Banks and Monetary Policy: the Mechanics of Interest Rates Setting

We hear a lot about interest rates, and not only in my professional field of expertise. Interest rates are everywhere to be found in our daily lives: credit card interest, interest on deposits, car loan interest, personal loan interest, treasury bond interest. The other day I received a spam e-mail that said: “Need new socks ? Apply for our Family Loan – competitive interest rates”. Since I am single and own approximately fifty pairs of socks – they seem to be the preferred Christmas present in my household – I decided not to push the ‘Click Here’ button. But just what are the mechanics of interest rate setting? Who decides which interest rate to charge to whom – and how?

Paul Volcker, while chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (1979-87), was often called the second most powerful person in the United States. Volcker triggered the “double-dip” recessions of 1979-80 and 1981-82, vanquishing the double-digit inflation of 1979-80 and bringing the unemployment rate into double digits for the first time since 1940. Volcker then declared victory over inflation and piloted the economy through its long 1980s recovery, bringing unemployment below 5.5 percent, half a point lower than in the 1978-79 boom and helping Ronald Reagan convert the American people to Reaganomics. Volcker was powerful because he was making monetary policy. Central banks are powerful everywhere for the same reason, although few are as independent of their governments as the Fed is of Congress and the White House. Central bank actions are the most important government policies affecting economic activity from quarter to quarter or year to year.

» Read more: Banks and Monetary Policy: the Mechanics of Interest Rates Setting

Related posts

Does monetary policy have asymmetric effects on stock returns

IT HAS BEEN OF GREAT interest to both macroeconomists and financial economists of whether monetary policy affects stock returns. A number of studies have empirically investigated the effects of monetary policy on stock returns. Using money aggregate data as a measure of money supply, some empirical studies agree that stock returns lag behind changes in monetary policy; for instance, see Keran (1971), Homa and Jaffee (1971), and Hamburner and Kochin (1972). In contrast, Cooper (1974), Pesando (1974), Rozeff (1974), and Rogalski and Vinso (1977) show that there is no significant forecasting power of past changes in money. Ever since the seminal paper by Bernanke and Blinder (1992), the Federal funds rate has been the most widely used measure of monetary policy. As such, the relationship between monetary policy and stock returns has been reexamined by using the interest rate instrument in the financial literature. Thorbecke (1997) and Patelis (1997) demonstrate that shifts in monetary policy help to explain U.S. stock returns. Conover, Jensen, and Johnson (1999) show that foreign stock returns generally react both to local and U.S. monetary policy.

Two important contributions to the literature on the effects of monetary policy on the stock market have been made. The first one emphasizes the roles of financial markets’ expectations about the future course of monetary policy. Bernanke and Kuttner (2003) extract unanticipated monetary policy from Federal funds futures and find that monetary policy surprises appear to have a significant effect on equity prices through changes in the equity premium. The second focus is on the prospect of endogeneity. Rigobon and Sack (2003) show that the causality between interest rates and stock prices may run in both directions. After accounting for this endogeneity, they find a significant monetary policy response to the stock market.

» Read more: Does monetary policy have asymmetric effects on stock returns

Related posts

Special Education Inclusion

Special education inclusion signifies the participation of special education students in regular education classrooms and provision of support services to these students. The main objective of inclusion education is that all students in a school, regardless of their strengths and their weaknesses in any area, become part of the school community. Every student develops a feeling of belonging with other students, teachers, and support staff. In segregated special education, children will not learn how to function in a non-disabled world. For instance, children who are disabled in terms of communication and are emotionally distressed would not communicate and might remain in a more emotionally disturbed state in segregated settings. The federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) holds it mandatory for schools to educate children with disabilities in general education classrooms.

» Read more: Special Education Inclusion

Related posts