Center for Business and Economic Research - Ball State University


CBER Data Center
Projects and PublicationsEconomic IndicatorsWeekly CommentaryCommunity Asset InventoryManufacturing Scorecard

About

Commentaries are published weekly and distributed through the Indianapolis Business Journal and many other print and online publications. Disclaimer

RSS Feed

Disclaimer

The views expressed in these commentaries do not reflect those of Ball State University or the Center for Business and Economic Research.

Recent

Educational Attainment, the 21st Century Fund and the Future of SchoolingIndiana ranks 42nd in educational attainment.

Big Savings for Ending Prevailing WageMy statistical models show that repealing state prevailing wage laws save taxpayers money.

Re-Thinking Economic Development A large share of the most mobile families—perhaps half—no longer need to live near where they work.

Money Illusion and InflationPrice fluctuation could cause inflation to last longer, but it didn’t cause the inflation, it simply extends the pain.

View archives

Top Tags

jobs and employment 231
economics 178
education 149
economic development 146
state and local government 129
taxes 123
finance 109
indiana 106
migration and population change 104
budget and spending 104
Browse all tags
Reporter / Admin Login

December 29, 2013

The Fed’s End-of-Year Actions

The Federal Reserve's decision last week to ease its efforts to stimulate the economy were widely expected, though I thought they might wait another month until the new Fed Chair, Janet Yellen, took over the helm.  What was unexpected about the announcement was just how minimal the changes were. 

To remind readers, the Fed is now actively engaged in something known as QE3, or the third round of quantitative easing.  This involves buying government bonds and mortgage-backed securities from banks.  That process injects $85 billion each month directly into the economy. 

According to a traditional money multiplier analysis, the effect on the actual money supply ought to be equal to $85 billion divided by the reserve requirement of banks, which is less than 2 percent.  So, $85 billion divided by 0.02 is $4.25 trillion in additional money per month if banks were to lend it out. Over 2013 that is more than $51 trillion in 'potential' new money created by the QE3.  This is more than three times the size of the U.S. economy and more than nine times the money we need for transactions each year. 

I apologize if you are scared by the math, but, trust me, it is the number of zeros that is the most terrifying. Clearly that growth in the overall money supply is not following this simple money multiplier.  We know this because we still have low inflation.  The challenge is that this transmission mechanism of the Fed’s monetary policy to the overall economy is weak.  With this persistent problem continuing it hardly matters whether the size of the QE3 is $75 billion or $85 billion a month.  The question is simply, why is this level of monetary growth not having a more visible effect?

To explain it simply, businesses borrow money to buy capital equipment, from which they can expect a rate of return.  If the market interest rate is beneath the rate of return for this capital then borrowing makes sense.  If the market interest rate is above the rate of return on this capital than businesses will not borrow. Thus, the Fed depends upon the actual rate of return on capital, which economists term the natural rate of interest.  

The natural rate of return on capital obviously varies for different businesses in different locations.  The problem is clearly that for many businesses in many places that rate of return is beneath the astonishingly low market interest rates.  This stifles growth.

Of course to many, this is all financial market shenanigans played out by rich people in pinstriped suits.  The actual effects of this read into labor markets, for if the return to capital investment is too low to stimulate borrowing, then hiring will also be stagnant.  That is where we now are.

The Fed’s slowdown of monetary stimulus was too small to have any real negative effect and that is why Wall Street is untroubled and stocks fly high.  Clearly 2014 is going to be a long, slow year for our economy.

Link to this commentary: https://commentaries.cberdata.org/710/the-fed-s-end-of-year-actions

Tags: business, economic impact, jobs and employment, money supply


About the Author

Michael Hicks cberdirector@bsu.edu

Michael J. Hicks, PhD, is the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and the George and Frances Ball distinguished professor of economics in the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. Hicks earned doctoral and master’s degrees in economics from the University of Tennessee and a bachelor’s degree in economics from Virginia Military Institute. He has authored two books and more than 60 scholarly works focusing on state and local public policy, including tax and expenditure policy and the impact of Wal-Mart on local economies.

© Center for Business and Economic Research, Ball State University

About Ball State CBER Data Center

Ball State CBER Data Center is one-stop shop for economic data including demographics, education, health, and social capital. Our easy-to-use, visual web tools offer data collection and analysis for grant writers, economic developers, policy makers, and the general public.

Ball State CBER Data Center (cberdata.org) is a product of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University. CBER's mission is to conduct relevant and timely public policy research on a wide range of economic issues affecting the state and nation. Learn more.

Terms of Service

Center for Business and Economic Research

Ball State University • Whitinger Business Building, room 149
2000 W. University Ave.
Muncie, IN 47306-0360
Phone:
765-285-5926
Email:
cber@bsu.edu
Website:
www.bsu.edu/cber
Facebook:
www.facebook.com/BallStateCBER
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/BallStateCBER
Close