『In setting monetary policy, the Committee seeks to mitigate deviations of inflation from its mandate consistent rate, and deviations of employment from our assessments of its maximum level. These dual objectives are generally complementary.』
『For example under present circumstances, in which the unemployment rate is elevated and the inflation outlook is subdued, the Committee judges that sustaining a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy is consistent with promoting both objectives. And in the longer-term, low and stable inflation can help promote healthy growth in output and employment.』
『Of course, circumstances may sometimes arise in which the dual objectives are not complementary. In such cases, the Committee follows a balanced approach in promoting these two objectives, taking into account the magnitude of the deviations and potentially different time horizons over which inflation and employment are projected to return to levels judged consistent with our mandate.』
『In other words the Committee always treats its primary objectives on price stability and maximum employment symmetrically, and the stance of policy at any given time is determined by the size, social cost, and expected evolution of the deviations of each of the Committee's policy objectives from its desired level.』
『Craig Torres: Hi, Mr. Chairman, Craig Torres from Bloomberg News. Congrats on the inflation target or goal. That's a big achievement for you, I'm sure.(以下割愛)』
『Patrick Welter: Mr. Chairman, Patrick Welter from the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. I have two short questions. Your predecessor, Mr. Greenspan, once said about his personal inflation, long-term inflation goal that it would be, zero percent if appropriately measured and I would like you to compare the inflation goal you told us about today with that statement, and the second question is comparing what you did today, are you approaching more some kind of inflation target just like the Central Bank of Sweden or Norway or are you approaching more the European Central Bank, for example, which has some kind of inflation goal but is not really an inflation target.』
『Now, are we inflation targeters if by inflation targeters you mean a central bank that puts top priority on inflation and other goals like employment as subsidiary goals then the answer is no.』
『We are a dual mandate central bank, we put equal weight on price stability and maximum employment, those are the goals given to us by Congress. And so, in that respect, as I've mentioned earlier I think to Greg, we're not absolutists.』
『If there's a need to let inflation return a little bit more slowly to target in order to get a better result in employment then that's something that we would be willing to do. Having said all that, I think it's worth noting that even banks that--central banks that call themselves inflation targeters typically pay at least some attention to other parts of the economy, employment growth, financial stability and the like. So I don't think there's really any central bank or a very few at least that focus only on inflation.』
『But again, in terms of terminology, I guess, I would reject that term for the Federal Reserve because we are going to be evenhanded and creating--treating the price stability and maximum employment parts of our mandate on level footing.
それはそれとして昨日の朝は何故か重くて読めなかった権丈先生のページが復活しているので読んでみましたが、こちらで紹介されている谷垣さんの代表質問とか実に良いのに何で報道でこういう話が出てこないんでしょうかねえ、全くもってメディアの劣化ですなあ。 [外部リンク] careful deliberations, Committee participants have reached broad agreement on a statement that sets forth our longer-run goals and policy strategy. This statement should not be interpreted as indicating any change in how the Federal Reserve conducts monetary policy. Rather, its purpose is to increase the transparency and predictability of policy.』
『With respect to the objective of price stability, it is essential to recognize that the inflation rate over the longer-run is primarily determined by monetary policy, and hence, the Committee has the ability to specify a longer-run goal for inflation.』
『The Committee judges that inflation at the rate of 2 percent as measured by the annual change in the price index for personal consumption expenditures, is most consistent over the longer-run with our statutory mandate.』
『Clearly communicating to the public, this 2 percent goal for inflation over the longer-run should help foster price stability and moderate long-term interest rates. It will enhance the Committee's ability to promote maximum employment in the face of significant economic disturbances.』
『Because monetary policy does not determine the maximum level of employment that the economy can sustain in the longer term, and since many of the determinants of maximum employment may change over time or may not be directly measurable, it is not feasible for any central bank to specify a fixed goal for the longer-run level of employment.』
『For example, based on current information, 11 participants expect that the appropriate federal funds rate at the end of 2014 will be at or below 1 percent while 6 participants anticipate higher rates at that time. In effect, those judgments are reflected in today's meeting statement in which the Committee indicated that economic conditions are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate at least through late 2014.』
金曜も申し上げましたように、これではガイダンス文言の期限が「現在の実質ゼロ金利政策の継続に対するガイダンス」ではなくて「1%以下のFFレート水準となっている期間に対するガイダンス」となっているという話になりまして、まあ確かに今までこのガイダンス文言における「exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate」の定義を誰もしていなかったのでそういう意味ではほぼ全ての人(と思われますが)が勝手に誤解していたと言ってしまえばそれまでなのですが、普通こういうガイダンス文言が出た時には「実質ゼロ金利政策に対する時間軸政策のようなもの」というのを想像すると思われる訳で、なんちゅう衝撃の事実というか今までペテンに掛けていたんかいな(どうも米国市場はその辺を華麗にスルーしているのではないかという節があるのだが・・・・・)という話ですわな。
『And so one implication of our extension of our expected point of take-off to late 2014 is to imply that the initial sales from our balance sheet, which are again far down the road but--that begins that will be later than previously thought. That will be presumably in 2015. So we do expect to hold our balance sheet at a high level for a longer period.』
『Robin Harding: Robin Harding from the Financial Times. Mr. Chairman, while I look at these forecasts for 2014, the median of the forecast is I think 0.75 and the mean is 1.12 percent. If I were to draw a line for these--these dots, how should I draw it so I best understand what the FOMC is most likely to do? And the second part, in the minutes, you say that the Committee will consider further options for improvements to the SEP, the economic projections. Could you tell us a bit more about what further you might do? Thank you.』
『Chairman Bernanke: Well, again, I want to first I want to emphasize that there is no mechanical relationship between these projections and the outcomes of the FOMC decisions. Of course, they're a big input into those decisions but it's a collective decision. If you want to draw lines, my guess I would--I guess my suggestion would be to look at the median, the middle of the--of the distribution because we do have a democratic process in the Committee, and so the median will give you some sense of where the weight balances against the higher--in favor of higher or lower--lower rates.』
『Again, we did note that in support of our assessment of late 2014, which is a Committee decision and of course there was a 9 to 1 vote in favor of that, but that is supported by the observation that 11 of the 17 participants expect the funds rate at the end of 2014 to be 1 percent or less. And so presumably the take-off would not be much earlier than that.』
・・・・・・・ということでですな、何だか判ったような判らんような話なのですけれども、FOMCの決定でのガイダンス文言における「exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate」が「現政策の継続期間」なのか「1%以下の低金利」なのかが結局曖昧なままになっているというのが見てとれる訳であります。
[外部リンク] Reserve issues FOMC statement of longer-run goals and policy strategy [外部リンク] FOMC is firmly committed to fulfilling its statutory mandate from the Congress of promoting maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates. The Committee seeks to explain its monetary policy decisions to the public as clearly as possible. Such clarity facilitates well-informed decisionmaking by households and businesses, reduces economic and financial uncertainty, increases the effectiveness of monetary policy, and enhances transparency and accountability, which are essential in a democratic society.』
『Inflation, employment, and long-term interest rates fluctuate over time in response to economic and financial disturbances. Moreover, monetary policy actions tend to influence economic activity and prices with a lag. Therefore, the Committee's policy decisions reflect its longer-run goals, its medium-term outlook, and its assessments of the balance of risks, including risks to the financial system that could impede the attainment of the Committee's goals.』
『The inflation rate over the longer run is primarily determined by monetary policy, and hence the Committee has the ability to specify a longer-run goal for inflation. The Committee judges that inflation at the rate of 2 percent, as measured by the annual change in the price index for personal consumption expenditures, is most consistent over the longer run with the Federal Reserve's statutory mandate. Communicating this inflation goal clearly to the public helps keep longer-term inflation expectations firmly anchored, thereby fostering price stability and moderate long-term interest rates and enhancing the Committee's ability to promote maximum employment in the face of significant economic disturbances.』
でまあここでも「inflation goal」と言ってまして、いわゆるターゲットとしての数値では無いというのもさることながら、これはまあデュアルマンデートであるからして当然ちゃあ当然なのですが、じゃあこの数値からどの程度ぶれが生じたら金融政策がどうなるかというような話に関しては「デュアルマンデートやその他の状況を見ながら総合的に判断」という話になっていまして(あとで引用するバーナンキ会見に詳しい)、そういう点からしてこの2%数値は別に金融政策に直接的にリンクしている訳では無く(まあ極端に外れるとなったら何かするでしょうから無関係という事でも無いが)、あくまでも上記パラグラフの後半にある「Communicating this inflation goal clearly to the public helps keep longer-term inflation expectations firmly anchored, thereby fostering price stability and moderate long-term interest rates and enhancing the Committee's ability to promote maximum employment in the face of significant economic disturbances.」という事で、「長期的なインフレ期待をアンカーさせるためのコミュニケーションツール」であるという建付けになっている訳で、一般的に「ターゲット」とか「目標」と言われるものと必ずしも一致しないと考えるのが妥当に思われます。
『The maximum level of employment is largely determined by nonmonetary factors that affect the structure and dynamics of the labor market. These factors may change over time and may not be directly measurable. Consequently, it would not be appropriate to specify a fixed goal for employment; rather, the Committee's policy decisions must be informed by assessments of the maximum level of employment, recognizing that such assessments are necessarily uncertain and subject to revision. The Committee considers a wide range of indicators in making these assessments. Information about Committee participants' estimates of the longer-run normal rates of output growth and unemployment is published four times per year in the FOMC's Summary of Economic Projections. For example, in the most recent projections, FOMC participants' estimates of the longer-run normal rate of unemployment had a central tendency of 5.2 percent to 6.0 percent, roughly unchanged from last January but substantially higher than the corresponding interval several years earlier.』
『In setting monetary policy, the Committee seeks to mitigate deviations of inflation from its longer-run goal and deviations of employment from the Committee's assessments of its maximum level. These objectives are generally complementary. However, under circumstances in which the Committee judges that the objectives are not complementary, it follows a balanced approach in promoting them, taking into account the magnitude of the deviations and the potentially different time horizons over which employment and inflation are projected to return to levels judged consistent with its mandate.』
『The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) consists of twelve members--the seven members of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; and four of the remaining eleven Reserve Bank presidents, who serve one-year terms on a rotating basis. The rotating seats are filled from the following four groups of Banks, one Bank president from each group: Boston, Philadelphia, and Richmond; Cleveland and Chicago; Atlanta, St. Louis, and Dallas; and Minneapolis, Kansas City, and San Francisco. Nonvoting Reserve Bank presidents attend the meetings of the Committee, participate in the discussions, and contribute to the Committee's assessment of the economy and policy options.』
『In the chart labeled appropriate timing of policy firming, each shaded bar indicates the number of Committee participants who judge that the initial increase in the target federal funds rate would appropriately occur in the specified calendar year shown below the bar.』
さいだすな。
『Six participants anticipate that policy firming is likely to commence in 2015 or 2016 while five others depict policy firming to commence in 2014. The remaining six participants judged that policy lift-off would be appropriate in 2012 or 2013.』
これは棒グラフの分布についての説明ですわな。
『In that chart, the dots depict the distribution of participants' assessments regarding the appropriate level of the target federal funds rate at the end of each of the next several years and over the longer-run.』
『For example, based on current information, 11 participants expect that the appropriate federal funds rate at the end of 2014 will be at or below 1 percent while 6 participants anticipate higher rates at that time.』
・・・・・・・・・1%だと???????
『In effect, those judgments are reflected in today's meeting statement in which the Committee indicated that economic conditions are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate at least through late 2014.』
『Voting for the FOMC monetary policy action were: Ben S. Bernanke, Chairman; William C. Dudley, Vice Chairman; Elizabeth A. Duke; Dennis P. Lockhart; Sandra Pianalto; Sarah Bloom Raskin; Daniel K. Tarullo; John C. Williams; and Janet L. Yellen. Voting against the action was Jeffrey M. Lacker, who preferred to omit the description of the time period over which economic conditions are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate. 』(今回)
『Voting for the FOMC monetary policy action were: Ben S. Bernanke, Chairman; William C. Dudley, Vice Chairman; Elizabeth A. Duke; Richard W. Fisher; Narayana Kocherlakota; Charles I. Plosser; Sarah Bloom Raskin; Daniel K. Tarullo; and Janet L. Yellen. Voting against the action was Charles L. Evans, who supported additional policy accommodation at this time.』(前回)
○経済見通しはやや下方修正かなあ(???)利上げ見通しは・・・・・・
[外部リンク] Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Open Market Committee on Wednesday released the attached table and charts summarizing the economic projections and the target federal funds rate projections made by Federal Reserve Board members and Federal Reserve Bank presidents for the January 24-25 meeting of the Committee.』
ということで付表がこちら。 [外部リンク] Projections of Federal Reserve Board Members and Federal Reserve Bank Presidents, January 2012Advance release of table 1 of the Summary of Economic Projections to be released with the FOMC minutes
[外部リンク] careful deliberations at its recent meetings, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) has reached broad agreement on the following principles regarding its longer-run goals and monetary policy strategy. The Committee intends to reaffirm these principles and to make adjustments as appropriate at its annual organizational meeting each January. 』
・・・・・ということですので、ロイターが今回「インフレ目標導入を発表」とか言ってますが(ちなみにブルームバーグはスルーしています)、毎年内容を見直すという事ですからして、どちらかと言えば「物価安定の理解」とかに近いもので、コミットメント的なものではないと考えるべきものであります。ロイターのニュースはこちらです(『米FRB、2%のインフレ目標導入を発表』2012年 01月 26日 04:30 JST)→ [外部リンク] FOMC is firmly committed to fulfilling its statutory mandate from the Congress of promoting maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates. The Committee seeks to explain its monetary policy decisions to the public as clearly as possible. Such clarity facilitates well-informed decisionmaking by households and businesses, reduces economic and financial uncertainty, increases the effectiveness of monetary policy, and enhances transparency and accountability, which are essential in a democratic society.』
マンデートをより明確にする事が良い事ですというような話でありますな。
『Inflation, employment, and long-term interest rates fluctuate over time in response to economic and financial disturbances. Moreover, monetary policy actions tend to influence economic activity and prices with a lag. Therefore, the Committee's policy decisions reflect its longer-run goals, its medium-term outlook, and its assessments of the balance of risks, including risks to the financial system that could impede the attainment of the Committee's goals.』
『The inflation rate over the longer run is primarily determined by monetary policy, and hence the Committee has the ability to specify a longer-run goal for inflation. The Committee judges that inflation at the rate of 2 percent, as measured by the annual change in the price index for personal consumption expenditures, is most consistent over the longer run with the Federal Reserve's statutory mandate. Communicating this inflation goal clearly to the public helps keep longer-term inflation expectations firmly anchored, thereby fostering price stability and moderate long-term interest rates and enhancing the Committee's ability to promote maximum employment in the face of significant economic disturbances. 』
『The maximum level of employment is largely determined by nonmonetary factors that affect the structure and dynamics of the labor market. These factors may change over time and may not be directly measurable. Consequently, it would not be appropriate to specify a fixed goal for employment; rather, the Committee's policy decisions must be informed by assessments of the maximum level of employment, recognizing that such assessments are necessarily uncertain and subject to revision.』
『The Committee considers a wide range of indicators in making these assessments. Information about Committee participants' estimates of the longer-run normal rates of output growth and unemployment is published four times per year in the FOMC's Summary of Economic Projections. For example, in the most recent projections, FOMC participants' estimates of the longer-run normal rate of unemployment had a central tendency of 5.2 percent to 6.0 percent, roughly unchanged from last January but substantially higher than the corresponding interval several years earlier. 』
『In setting monetary policy, the Committee seeks to mitigate deviations of inflation from its longer-run goal and deviations of employment from the Committee's assessments of its maximum level. These objectives are generally complementary. However, under circumstances in which the Committee judges that the objectives are not complementary, it follows a balanced approach in promoting them, taking into account the magnitude of the deviations and the potentially different time horizons over which employment and inflation are projected to return to levels judged consistent with its mandate.』
まずは声明文から。 [外部リンク] received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in December suggests that the economy has been expanding moderately, notwithstanding some slowing in global growth. While indicators point to some further improvement in overall labor market conditions, the unemployment rate remains elevated. Household spending has continued to advance, but growth in business fixed investment has slowed, and the housing sector remains depressed. Inflation has been subdued in recent months, and longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable.』(今回)
『Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in November suggests that the economy has been expanding moderately, notwithstanding some apparent slowing in global growth. While indicators point to some improvement in overall labor market conditions, the unemployment rate remains elevated. Household spending has continued to advance, but business fixed investment appears to be increasing less rapidly and the housing sector remains depressed. Inflation has moderated since earlier in the year, and longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable. 』(前回)
パラグラフいきなりまる引用で恐縮ですが、まず基本的な経済認識に関しては「economy has been expanding moderately」というのを変えておりません。
前回との変化を順にみると、まずは海外経済に関しては「apparent slowing」所のapparentが抜けていますがまあ比較的それはどうでも良さそう。労働市場の改善に関して「some further improvement」とfurtherというのを加えて改善が進んでいる事を示しているのは上方修正。その一方で企業の投資活動に関して「growth in business fixed investment has slowed」としているのが下方修正です。
でまあ今回一番あたくしがこのパラグラフで注目したのはインフレの部分で、「インフレはこの数か月は抑制されている(has been subdued)」としておりまして、まあこちらはFOMC的には結構な傾向という所でしょう。
第2パラグラフは先行き見通し。
『Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability. The Committee expects economic growth over coming quarters to be modest and consequently anticipates that the unemployment rate will decline only gradually toward levels that the Committee judges to be consistent with its dual mandate. Strains in global financial markets continue to pose significant downside risks to the economic outlook. The Committee also anticipates that over coming quarters, inflation will run at levels at or below those consistent with the Committee's dual mandate.』(今回)
『Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability. The Committee continues to expect a moderate pace of economic growth over coming quarters and consequently anticipates that the unemployment rate will decline only gradually toward levels that the Committee judges to be consistent with its dual mandate. Strains in global financial markets continue to pose significant downside risks to the economic outlook. The Committee also anticipates that inflation will settle, over coming quarters, at levels at or below those consistent with the Committee’s dual mandate. However, the Committee will continue to pay close attention to the evolution of inflation and inflation expectations.』(前回)
『To support a stronger economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at levels consistent with the dual mandate, the Committee expects to maintain a highly accommodative stance for monetary policy.』(今回)
『To support a stronger economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at levels consistent with the dual mandate, the Committee decided today to continue its program to extend the average maturity of its holdings of securities as announced in September. 』(前回)
『In particular, the Committee decided today to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and currently anticipates that economic conditions--including low rates of resource utilization and a subdued outlook for inflation over the medium run--are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate at least through late 2014.』(今回)
ここは前回の第4パラグラフの相当する部分から比較します。
『The Committee also decided to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and currently anticipates that economic conditions--including low rates of resource utilization and a subdued outlook for inflation over the medium run--are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate at least through mid-2013.』(前回)
『The Committee also decided to continue its program to extend the average maturity of its holdings of securities as announced in September. The Committee is maintaining its existing policies of reinvesting principal payments from its holdings of agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in agency mortgage-backed securities and of rolling over maturing Treasury securities at auction. The Committee will regularly review the size and composition of its securities holdings and is prepared to adjust those holdings as appropriate to promote a stronger economic recovery in a context of price stability.』(今回)
前回の第3パラグラフを引用します。
『To support a stronger economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at levels consistent with the dual mandate, the Committee decided today to continue its program to extend the average maturity of its holdings of securities as announced in September. The Committee is maintaining its existing policies of reinvesting principal payments from its holdings of agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in agency mortgage-backed securities and of rolling over maturing Treasury securities at auction. The Committee will regularly review the size and composition of its securities holdings and is prepared to adjust those holdings as appropriate.』(前回)
まあ強いて言えば最後の部分に「to promote a stronger economic recovery in a context of price stability」というのが入っているのが違いですが、ここに関しては前回あった第5パラグラフがばっさり削除されていまして、大体まあこの部分を一文にしましたちゅう所でしょうか。一応今回公表された「デュアルマンデートの理解」を意識したのかもしれませんが。
『The Committee will continue to assess the economic outlook in light of incoming information and is prepared to employ its tools to promote a stronger economic recovery in a context of price stability. 』(前回)
[外部リンク] to The Columbian’s 2012 Economic Forecast BreakfastVancouver, WashingtonBy John C. Williams, President and CEO, Federal Reserve Bank of San FranciscoFor delivery on January 10, 2012
『My message this morning is that we at the Fed are doing everything we can to move the economy forward. We’ve pushed short-term interest rates about as far down as they can go. And our unconventional programs have pushed longer-term rates down as well. These are not magic.』
ちなみに金融政策に関する話はその前の方にあります。
『Lower interest rates alone can’t fix all the economy’s problems. But they do help. Conditions are far better today than they would be if the Fed hadn’t administered such strong medicine.』
まあそうですな。
『What’s also needed are tax and spending policies that work together with Federal Reserve programs to stimulate the economy. For example, I’d like to see federal programs that support the housing market. Housing has been at the center of the crisis and is one of the big impediments to recovery.』
『For a detailed discussion of the problems in the housing market and policy options to address these issues, see “The U.S. Housing Market: Current Conditions and Policy Considerations,” Board of Governors white paper, January 4, 2012.』
となっていまして、まあこれもネタにしないと本当はいかんですな、という話でしょう(大汗)。
・で、経済見通しは先ほど申し上げたようにどう見てもハト派です本当にありがとうございました
本文8ページ目以降が経済見通しとか金融政策に関する部分です。
『The broadest barometer of economic conditions is gross domestic product, which measures the nation’s total output of goods and services. My forecast calls for GDP to rise nearly 2-1/2 percent this year and about 3 percent in 2013. That’s an improvement from 2011, when I estimate GDP grew about 1-3/4 percent.』
ほう。
『Unfortunately, such moderate growth will not be enough to take a big bite out of unemployment. The unemployment rate is currently 8.5 percent. I expect it to remain over 8 percent well into next year and still be around 7 percent at the end of 2014.』
昨年11月のSEP([外部リンク] should mention one risk that would cause the economy to perform much worse. That’s the situation in Europe.』
欧州問題が下振れリスク要因キタコレ。
『The governments of several countries that use the euro as their currency have been struggling to pay their debts. Greece in particular appears unable to meet its obligations. At the same time, countries such as Italy have been forced to pay unsustainably high interest rates. This has raised questions about the health of European financial institutions that invest in government bonds.』
『I’d like to say a brief word about inflation. Some observers feared that the Fed’s aggressive actions to boost the economy would cause inflation to jump. That simply hasn’t happened.』
『The prices of oil and other commodities did jump last year in the face of strong global demand. But commodity prices have retreated notably since then and so has the overall inflation rate. And there’s no sign that the public or financial markets expect inflation to rise much. I expect inflation to come in under 1-1/2 percent this year and next, down from about 2-1/2 percent in 2011.』
『So what does the story I’ve told mean for Federal Reserve policy? The Fed has taken extraordinary action to boost growth. That effort is ongoing.』
『The Fed sets policy with an eye on the two goals Congress has assigned it: maximum employment and stable prices. Inflation is likely to fall a bit below what I consider the level most consistent with the stable-prices mandate. And clearly, with unemployment at 8.5 percent, we are very far from maximum employment.
物価と失業の状況説明読むとどう見ても追加緩和です本当にありがとうございました。
『During the recession, Congress and the White House used the federal budget to stimulate the economy by raising spending and trimming taxes. Now, the agenda in Washington, D.C., is to control spending and cut the federal budget deficit. Those are essential goals in the long run. But, in the short run, such government austerity is damping the economy, not boosting it. And it’s being reinforced as state and local governments also pare spending.』
財政再建に向けた取り組みによる経済押し下げ効果も追加緩和の必要性を示しますな。
『In this situation, it’s vital that the Fed use all the tools at its disposal to achieve its mandated employment and price stability goals. 』
ラッカー総裁の講演ですが、これまた味わいのあることに、経済見通しの最初の部分では「去年の年初に予想した見通しよりも悪い結果になったのでその原因について考えてみる」という話をしていまして、その要因として一時的な物(商品価格上昇や日本の震災によるサプライチェーンの毀損)もあるけれども、より持続的な問題があるということで指摘しているのが『The still-overbuilt housing market tops the list.』となってまあキタコレという感じですな。
で、その中身に関しては後日。
・経済見通しはそんなに強くない
経済見通しの部分から。
『On balance, until now, the impediments to recovery - including the housing stock overhang, consumer deleveraging, skills deficits and uncertainty regarding regulatory and tax policy - have had the upper hand.』
経済悪材料の方が強いですよと。
『They represent difficult economic challenges that are not likely to cure themselves quickly over time. My takeaway from 2011 is the lesson that the impediments to more rapid U.S. growth are likely to be deeper and more persistent than we thought a year ago.』
これらの障害物の影響が大きく、回復は以前考えていたよりも時間が掛かるでしょうとな。
『As a consequence, I am expecting only a modest improvement for 2012, with GDP expanding at a pace between 2 and 2-1/2 percent. This is a forecast of growth at a moderate pace - not as rapid as past expansions, but positive growth nonetheless.』
『A key part of any forecast is inflation. In 2011, we were reminded that inflation can rise despite elevated unemployment. In 2010, the inflation rate was 1.4 percent. In the first 11 months of 2011, inflation has averaged 2.5 percent at an annual rate. Obviously the run-up in energy and food prices earlier this year played a big role in this increase.』
で、ここからがちょっと他のハト的委員と違うのだ。
『But the pickup in inflation last year was broad based.』
ほう。
『Core inflation - which strips out food and energy prices - was 0.9 percent in 2010, but averaged 1.7 percent in 2011 through November. This higher inflation rate in 2011, despite unemployment averaging 9 percent, undercuts the hoary notion that "slack" in the labor market can be counted on to keep inflation contained.』
失業が高くてもインフレが高かったよねということで・・・・
『This lesson is of course not new; we learned this all too well during the 1970s.』
[外部リンク] Federal Reserve on Friday released blank templates showing the format of the two charts it will use on January 25 to report Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) participants' projections of the appropriate target federal funds rate. It also released a draft of an explanatory note that will accompany the projections.』
『The first chart, which will have shaded bars when released on January 25, will show FOMC participants’ projections for the timing of the initial increase in the target federal funds rate. The second chart, which will have dots representing policymakers’ individual projections when released on January 25, will show participants’ views of the appropriate path of the federal funds rate over the next several years and in the longer run.』
で、そのテンプレはこちら。 [外部リンク] charts are based on policymakers’ projections of the appropriate path for the FOMC’s target federal funds rate. The target funds rate is measured as the level of the target rate at the end of the calendar year or in the longer run. Appropriate monetary policy, by definition, is the future path of policy that each participant deems most likely to foster outcomes for economic activity and inflation that best satisfy his or her interpretation of the Federal Reserve’s dual objectives of maximum employment and stable prices.』
『In the upper panel, the shaded bars represent the number of FOMC participants who project that the initial increase in the target federal funds rate (from its current range of 0 to 1/4 percent) would appropriately occur in the specified calendar year.』
『In the lower panel, the dots represent individual policymakers’ projections of the appropriate federal funds rate target at the end of each of the next several years and in the longer run. Each dot in that chart represents one policymaker’s projection. Please note that for purposes of this chart the responses are rounded to the nearest 1/4 percent, with the exception that all values below 37.5 basis points are rounded to 1/4 percent.』
その次が『Differentiating proprietary trading from market making』である。
『One of the more difficult tasks in implementing the statutory prohibitions is distinguishing between prohibited proprietary trading activities and permissible market-making activities. This distinction is important because of the key role that market makers play in facilitating liquid markets in securities, derivatives, and other assets.』
そらそうよ。
『At the ends of the spectrum, the distinction between pure proprietary trading and market making is straightforward.』
ほうほうそれでそれで?
『At one end, for instance, trading activities that are organized within a discrete business unit, and that are conducted solely for the purpose of executing trading strategies that are expected to produce short-term profits without any connection to customer facilitation or intermediation, are not difficult to identify.』
そうっすかねえ・・・・・・
『These "internal hedge fund" operations existed at many bank affiliates for quite some time before the Volcker Rule was enacted. Firms that either are or were engaged in these non-client-oriented, purely proprietary trading businesses can readily identify and wind down these activities. Indeed, some have already done so for a number of reasons, including anticipatory compliance with the Volcker Rule. 』
『At the other end of the spectrum, a textbook example would be a pure agency-based market maker that acts as an intermediary, instantaneously matching a large pool of buyers and sellers of an underlying asset without ever having to take a position in the asset itself. Profits are earned either solely by charging buyers a higher price than is paid to sellers of the asset, or in some cases by charging a commission. Buyers and sellers willingly pay this "spread" fee or commission because the market maker is able to more quickly and efficiently match buyers with sellers than if they were left to find each other on their own.』
というような単純な話で済まないというのは当然その次に出てくる。
『I refer to this as a textbook example because instances of such riskless market making in our trading markets are rare. In actual markets, buyers and sellers arrive at different times, in staggered numbers and often have demands for similar but not identical assets. Market makers hold inventory and manage exposures to the assets in which they make markets to ensure that they can continuously serve the needs of their customers.』
『Accordingly, in the broad middle that exists between these two clear examples, the distinction between prohibited proprietary trading and permissible market making can be difficult to draw, because these activities share several important characteristics.』
『In both activities, the banking entity generally acts as principal in trading the underlying position, holds that position for only a relatively short period of time, and enjoys profits (and suffers losses) from any price variation in the position over the period the position is held. Thus, the purchase or sale of a specific block of securities is not obviously permissible or forbidden based solely on the features of the transaction itself.』
『The statute instead distinguishes between these activities by looking to the purpose of the trade and the intent of the trader.』
そう来たか。
『These subjective characteristics can be difficult to discern in practice, particularly in the context of complex global trading markets in which a firm may engage in thousands or more transactions per day. A similar challenge attaches to efforts to distinguish a hedging trade from a proprietary trade. 』
そらそうよ。
・更に説明は続く
『Implementation framework』という小見出しになるが。
#つーかこの調子だと全文引用になっていまいますな(汗)
『The agencies have proposed a framework for implementation of the Volcker Rule that combines: 1) an explanation of the factors the agencies expect to use to differentiate prohibited activities from permitted activities, 2) a requirement that banking entities with significant trading activities implement a program to monitor their activities to ensure compliance with the statute, and 3) data collection and reporting requirements, to facilitate both compliance monitoring and the development of more specific guidance over time.』
『In addition, the agencies will use their supervisory and examination processes to monitor compliance with the statute. 』
さいですか。
『The third element of the interagency proposal bears some additional comment. In order to help differentiate between permitted market-making activities and prohibited proprietary trading activities, the agencies have proposed to collect data from trading firms on a number of quantitative measurements.』
取引のデータを集めて「単純なプロップトレーディングとは何ぞや」というのを定義していくんだとさ。
『These metrics are designed to assist both the agencies and banking entities in identifying the risks and characteristics of prohibited proprietary trading and exempt activities. The proposal makes clear that metrics would be used as a tool, but not as a dispositive factor for defining permissible activities. The agencies instead propose to use metrics to identify activity that merits special scrutiny by banking entities and examiners in their evaluation of the activities of firms.』
ふーん。
『The proposed rule does not include specific thresholds to trigger further scrutiny for individual metrics, but requests comment on whether thresholds would be useful, and notes that the agencies expect to propose them in the future. The proposal also makes clear that the agencies expect to take a heuristic approach to metrics, revising and refining them over time as greater experience is gained in reviewing, analyzing, and applying these measurements for purposes of identifying prohibited proprietary trading.』
まあ変に厳格適用とかされるとややこしい事になりそうな感じですなあ。
『Additionally, since some banking entities engage in few or no activities covered by the statute, the proposal also includes a number of elements intended to reduce the burden of the proposed rule on smaller, less-complex banking entities. In particular, the agencies have proposed very limited compliance programs and have reduced or eliminated the data collection requirements for these banking entities.』
中小金融機関には細かい報告とかの義務を軽くするっぽいですな、そらそうだろ。
・Potential effects of the proposalとな
最後の小見出しが『Potential effects of the proposal』である。
『The proprietary trading prohibition in the Volcker Rule statute itself will undoubtedly affect the trading behavior of banking entities.』
どう見ても規制やり過ぎの方向に変化させそうな気がするんだが。
『Indeed, that is what Congress intended in enacting these provisions. Congress has itself made the judgment that this prohibition will enhance financial stability and is socially desirable. The task of the agencies is to implement Congressional intentions, as manifest in the statute itself, as efficiently and effectively as possible.』
『The approach taken in the proposed rulemaking is concededly not a simple one. But, at least to date, it has seemed the most feasible.』
そうなの????
『Two alternative approaches have been suggested, and we considered each prior to issuing the proposed regulation.』
ほう。
『One considerably simpler approach would be to articulate high-level principles for differentiating prohibited and permitted activities and then leave it to the firms to self-report violations based on internal models or other devices, presumably with compliance and systems monitoring by regulatory agencies. While having the virtue of simplicity at the outset, this approach would provide little clarity about whether an activity is permitted or prohibited. It seems quite likely that, either formally or informally, the regulatory agencies would regularly be asked to offer guidance or approve specific practices. Otherwise, this approach would essentially rely on self-policing by banking entities. 』
『A second alternative would be to establish definitive bright lines for determining whether an activity is permitted or prohibited. This approach would be very difficult in practice, at least with current information and data, because of the many asset classes, business models, and transaction types covered by the statutory provisions. Hard-and-fast rules would also run the risk of being either too restrictive, and thus inadvertently classifying legitimate, customer-driven market-making or hedging activity as prohibited, or too narrow, and thus failing adequately to capture the full range of activities that are prohibited under the statute. 』
『The more nuanced framework contained in our proposal was designed to realize some of the advantages of both of these approaches while minimizing their potential adverse effects. The Dodd-Frank Act provides a long conformance period for firms that are subject to the Volcker Rule. The agencies have proposed to use that conformance period to study the effects of the statutory prohibitions on the activities of banking entities before the Volcker Rule is fully implemented.』
『To assist in this undertaking, the agencies have proposed to begin collecting and reviewing trading data that should help firms subject to the statutory provisions, as well as the agencies in our efforts, to monitor and understand the contours of the activities that are prohibited, permitted, and affected by the statutory provisions that make up the Volcker Rule.』
『As I mentioned earlier, we are hopeful that the data collection and reporting required in our proposal will eventually facilitate more specific guidance on market-making, hedging, and other exemptions from the general prohibition. After the Volcker Rule becomes fully effective, we would continue to monitor the effects of the rule and look for opportunities to refine it.』
『Having said all this, the Federal Reserve is more than open to alternatives that would be superior to the approach proposed. Indeed, the agencies requested comment on alternative approaches in the Federal Register notice.』
[外部リンク] Volcker Rule Before the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises and the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit, Committee on Financial Services, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. January 18, 2012
ということで議会証言があったので斜め読みしてみましたお。
・プロップトレーディングはするなという話ですがさて・・・・・・
『Summary of statute and proposal』というのがまあボルカールールの話ですわな。『The statutory provisions that make up the Volcker Rule generally prohibit banking entities from engaging in two types of activities: 1) proprietary trading and 2) acquiring an ownership interest in, sponsoring, or having certain relationships with a hedge fund or private equity fund (each a covered fund).』
『These statutory provisions apply, in general, to insured depository institutions; companies that control an insured depository institution; and foreign banks with a branch, agency, or subsidiary bank in the United States, as well as to an affiliate of one of these entities. 』
『Under the statute, proprietary trading is defined as taking a position as principal in any security, derivative, option, or contract for sale of a commodity for future delivery for the purpose of selling that position in the near term or otherwise with the intent to resell to profit from short-term price movements.』 まあこの後に延々と出てくるのですが、こんな定義するのはいいけどそんな事したらおめー証券業やるなちゅうことかよという話になりますわな。で、後の章というか、この証言の後半ほぼ全部が延々と「行う事が許されるマーケットメイクと禁止されるべきプロップトレーディングの区別をどうするのか」という話をしていまして、まあFRB的にはボルカールールを変に運用すると金融取引自体が死んでしまって米国の打ち出の小槌が死亡するという事くらいは先刻ご承知で、さてどうしたもんかという事で今回の議会証言でもどう説明するかという風情になっているようではございまする。
『The statute applies only to positions taken by a banking entity as principal for the purpose of making short-term profits; it does not apply to positions taken for long-term or investment purposes. Moreover, the statute contains a number of exemptions, including for underwriting, market making-related activities, and risk-mitigating hedging activities. The implementing rule proposed by the agencies incorporates all of these statutory definitions and exemptions.』
でどう運用するんでしょうねえ(棒読み)。
『The statute also authorizes the relevant regulatory agencies to permit additional activities if they would promote and protect safety and soundness of the banking entity and the financial stability of the United States.』
『The second major prohibition in the statute forbids any banking entity from acquiring or retaining an ownership interest in, or having certain relationships with, a covered fund.』
ふーん。
『Again, the statute contains a number of exceptions, including for organizing and offering a covered fund, making limited investments in a covered fund, sponsoring and investing in loan securitizations, and risk-mitigating hedging activities. The statutory definition of a fund covered under the Volcker Rule is quite broad.』
これらの例外規定をどういう運用するのか次第なんでしょうけれども。
『The statute also quite broadly prohibits any banking entity that serves as the investment manager, adviser, or sponsor to a covered fund, or that organizes and offers a covered fund, from engaging in certain transactions with the fund, including lending to, or purchasing assets from, the fund.』
まあ要するに銀行は商業銀行だけやってろという話ですかそうですか。
『The statute also prohibits otherwise permissible trading and investment activities when there is a material conflict of interest with customers, clients, or counterparties, or when the activity results in an exposure to high-risk assets or trading strategies. These are significant provisions and the agencies have specifically solicited comment on disclosure requirements and other approaches to implementing these parts of the statute.』
[外部リンク] 13 St. Louis Fed’s Bullard Discusses Fiscal Approaches to Stabilization Policy『ST. LOUIS - Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis President James Bullard discussed his new research paper, titled “Death of a Theory,” with members of various financial institutions and local business leaders on Friday at the Edward Jones Annual Meeting.』
ということで、リサーチペーパーテキストはこちら。 [外部リンク] of a Theory』というのが何っつーか目立ちたがりさんなブラード総裁のクオリティ炸裂という感じですが、テキストの『Abstract』をとりあえず読む。
『I discuss the effectiveness of fiscal approaches to stabilization policy.』
ほほう。
『The conventional wisdom pre-2007 was that fiscal policy intervention as a stabilization tool had little to recommend it, mostly due to political constraints and to the unlikely effectiveness of many types of temporary fiscal policy actions. 』
『However, with short-term nominal interest rates near zero, attention turned again toward fiscal stabilization policy.』
ほほう。
『I describe and critique two theories of how fiscal policy might be viewed as effective in such circumstances. One, heavily studied, is that a tax-financed increase in government expenditures would temporarily increase total output in the economy. The other, lightly studied but rhetorically forceful, is that increased government expenditures may inspire confidence.』
『Both theories have drawbacks, but I argue the first is dying because of three considerations: (1) actual political systems are ill-suited to implement the advice from the theory; (2) monetary stabilization policy has been quite effective, making fiscal experiments redundant; and (3) governments pushed distortionary taxes into the future, which in the theory reduces or eliminates the desired effects.』
[外部リンク] to The Columbian’s 2012 Economic Forecast BreakfastVancouver, WashingtonBy John C. Williams, President and CEO, Federal Reserve Bank of San FranciscoFor delivery on January 10, 2012 The Federal Reserve and the Economic Recovery
『The subject of my talk is the economy and what the Federal Reserve is doing to encourage economic growth while keeping inflation low. This morning, I’ll review the events of recent years, with a special eye on how the boom and bust in housing affected the recession and the economic recovery. I’ll talk about the measures the Federal Reserve has taken to combat the financial crisis and to bolster the economy. That leads naturally to the current economic situation and my forecast of where things are going from here. I’ll focus on the progress we’re making toward the two goals Congress has assigned the Fed: maximum employment and stable prices. I’ll conclude with a few words about the current stance of Fed policy. I should stress that I’m expressing my own views and not those of anybody else in the Federal Reserve System.』
『The ongoing weakness in housing has made it more difficult to achieve a vigorous economic recovery. Housing has inhibited economic activity through a number of channels.』 以下のような経路で住宅市場悪化が経済に悪影響をもたらすと。
『First, the strong rebound in residential investment that typically powers economic recoveries following deep recessions has been absent. For example, nine quarters following the ends of the mid-1970s and early 1980s recessions, residential investment had climbed by 65 percent and 55 percent, respectively, above the level at the corresponding troughs. In contrast, during this cycle, there has been no rebound. In the third quarter of 2011, residential investment was still somewhat below the level in the second quarter of 2009.』
『Second, by eroding household wealth, the decline in housing prices has contributed to greater weakness in consumption. For most American households the family home is by far the largest tangible asset, a buffer against misfortune, and often a significant savings vehicle to fund retirement.』
『Since home values peaked in 2006, homeowners have lost more than half their home equity-about $7.3 trillion-and expectations of future gains have also declined. At present roughly 11 million households are in negative equity with the aggregate amount of negative equity estimated to be roughly $700 billion.』
『Third, the weakness in home prices has reduced credit availability. Because the home is the primary source of collateral for most households, financial institutions are less willing to lend when house prices have declined substantially and could fall further. In addition, problems in the foreclosure process and obstacles to efficient modification of loans in securitizations, which I'll describe in a moment, make a house of a given value less attractive as collateral to secure a loan. As a result, as home prices have fallen, financial institutions have tightened lending standards. This has reduced the amount of credit available for households, including for small business formation.』
『Fourth, the big drop in house prices has made it more difficult for borrowers to refinance. This has undercut to a degree the ability of monetary policy to support demand.』
『Traditionally, refinancing activity has been an important channel through which lower interest rates support spending and employment. Refinancing frees up borrower income. Because those who refinance tend to have a higher marginal propensity to consume from income than the investors receiving the mortgage payments, such refinancing activity increases overall demand. However, the fall in home equity combined with a pro-cyclical tightening of refinancing standards and fees means that many borrowers who would like to refinance cannot do so.』
その次の小見出しは『Problems in Housing』ということで現状の米国住宅市場における色々な問題についてああだこうだと話をしているのですがその辺は華麗にスルーして(もしかしたら後でネタにするかも)その次の『The Case for Housing Intervention』をば。
『All these factors imply that there are many potential equilibrium outcomes in terms of housing demand and home prices-some considerably more desirable than others. Negative price expectations and flawed financing and administrative mechanisms, if left unaddressed, can contribute to ongoing weakness in housing demand and make it harder to generate a robust economic recovery.』
『Persistent weakness in housing is particularly problematic because it acts as a drag on spending and job creation in an environment in which such weakness can not be easily offset by other policy adjustments. Housing policy should seek to break adverse feedback loops, promote more economically efficient outcomes in housing and support growth.』
『In recent speeches, I have called for a "comprehensive approach" to stabilize the national real estate market and lay the foundations for recovery. I believe this should include measures to improve access to mortgage credit, reduce obstacles to refinancing, lessen the flow of homes into foreclosure through bridge financing and accelerated principal reduction, and to facilitate the absorption of REO back into use as owner- or renter- housing.』
ということですが、こちらのスピーチは『"The National and Regional Economic Outlook," October 24, 2011, and "Securing the Recovery" November 17, 2011.』ということですので、まあそれ嫁という話ですな。
また、新年に議会にFEDが提出したのも引き合いにだされています。
『Earlier this week Chairman Bernanke sent members of Congress a thoughtful analysis of housing policy by staff at the Board of Governors in Washington that evaluates a number of these same issues. What I would like to do today is to elaborate on some specific proposals we have developed in New York, in order to try to persuade you that there are workable solutions to our housing problems at costs that I deem very reasonable relative to the economically inefficient path we are on. Of course, I am open to other promising alternatives that would address the same issues.』脚注にありますがこれですな『Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. 2012. White Paper, "The U.S. Housing Market: Current Conditions and Policy Considerations," January 4.』
『I note also that a truly comprehensive approach would also include long-term reform -including reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac-to put housing finance on a more stable footing and to equip the market to deal more effectively with any future systemic shocks.』
ふむふむ。
『But I will not discuss these issues in-depth today.』
おーのー。
・ただまあ今回はお助け策の話が延々と続くのでして・・・・・・
ということで以下の小見出しが先日申し上げたように『Access to Mortgage Credit』『Mortgage Refinancing』『Bridge Financing』『Earned Principal Reduction』『REO Portfolio』と続くのですが段々お助け策になっているのがオモシロスなのでございますけれども、時間と量の関係で今日はスルーします。
・『Moral Hazard』って所が凄いのよ
で、お助けの話が延々と続いた後にこの小見出しなのですよね。
『Some argue that any interventions to improve the real estate market would lead to moral hazard-that is these intervention would reward bad behaviors. I think these concerns are overstated.』
このような介入策はモラルハザードをもたらすという意見があるが私はそうは思わない(キリッ)。
『First, the programs that have been proposed can be designed with the proper incentives to limit moral hazard and to encourage desireable behavior.』
ほう。
『Second, in contrast to the earlier phase of housing crisis when mostly subprime borrowers came under stress, many of the borrowers running into trouble with their mortgages today took out conforming loans subject to standard downpayment requirements, had respectable FICO scores and borrowed a moderate amount to finance an average house.』
『The problem was that these purchases occurred near the peak in the market and now many of the buyers have suffered an adverse life shock such as unemployment or illness. This isn't a moral hazard issue, this is just the bad luck associated with the timing of the purchase and an exceptionally weak jobs market. Punishing such misfortune accomplishes little.』
『I believe that the proposals I put forward are strongly in the public interest. I also believe that they would be good for taxpayers. Consider, for instance, the proposal for earned principal reduction. While this would certainly involve outlays, these would be offset by reduced defaults. Whether there is a net cost or not depends on the reduction in the default rate that would come with principal reduction and how this reduction would affect the performance of the overall housing market and the economy.』
『Based on recent data on borrower behavior, my staff calculates that the taxpayer (through the effect on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) would be better off with earned principal reduction under a base case of roughly flat house prices and persistent weakness in the jobs market. Under a scenario of modest house price increases, the combination of fewer defaults and shared appreciation also produces a net benefit.』
『Housing and the Economic Recovery』というのが最初の小見出しですが、そちらに今日はこんな話をしますよというのが。
『In my presentation today, I will explain why a more robust housing market matters for the wider economy. I will also highlight those factors specific to the housing market that create a risk that it will linger in an extremely weak state for longer than is necessary and remain vulnerable to further weakness.』
『I will make the case for further housing-related policy interventions that would help stabilize home prices, improve the housing outlook and generate an earlier recovery in housing activity. I believe such actions would support growth and make monetary policy more effective in promoting the dual mandate given to the Federal Reserve by Congress-maximum sustainable employment in the context of price stability.』
『Let me now explain our assessment in greater detail, starting with the economic analysis. Real GDP in the euro area grew by 0.1% quarter on quarter in the third quarter of 2011. At present, a number of factors seem to be dampening the underlying growth momentum in the euro area. They include moderate global demand growth and weak business and consumer confidence in the euro area. Domestic demand is likely to be dampened by the ongoing tensions in euro area sovereign debt markets, as well as the process of balance sheet adjustment in the financial and non-financial sectors.』(今回)
『Let me now explain our assessment in greater detail, starting with the economic analysis. Real GDP in the euro area grew by 0.2% quarter on quarter in the third quarter of 2011, unchanged from the previous quarter. Evidence from survey data points to weaker economic activity in the fourth quarter of this year. A number of factors seem to be dampening the underlying growth momentum in the euro area. They include a moderation in the pace of global demand growth and unfavourable effects on overall financing conditions and on confidence resulting from ongoing tensions in euro area sovereign debt markets, as well as the process of balance sheet adjustment in the financial and non-financial sectors.』(前回)
『At the same time, we continue to expect euro area economic activity to recover, albeit very gradually, in the course of 2012, supported by developments in global demand, very low short-term interest rates and all the measures taken to support the functioning of the financial sector.』(今回)
『At the same time, we expect euro area economic activity to recover, albeit very gradually, in the course of next year, supported by resilient global demand, very low short-term interest rates and all the measures taken to support the functioning of the financial sector.』(前回)
ということで、先行き見通しは継続しており、その要因も変わりません。
・経済の下向きリスクはこれまた同じ
めんどいので前回分引用割愛。
『In the Governing Council’s assessment, substantial downside risks to the economic outlook for the euro area continue to exist in an environment of high uncertainty. They notably relate to a further intensification of the tensions in euro area debt markets and their potential spillover to the euro area real economy. Downside risks also relate to the global economy, protectionist pressures and the possibility of a disorderly correction of global imbalances.』(今回)
『With regard to price developments, euro area annual HICP inflation was 2.8% in December 2011, according to Eurostat’s flash estimate, after 3.0% in the preceding three months. This decline was expected and reflects a downward base effect stemming from energy prices. Inflation rates have been at elevated levels since the end of 2010, mainly driven by higher energy and other commodity prices. Looking ahead, they are likely to stay above 2% for several months to come, before declining to below 2%. This pattern reflects the expectation that, in an environment of weaker growth in the euro area and globally, underlying cost, wage and price pressures in the euro area should remain modest.』(今回)
『The Governing Council continues to view the risks to the medium-term outlook for price developments as broadly balanced. On the upside, the main risks relate to further increases in indirect taxes and administered prices, owing to the need for fiscal consolidation in the coming years, and possible increases in commodity prices. The main downside risks relate to the impact of weaker than expected growth in the euro area and globally.』(今回)
6日の講演ネタを今さらですいませんすいません。 [外部リンク] and the Economic Recovery January 6, 2012
William C. Dudley, President and Chief Executive Officer Remarks at the New Jersey Bankers Association Economic Forum, Iselin, New Jersey ということでお題は住宅市場の話でして、(こんなことならネタにしておけばよかったと今更大航海時代なのですが)10月のデューク理事の住宅市場に関する講演の話からの継続みたいなお話をああでもないこうでもないとしているのですな。
んでもってその先に『The Case for Housing Intervention』という小見出しの部分があって、この辺りから先が中々アレでございまして、包括的なアプローチが重要という話があるのですけれども、詳しい話は以前講演したテキストを見てちょとかあるので忌々しい事にそれをまた読む(もしかしたら読んだのを忘却している鴨^^)という話ですが(--)、まあそこから先が『Access to Mortgage Credit』『Mortgage Refinancing』『Bridge Financing』『Earned Principal Reduction』『REO Portfolio』という小見出しが続くのですけれども、この小見出しって最初のうちはまあそうですかなあという話なのでございますが、後に行くほどドンドンお助け施策の香りが高くなるのが非常に香ばしいという所です。
そしてお助け施策の話が延々と続くという中銀の仕事かそれというようなネタが続いたためにその次の小見出しが『Moral Hazard』と来て『The Taxpayer Interest』と来るのが非常にこう味わいが深いと申しますか何と申しますかという感じです。最後の最後が『Housing Policy and Monetary Policy』でして、こちらの部分が市場の反応を起こした部分ですな。
・ということでとりあえず最後の最後の部分を
『Housing Policy and Monetary Policy』A4の紙に打ち出すと8ページ(正味7ページ)の講演の中で最後の14行だけなんですけれどもね。
『In closing, the housing policy agenda I describe would address one factor that has impeded the economic recovery. Implementing such policies would improve the economic outlook and make monetary accommodation more effective.』
『However, because the outlook for unemployment is unacceptably high relative to our dual mandate and the outlook for inflation is moderate, I believe it is also appropriate to continue to evaluate whether we could provide additional accommodation in a manner that produces more benefits than costs, regardless of whether action in housing is undertaken or not.』
『Monetary policy and housing policy are much more complements than substitutes.』
ほう。
『As I hope I have convinced you today, while the Fed has will do all it can to achieve our dual mandate of maximum sustainable employment in the context of price stability, we have to recognize that there is more to economic policy than just monetary policy. Low interest rates help housing, but cannot resolve the problems in that sector that are pressing on wider economic activity. With additional housing policy interventions, we could achieve a better set of economic outcomes than with just monetary policy alone.』
[外部リンク] statement to the press conference (with Q&A)
Mario Draghi, President of the ECB, Vitor Constancio, Vice-President of the ECB, Frankfurt am Main, 12 January 2012
会見の説明部分だけだと基本的に「前回の見方を踏襲」という感じではありますな。
で、今回試しに一部前回との比較を入れてみる(説明がA4の紙に打ち出した場合に正味2ページ分程度と長いことから章立てとかが時々ずれるのでFOMC声明文のような逐語比較はあまりうまくないのですが)。前回分はこちら。[外部リンク] on its regular economic and monetary analyses, the Governing Council decided today to keep the key ECB interest rates unchanged, following the 25 basis point decreases on 3 November and 8 December 2011. The information that has become available since early December broadly confirms our previous assessment.』(今回)
ということで、では内訳はどうですねんという話ですが。
『Inflation is likely to stay above 2% for several months to come, before declining to below 2%. At the same time, the underlying pace of monetary expansion remains moderate. As expected, ongoing financial market tensions continue to dampen economic activity in the euro area, while, according to some recent survey indicators, there are tentative signs of a stabilisation in activity at low levels. The economic outlook remains subject to high uncertainty and substantial downside risks.』(今回)
『Inflation is likely to stay above 2% for several months to come, before declining to below 2%. The intensified financial market tensions are continuing to dampen economic activity in the euro area and the outlook remains subject to high uncertainty and substantial downside risks.』(前回)
『In such an environment, cost, wage and price pressures in the euro area should remain modest and inflation rates should develop in line with price stability over the policy-relevant horizon. Overall, it is essential for monetary policy to maintain price stability over the medium term, thereby ensuring a firm anchoring of inflation expectations in the euro area in line with our aim of maintaining inflation rates below, but close to, 2% over the medium term. Such anchoring is a prerequisite for monetary policy to make its contribution towards supporting economic growth and job creation in the euro area. A very thorough analysis of all incoming data and developments over the period ahead is warranted. 』(今回)
『In such an environment, cost, wage and price pressures in the euro area should remain modest over the policy-relevant horizon. At the same time, the underlying pace of monetary expansion remains moderate. Overall, it is essential for monetary policy to maintain price stability over the medium term, thereby ensuring a firm anchoring of inflation expectations in the euro area in line with our aim of maintaining inflation rates below, but close to, 2% over the medium term. Such anchoring is a prerequisite for monetary policy to make its contribution towards supporting economic growth and job creation in the euro area.』(前回)
『The provision of liquidity and the allotment modes for refinancing operations will continue to support euro area banks, and thus the financing of the real economy. The extensive recourse to the first three-year refinancing operation indicates that our non-standard policy measures are providing a substantial contribution to improving the funding situation of banks, thereby supporting financing conditions and confidence.』(今回)
『In addition, we are actively working towards the implementation of all the measures announced at our December meeting, which should provide additional support to the economy.』(今回)
[外部リンク] Risk Management Approach to Monetary Policy
この前まで引用した話を踏まえてエバンス総裁の提唱する政策アプローチの話になります。
小見出し『A Risk-Management Approach to Policy Changes』の所から。
『Of course, I realize that I could be wrong in my assessment. So let us consider how we should conduct policy when we don’t know for sure which scenario is really the one we face today. How can we avoid risking a repeat of either the stagflation of the 1970s or the slow growth of the 1930s?』
『The problem, of course, is that policies that are optimal for the liquidity trap scenario would tend to generate higher inflation without significant reductions in unemployment if the structural impediments scenario were true. Conversely, policies that are optimal for the structural impediments scenario would leave the economy unnecessarily mired in depression and deflation if we were actually in the liquidity trap scenario.』
『Fortunately, between these two extreme scenarios, there is a robust middle ground policy approach. The Fed could sharpen its forward guidance in two directions by implementing a state-contingent policy. The first part of such a policy would be to communicate that we will keep the funds rate at exceptionally low levels as long as unemployment is somewhat above its natural rate. The second part of the policy is to have an essential safeguard - that is, a commitment to pull back on accommodation if inflation rises above a particular threshold.』
『Furthermore, I believe the inflation-safeguard threshold needs to be above our current 2 percent inflation objective - perhaps something like 3 percent.』
『Now, the “3 percent inflation” number may seem shocking coming from a conservative central banker. However, as Kenneth Rogoff recently wrote in a Financial Times piece, “Any inflation above 2 percent may seem anathema to those who still remember the anti-inflation wars of the 1970s and 1980s, but a once-in-75-year crisis calls for outside-the-box measures.”I agree wholeheartedly with Professor Rogoff.』
『Importantly, it is consistent with the most recent liquidity trap research, which shows that improved economic performance during a liquidity trap requires the central bank, if necessary, to allow inflation to run higher than its target for some time over the medium term.』
『Such policies can generate the above-trend growth necessary to reduce unemployment and return overall economic activity to its productive potential. In fact, I have seen model simulation results that suggest to me that core inflation is unlikely to rise as high as 3 percent under such a policy.』
『But suppose the structural impediments scenario turns out to be correct. In this case, inflation will rise more quickly and without any improvements to the real side of the economy. In such an adverse situation, the inflation safeguard triggers an exit from the now-evident excessive policy accommodation before inflation expectations become unhinged.』
『Today, I have outlined an appropriate course for monetary policy to take when we cannot know with certainty the degrees to which various forces are driving the economic weakness we currently face. 』『If, as I fear, the liquidity trap scenario describes the present environment, we risk being mired in recession-like circumstances for an unacceptably long period. Indeed, each passing month of stagnation represents real economic losses that are borne by all. In addition, I worry that even when the economy does regain traction, its new potential growth path will be permanently impaired.』
なるほど。
『The skills of the long-term unemployed may atrophy and incentives for workers to invest in acquiring new skills may be diminished. Similarly, businesses facing uncertain demand are less inclined to invest in new productive capacity and technologies. All of these factors may permanently lower the path of potential output.』 経済が回復軌道に乗った場合でも潜在成長の低下を懸念していると。
『As I said in the fall of 2010 and I repeat the message again today: I think state-contingent policies such as those I just described are a productive way to provide such necessary monetary accommodation. There is simply too much at stake for us to be excessively complacent while the economy is in such dire shape. It is imperative to undertake action now.』
『Closing WordsThe recent financial crisis has certainly left not one, as the Beatles song said, but many a pool of tears. As a result, if I may return to the Dickens quote, it feels for many of us like the worst of times. It may be a bit of a stretch to say that we are in the best of times, but it is too early to despair. Our economies have the resources, not only money but also the intellectual and institutional capabilities, to resolve the issues we face. If we can adapt the economy to a new environment and resist pressures that would lead to collateral damage, even after the bursting of the bubble, we should still be able to find a path leading to renewed growth. What we need is the determination and will. Ultimately, if we have this determination and will, we can shorten the long and winding road.』
『"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times..."
Thus begins A Tale of Two Cities, by Charles Dickens, the bicentennial of whose birth we will celebrate next month. While this famous opening sentence of the novel refers to the year 1775, it also strikes a chord with us in 2012. On the one hand, with all due respect to the frustration vented by the Occupy protesters, the people of today's developed nations enjoy a living standard far higher than the harsh realities of Dickensian England. One of the few luxuries available to young David Copperfield, the alter ego of Dickens, was to take a plunge in the cold spring water at the old Roman Bath just a few hundred yards from this hall. On the other hand, it is also true that people feel as if the economy is in the worst possible shape. Difficult issues in their own right, such as mounting government debts, aging of the population and challenges brought about by globalization, are exacerbated by stagnant growth.』
[外部リンク] Tale of Two Cities in the Eyes of a Central Banker Remarks by Toshihiko Fukui, Governor of the Bank of Japan, at Japan Society, New York on Thursday, January 6, 2005
脚注では『Mishkin, Frederic S., “The Role of House Prices in Formulating Monetary Policy,” Speech at the Forecasters Club of New York, January 17, 2007.を参照。』とあったりするのでした(^^)。
[外部リンク] Risk Management Approach to Monetary Policy
今日は『Two Different Perspectives on the Economy』の所である。
『Central bankers must formulate monetary policy with the understanding that our knowledge is imperfect. We may have incomplete and sometimes competing views of the forces that generate current economic conditions. This is especially true in the difficult circumstances we face today.』
ほほう。
『In my view, we should try to formulate a monetary policy strategy that carefully balances the risks associated with the reasonable alternative economic scenarios that we face and is as robust as possible to miscalculations as to which of these scenarios is predominantly true.』
『Let me now discuss two quite different perspectives that could account for the disappointing slow growth and continued high unemployment that we confront today. These two conditions are important to consider in that they have markedly different monetary policy prescriptions.』
『The first storyline I will refer to as the “structural impediments scenario.” In this scenario, the recent period, which has been referred to as the Great Recession, was accompanied by an acute period of structural change, skills mismatch, job-killing uncertainties and excessive regulatory burdens. Accordingly, these structural impediments have caused the natural rate of unemployment to increase.』
『The structural impediments scenario sounds plausible to many, but I do not find it compelling. As best I can tell, it rests on lots of conjecture about economic forces and outcomes that are not confirmed by the evidence at hand. As an economist seeking firm quantitative explanations, I am not aware of any rigorously studied economic models that both match critically important time-series properties of the data and support the notion that today’s high unemployment rate arises from special structural impediments. Even generous estimates of the impact of structural reallocation and other factors on today’s equilibrium, or the so-called natural rate of unemployment, do not come anywhere near the current 9 percent rate of unemployment.』
『Nevertheless suppose this scenario were true. In this case the role for additional monetary accommodation is modest at best: The economy faces a supply constraint that monetary policy simply cannot address. Accordingly, those subscribing to this view think that additional easing would likely raise inflation without having a sizable impact on unemployment. In this scenario, our running a more accommodative monetary policy potentially risks repeating the stagflation of the 1970s. At that time, the Fed did not understand that the changing structure of the economy had caused the natural rate of unemployment to rise. In an effort to reduce the unemployment rate, it provided too much accommodation that only served to raise inflation and inflation expectations. To avoid that mistake today, under the structural impediments scenario, the Fed should revert to a “business-as-usual” monetary policy and begin to consider removing excess accommodation before inflation rises above its target and inflation expectations start to creep unalterably upward.』
でもって一方のシナリオは「流動性トラップシナリオ」というものです。
『There is a second competing storyline - one that I refer to as the “liquidity trap scenario.” First, consider what occurs during normal times when nominal rates of interest are considerably above zero and real rates of interest are positive. If the supply of savings increased but the demand for investment remained unchanged, market forces would drive down real interest rates to some natural rate of interest that equilibrates savings and investment. This market dynamic is thwarted in the case of a liquidity trap.』
現状ではデレバレッジやリスク回避の動きに加えて名目ゼロ金利制約によって投資が拡大しませんと。 『Here, cautious behavior holding back spending - whether it is due to risk aversion, extreme patience or deleveraging - causes the supply of savings to exceed the demand for investment even at very low interest rates. Today short-term, risk-free interest rates are close to zero and actual real rates are only modestly negative. But they are still not low enough - because short-term nominal interest rates cannot fall below zero, real rates cannot become negative enough to equilibrate savings and investment.』
で、ラインハートとロゴフの「This Time Is Different」が出てくる。
『As I weigh the evidence, I find the case for the liquidity trap scenario more compelling than one for the structural impediments scenario. My assessment has been influenced by the book titled This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly by Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff. Reinhart and Rogoff document the substantially detrimental effects that financial crises typically impose on the subsequent economic recovery. As we all know, the recent recession was accompanied by a large financial crisis. When I look at the U.S. economy today, I see it tracking Reinhart and Rogoff’s observation that such recoveries are usually painfully slow - and are so for reasons that have little to do with structural impediments in the labor market and the like.』
『Liquidity traps are rare and difficult events to manage. They present a clear and present danger that we risk repeating the experience of the U.S. in the 1930s or that of Japan over the past 20 years.』
日本もそうですなあそうなったら困りますなあとな。
『However, liquidity traps have been studied over the years in rigorous analytical models by a number of prominent economists, including Paul Krugman, Gauti Eggertsson, Michael Woodford and Ivan Werning. Variants of these models have successfully explained business cycle developments in the United States.』
で、ここの部分の脚注を見ると『See Eggertsson and Woodford (2003); Krugman (1998); and Werning (2011).』ってあるんですが、クルーグマンはこの前「正直スマンカッタ」って話をしてたような気がするんだがががががが。
『The lesson drawn from this literature is that the performance of economies stuck in a liquidity trap can be vastly improved by lowering real interest rates and lifting economic activity using an appropriately prolonged and forward-looking period of accommodative monetary policy. Of course, such monetary accommodation is the antithesis of the policy prescription for the structural impediments scenario.』
[外部リンク] III liquidity standard and strategy for assessing implementation of standards endorsed by Group of Governors and Heads of Supervision 8 January 2012
[外部リンク] Council statement on resignation of Swiss National Bank Chairman, Philipp Hildebrand
Loss of an outstanding central banker
『The Bank Council of the Swiss National Bank (SNB) has taken note of the decision by Philipp Hildebrand, Chairman of the SNB Governing Board, to resign his post. With him, Switzerland is losing an outstanding central banker with excellent international connections, which have brought great benefit to our country.』
ほうほうそうですか(棒)という所ですがサイダーはまずいだろサイダーは・・・・・
○金曜に微妙にネタになっていたネタ
WSJより(全文は有料記事だが検索エンジン経由の場合見れる場合もあり) [外部リンク] Banks Get 'Stress Tests'
ということで何でまたこの時期にストレステストよという感じですが。
『TOKYO-The International Monetary Fund is conducting "stress tests" on Japanese banks to gauge how vulnerable they are to a potential drop in the value of their huge holdings of Japanese government bonds, people familiar with the matter said. The move could sharpen investors' focus on the risk to Japan's economy from its ballooning debt.』
『Credit-ratings firms, investors, and even Japan's central-bank governor have expressed concerns about the growing debt, now equal to about twice the country's annual economic output, but much of the attention has been on the government's ability to sustain its large budget deficits. 』(以上上記URLより、以下は有料記事)
以下は有料記事の為引用しませんけど、まあ話としては日本の財政がアレで金利が急騰したら日本の銀行がエライコッチャであることを懸念するのでストレステストをするでしょうというような記事ですが、まあこの手の記事によくある毎度おなじみのソース、『people familiar with the matter』って奴なのが実にこうアレな上に書きっぷりがどうも日本に対して悪意ある記事だわとか思う訳で、日本の心配する前にお前らの心配しやがれや雨公はと思ってよくよくこの記事のクレジット見たら『By TAKASHI NAKAMICHI』って海外メディアに良く存在する反日あるいは侮日日本人ですかそうですかこんなの日本入国拒否モンだろこんなのという感じではございましたです、はい。ちなみに、IMFでは「Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP)」というのをやっていまして、過去のレポートとかこちらを見ると出ています。
[外部リンク] Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) Last updated: Monday, November 14, 2011
んでもって年ごとのソート(デフォだとそうなっている)と国ごとのソート(Sort By: Date | Countryという所をクリックするあるよろしある)ができますが、日本の場合は2003年の9月に実施されています。
[外部リンク] Financial System Stability Assessment and Supplementary Information Published: September 5, 2003
[外部リンク] of Japan’s Quantitative and Credit Easing: Are They Now More Effective?
『Summary: This paper asks whether the BoJ’s recent experience with unconventional monetary easing has been effective in supporting economic activity and inflation. Using a structural VAR model, the paper finds some evidence that BoJ’s monetary policy measures during 1998-2010 have had an impact on economic activity but less so on inflation. These results are stronger than those in earlier studies looking at the quantitative easing period up to 2006 and may reflect more effective credit channel as a result of improvements in the banking and corporate sectors. Nevertheless, the relative contribution of monetary policy measures to the variation in output and inflation is rather small.』
ほうほうそうですか。
雑談が長くなりまして恐縮至極ですがお題の話を少々(時間ががががが)。
○シカゴ連銀エバンス総裁の講演より
12月5日の講演ですが何を今さらとか突っ込まないように。
[外部リンク] Risk Management Approach to Monetary Policy
『Mr. Evans dissented because he continued to view additional policy accommodation as appropriate in circumstances where his outlook was for growth to be too slow to make sufficient progress in reducing the unemployment rate and for inflation to drop below levels consistent with the Committee's dual mandate. He continued to support the use of more-explicit forward guidance about the economic conditions under which the federal funds rate could be maintained in its current range, and he suggested that the Committee also consider additional asset purchases.』(12月FOMC議事要旨より)でまあこの主張の背景になる話(ちなみにFOMCは12月13日ね)をこちらで行っていますです。まあ最初にこういう話をしているのが当然ながらチャーミングですが。『For those of you who follow monetary policy deliberations, you will certainly be aware that I was the lone dissenter at the last policy meeting held in early November. So it should come as no surprise when I say that the views that I am presenting today are my own and not necessarily those of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) or my other colleagues in the Federal Reserve System.』
『This timing, along with the continued softness of most economic indicators into the early summer, indicates that the slowing in output growth was not all due to temporary factors. Even with slightly firmer economic data that have come out recently, the sense of building momentum seems absent. Rather, the headwinds facing consumers and businesses are even stronger than we had thought.』
で、その結果としてのまとめですが。
『Against this backdrop, the outlook has weakened substantially.』
キタコレ。
『Last June my colleagues on the FOMC and I were projecting real GDP growth would be around 2-3/4 percent in 2011 and 3-1/2 percent in 2012. As I alluded to a moment ago, some of the recent incoming numbers - on manufacturing activity and automobile sales, for example - have improved. Even so, our latest forecast made in early November revised down our outlook for 2011 by a full percentage point and projected GDP growth at just 2-3/4 percent in 2012 - barely above most analysts’ views of the potential rate of output growth for the economy.』
ということでFOMCの見通しも下がりましたと。
『Such growth rates certainly are not strong enough to make much of a dent in the unemployment rate and other measures of resource slack.』
このような成長率では失業や経済のスラックの改善には不十分と。
『Indeed, the FOMC’s latest forecasts are for the unemployment rate to remain above 8-1/2 percent through 2012 and to fall only to about 8 percent in 2013. Without new developments or changes in policy, I don’t believe the U.S. economy is poised to achieve escape velocity anytime soon.』
ということで追加の政策が必要ですよ、というのがエバンス総裁の追加緩和主張の根拠
・物価はこの調子だとマンデート以下の水準に落ちますという話
次の小見出しが『Inflation Outlook under 2 Percent』とキタコレな話。
『Putting these factors together, I would argue that inflation is likely to remain moderate over the foreseeable future. The FOMC forecasts for core inflation were concentrated near 1.8 percent this year, and its forecasts for total inflation were in the range of 1.5 percent to 2.0 percent for 2012, 2013 and 2014. My own assessment is that inflation will be at the lower end of these ranges.』
『These disappointing forecasts pose a challenge for monetary policy. The Fed is charged by Congress in the Federal Reserve Act to encourage conditions that foster both maximum employment and price stability. This is what you hear us refer to as the Fed’s “dual mandate.” Given the high unemployment rate and low job growth, I think it is clear that the Fed has fallen short in achieving its goal of maximum employment.』
Fedはマンデートの「maximum employment」のゴールに達していないキタコレ。
『I will return to this point shortly. As for the price stability component of our dual mandate, the majority of FOMC participants - including me - judge our objective for overall inflation to average 2 percent over the medium term. With my own view that inflation is likely to run below this rate over the next few years, I believe we run the risk of missing on our inflation objective as well.』
・・・・・という認識の下で、じゃあどういう政策をするかという話ですが、FOMC議事要旨にある『the use of more-explicit forward guidance about the economic conditions under which the federal funds rate could be maintained in its current range』ということですけれども、その趣旨に関してが続きでして、今日は前座の部分で時間切れとなりましたどうもすいませんすいません。
