BEING STREET SMART
by Sy Harding
Enough With The Fed's Transparency Already!
When Ben Bernanke became chairman of the Federal Reserve in
2006 he promised a significant change. The Fed would be much more ‘transparent’
in letting markets and the public know more about its inner workings, its
concerns, its internal debates, its potential decisions. He has certainly kept
his promise.
But sometimes I yearn for the days of former Fed chairmen
Paul Volcker and Alan Greenspan, who revealed nothing of what the Fed was
thinking. Greenspan was particularly adept at befuddling even Congressional
committees with his famous “fed-speak” language that left committee members and
analysts asking afterwards, “Wha’d he say?”
That approach of providing no transparency helped get the
economy through a lot of problems during their combined decades in office. We
only found out long afterward how worried the Fed had been at various times,
knowledge that no doubt would have resulted in several panics had the Fed been
transparent with its concerns at the time.
How well has it worked out having the Fed providing more
transparency since 2006?
In February, 2008 in the early stage of the 2008-2009
recession, we saw Fed Chairman Bernanke and then Treasury Secretary Paulson in
televised Congressional hearings on the economy and financial markets. You would
think all participants would want to boost the chances of their new rescue
efforts working, by providing the public with as much positive bias as possible.
But no, in the interest of full transparency, we had
Bernanke warning about how the Fed expected still more negative pressure ahead
from the housing collapse, worsening labor markets, a credit crunch that may
have still more shoes to drop, and revealing that the Fed was also beginning to
worry about the potential for rising inflation.
That was really brilliant. Spend big bucks on stimulus plans
aimed at boosting public confidence that more serious problems could be averted,
and then completely undermine the effort with transparency that revealed still
more worries in the Fed’s thinking.
Since then the transparency has increased. The Fed’s
statements after its FOMC meetings have become more revealing, the actual
minutes of the meetings are now released within a few weeks, and this year
Chairman Bernanke has begun holding a press conference following the meetings to
provide any lingering information or questions not provided in the FOMC
statement.
The result has been that over the last three years markets
have been forced to focus not so much on the normal driving forces of markets,
the economy and earnings, but on what the Fed is worried about, what its members
are thinking, what tools it is discussing that it could bring into play if
needed, and what might trigger potential market-moving action.
And Chairman Bernanke admitted in his press conference
yesterday that the Fed is targeting the stock market as a large part of its
effort to improve the employment picture. He seemed to agree that QE1 and QE2
did not result in the additional liquidity going directly into jobs and the
economy, and QE3 may not either, but that it will hopefully lower long-term
interest rates, including mortgage rates, and possibly increase asset prices.
And he said, “To the extent that the prices of homes begin to rise, consumers
will feel wealthier, they’ll begin to feel more disposed to spend. So house
prices are one vehicle. . . . And stock prices – many people own stocks directly
or indirectly. The issue is whether improving asset prices will make people more
willing to spend.”
One has to wonder.
If using interest rate cuts, and then QE1, QE2, and
‘operation twist’ to bring 30-year mortgage rates down to generational lows of
3.6% has not jump-started the housing market to any great extent, would 3.2%
make any meaningful difference? Mortgage rates do not seem to be the problem for
would-be home buyers. Tightened lending practices, lack of jobs, and uncertainty
about the future are the problems.
Will the dramatic action have its apparent other desired
result, another leg up for the stock market. Or will it result in a sell-off,
given that expectation of the Fed action has pretty much been factored in since
the market’s June low?
For investors, it was bad enough that the action alone
indicated the Fed believes the economy and threat of a global recession have
become so alarming that it could wait no longer and had to fire off such a huge
barrage of measures all at once, virtually emptying its arsenal of meaningful
weapons.
So the further uncertainties Chairman Bernanke felt
compelled to provide in his press conference were not needed, and may have done
more harm than good to the Fed’s intentions.
Bernanke certainly did not take European Central Bank
President Draghi’s positive and encouraging approach. In promising ECB action
Draghi said “The ECB will do whatever it takes to save the euro - and believe me
it will be enough.”
But in his press
conference, while saying the Fed’s target is unemployment, Chairman Bernanke
kept repeating that the Fed’s monetary action “is not a panacea”, that it will
not solve the unemployment or slowing economy problems, that it can only
“provide some support”, that further help would have to come from the fiscal
side (Congress). He also said several times in response to questions that “The
Fed does not have tools that are strong enough to solve the unemployment
problem.”
The Fed’s action would have a better chance of producing the
sustained positive market reaction the Fed apparently is after, if the Fed had
simply taken the action and shut-up. Chairman Bernanke’s penchant for
‘transparency’ has caused more uncertainties than clarity over the years since
adopted.
And it did so again this time to a degree that a positive
market reaction is far from assured.
Meanwhile, I’m still liking our buy signal on gold and 20%
holding in GLD, and sell signal on U.S. Treasury bonds, and 20% holding in the
ProShares Short 20-year bond etf, symbol TBF.
Sy Harding is president of Asset Management Research Corp, and editor of www.StreetSmartReport.com, and the free market blog, www.streetsmartpost.com. He can also be followed on Twitter @streetsmartpost
Editors: You are welcome to quote from this article, or use it in its entirety, in your publication or on your website, as long as the credit in the above paragraph is also included. Readers are also welcome to e-mail, or print and snail-mail it to friends.
These reports reflect our opinions and are based on our best judgment, but no warranty is given or implied as to their accuracy. Past performance does not guarantee future performance.
Back to the Top Home Subscribe to RSS Feed
Copyright © 2012
Asset Management Research Corp. -- ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.