years.
        
               | HarryHirsch wrote:
               | Housing prices went up 20 % between 2016 and now because
               | zoning became more difficult? That doesn't compute.
               | 
               | Clearing price is set by the maximum payment mortgage a
               | household can afford, i.e. principal + interest. If the
               | interest rate is lower, that results in a higher cash
               | price, and that's what we see.
               | 
               | Of course politicians at all levels and households who
               | have already are uninterested in seeing a change to the
               | status quo, so no surprise that there are supply
               | constraints as well. All that started when housing became
               | a popular investment vehicle sometimes in the late
               | 1970's.
               | 
               | The fact that entry-level housing is extra scarce because
               | it's less profitable for the builder than a doctor's
               | palace doesn't help either.
        
               | JamesBarney wrote:
               | I understand how interest rates increase the price of
               | house. It's a fairly straightforward calculation.
               | 
               | But what is your theory for the mechanism by which lower
               | interest rates causes an increase in the price of rent?
        
               | HarryHirsch wrote:
               | That's households that are priced out of a mortgage, so
               | they have no alternative but to rent. In emergencies you
               | can go to a food bank, but you absolutely need a roof
               | over the head.
        
             | hodgesrm wrote:
             | > Inflation of goods is caused by a supply shock or too
             | much demand (too much spending chasing two few resources).
             | 
             | It was my understanding that increase in the money supply
             | caused severe inflation in Spain during the 1500s. [0] If
             | true how does that square with the argument that goods
             | inflation is from a supply shock or excess demand?
             | 
             | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_revolution#Spain
        
               | HarryHirsch wrote:
               | There was also population growth as well as an increase
               | in the velocity of money, compounded by the fact that the
               | rural nobility was on fixed incomes, because taxes and
               | levies were not adjusted to inflation. The inflation rate
               | was 2 % or so, completely manageable with contemporary
               | approaches.
        
               | JamesBarney wrote:
               | The money supply doesn't directly effect inflation. The
               | money supply causes an increase in demand which triggers
               | inflation.
               | 
               | If you printed 10 trillion dollars and shot it into orbit
               | around the Sun prices wouldn't change. People have to
               | spend it creating increased demand. This is one of the
               | reasons quantitative easing had little effect. They
               | printed a bunch of money but it just sat in banks and was
               | never spent.
        
       | mwattsun wrote:
       | This is a long read but worth it. I don't like to only complain
       | but praise too, so good on the writer Christopher Leonard. The
       | part about low interest rates causing a farm land bubble in
       | Kansas was enlightening. I lived through the extreme interest
       | rates of the late 70's and subsequent crash caused by the
       | policies of Paul Volcker and it wasn't pretty, but then I was
       | able to buy a house in the mid 80's at a decent interest rate.
       | 
       | Edit: Volcker
        
         | hodgesrm wrote:
         | Agree. It had an unusually clear explanation of how different
         | types of bubbles are tied to Fed policies. Pointing out the
         | effect of shifting of assets from poorer to richer segments of
         | society was another interesting point in the article.
         | 
         | Hoenig's arguments are quite different from the "deficits don't
         | matter" spiel of Krugman and others. Krugman's argument that we
         | don't see ill effects of current policies could be just as much
         | a failure of imagination as lack of data.
        
           | uejfiweun wrote:
           | Krugman is nothing but an idiotic hack. He has been so
           | consistently out of touch and wrong about everything that I
           | almost consider him to be malicious. He just blatantly is a
           | spinster for the democratic party, but hides behind his
           | pedigree and pretends like his opinion is _obviously_
           | correct. It 's that classic snooty elitism, the
           | grandstanding, the self-righteousness - the same things that
           | alienate moderates from the democratic party.
        
             | JamesBarney wrote:
             | I get that Krugman can be shrill. But no one who wins a
             | nobel prize in economics is an idiot.
        
               | salawat wrote:
               | Never underestimate the career trajectory of a well
               | connected idiot in a soft science with a reproducibility
               | problems.
        
               | hodgesrm wrote:
               | Agree. Krugman is really good on pure economic questions
               | like trade theory. Unfortunately he is a lot less
               | trustworthy on issues where economics and current
               | politics intersect, e.g., NYT opinion pieces. I read
               | those with a fair degree of skepticism though he has
               | produced a few that were economic gems.
        
         | HWR_14 wrote:
         | Volcker is pretty much believed to have ended the periods of
         | high inflation, so what makes you blame him for a "crash"?
        
           | hodgesrm wrote:
           | Well according to the article it destroyed a lot of banks
           | when asset prices stopped rising.
           | 
           | > "You could see that no one anticipated that adjustment,
           | even after Volcker began to address inflation. They didn't
           | think it would happen to them," Hoenig recalled. Overall,
           | more than 1,600 banks failed between 1980 and 1994, the worst
           | failure rate since Depression.
           | 
           | I had not personally made that connection to S&L failures but
           | getting out of a bubble has to impose costs to somebody.
        
             | dvogel wrote:
             | This glosses over the outright fraud within the banking
             | industry that was at the heart of the S&L crisis. Without
             | the fraud there would have been enough assets and financial
             | incentive to consolidate instead of liquidations. The Fed
             | policies only had the effect of forcing the industry to
             | account for the rot within.
        
       | HarryHirsch wrote:
       | _higher prices for gas, goods and automobiles being fueled by the
       | Fed's unprecedented money printing programs_
       | 
       | Really? These are not caused by low interest rates. But the
       | current housing prices are caused by low interest rates, and
       | that's not even discussed in the article.
       | 
       | But the government is missing in action.
        
         | Robotbeat wrote:
         | I think it's kind of silly to blame gas prices on Fed action
         | since 2008-2011. Even in nominal terms, gas prices are lower
         | now than the peaks of that time, and for much of the time, gas
         | prices were FAR lower.
         | 
         | Inflation was low for over a decade. We hit a huge pandemic and
         | inflation ticked up. Let's not crown him vindicated about
         | inflation like a clock that's right one or twice a day. He has
         | a decade of low inflation to answer for first, and countless
         | examples of monetary austerity giving rise to recessions in
         | other countries as counterfactual.
        
           | exceptione wrote:
           | The article makes a point that Hoenig did repeatedly not
           | mentioned inflation. Instead his main point is about the
           | inequality as well as asset bubbles QE would cause.
           | 
           | I think he is right, also about the point that you cannot
           | walk back without causing massive pain in the economy. I too
           | think central banks have painted themselves in a corner, as
           | when central banks drop even a slight hint of changing
           | course, panic in the markets follows.
        
       | JamesBarney wrote:
       | The Fed's mandate "so as to promote effectively the goals of
       | maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term
       | interest rates"
       | 
       | It does not mention asset price bubbles, or inequality.
       | 
       | > stoke dangerous asset bubbles
       | 
       | Maybe low interest rates increase the risk of asset bubbles, but
       | there were plenty of asset bubbles when interest rates were
       | higher than today. But are we willing to accept less than full
       | employment for the risk of maybe causing an asset bubble that
       | will lead to less than full employment? It's trading something
       | bad today for a risk of something bad tomorrow. Seems like a poor
       | trade to me.
       | 
       | > enrich the biggest banks over everyone else
       | 
       | Investopedia doesn't think so, but who cares if banks get rich if
       | it means we have full employment.
       | 
       | > that would deepen income inequality
       | 
       | There is plenty of evidence that full employment helps reduce
       | income inequality. Anecdotally the recent shortage of employees
       | means I'm seeing gas stations advertising $15/hr instead of the
       | $8 they used to pay. Meanwhile everyone I know who was making
       | $100k didn't see a 100% raise.
       | 
       | Research backs up that full employment reduces inequality [1].
       | 
       | [0] https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/041015/how-do-
       | inter... [1] https://equitablegrowth.org/wages-full-employment-
       | reducing-i...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-12-28 23:02 UTC)