Fed Monetizes 1 Trillion in MBS and Treasuries for 2013

Quote from CT10Gov:

Why do you think they wouldn't? reserve requirement is explicitly one of their tools.

You also didn't address my point that the balancesheet will effectively shrink when they allow their SOMA portfolio to mature. No action needed.

Wouldn't encouraging banks to move money from reserves parked at the Fed into the economy further exacerbate any inflation issues?

As for your answer on shrinking the balance sheet when their SOMA portfolio matures, I'm sorry for not seeing your question. Of course it would. But how would this reduce the amount of money in the system?

Additionally, if they stop adding to their balance sheet, what do you think will happen to the market? Ie, if they cancel throwing $85B into the market every month, what do you anticipate will happen?
 
Quote from achilles28:

What's lost in this debate is the forest from the trees.

The Federal Government and Central Bank do not have the luxury of time while they rack up the national debt. That's the point. Time is against us. The ongoing shit-show in Europe is a prelude to our future. That's what they peanut gallery can't seem to wrap their heads around. FED apologists laud our debt-financed interventionism, while major parts of Europe, are insolvent from their own excessive borrowing. Which proportionately, is not much greater than our own.

Reinhart and Rogoff compiled an exhaustive work on the outcomes of net creditor nations that take on excessive debt, and their outcomes. Past 90% debt-to-GDP, the likelihood of a large depression is high. Past 100-110%, the likelihood of a default/restructuring/major depression/currency collapse is high. This is not the first time in history idiots have leveraged their countries into bankruptcy with dire consequences. This has happened over and over and over again. The argument that we are somehow "special", that it "can't happen here", is pure nonsense. Piezoe is convinced we are not Portugal, Spain, or even Italy. Crisis avoided because Piezoe says everything will be a-okay.

The facts are worth repeating and examination. The magnitude of Federal borrowing and Central Bank QE to keep this economy on life support is shocking. State and Local Governments not withstanding, the Federal Government is borrowing roughly 7% of GDP, per year (1.1 Trillion). The FED plans to purchase another 500 Billion, per year, in non-treasury related securities (MBS), to boost the economy further (QE3 or 4??). This amounts to total net borrowings of 1.6 Trillion dollars for 2013, which translates to 10% of GDP. Throw in the fiscal multiplier (~1.6), and we're short about 16% GDP. This is a massive fucking hole. This cannot be "dug out of" with "shovel-ready' "make-work" bullshit rhetoric. We have a serious motherfucking problem here.

The point I made at the beginning of the thread holds relevance. The Federal Reserve is upping it's MBS purchases to take pressure off the budget deficit. It's moving the debt off the public balance sheet, onto the FED's balance sheet. It's more an accounting trick to win market confidence. Either way, it doesn't hide the fact the economy is still short 10% GDP raw (16% GDP with the fiscal multiplier).

What happens next? Assuming the markets can be fooled with the accounting game, the official US budget deficit will be used to calculate debt-to-GDP. At a 7% annual budget deficit, we've got 4 years until America hits 130% debt-to-GDP. That's pretty much where capital markets balked at refinancing Greek, Portuguese and Italian paper. It's where those countries effectively went bankrupt.

The response from Keynesians is Japan. Always Japan. Japan is a net creditor nation. We are not. The total amount of foreign holdings of Japanese sovereign debt are miniscule compared to the BOJ's holdings of foreign securities. The reverse is true for America (and Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy, France, the UK etc). There is no anchor to the dollar, past a certain point.

The same idiots who got us into this mess, intend to push us to the brink of a currency collapse, in the name of staving off a secular depression. Think about the idiocy of that for a moment. You've got clowns like CTGov who can't see past the transactional minutia, to KTM, who drives a tractor trailer through the rear-view mirror. This type of backward, reactionary, "stability at all costs" policy has dominated Keynesian thought, post-Volker. It's largely political strategy to keep corporate owners happy, with no respect to the principles of true Keynesian economics (raise rates and run surpluses during booms), or for the need to invoke painful short-term decisions to ensure long-term growth and dollar stability. We are led by the same fools who didn't see the housing collapse coming, who caused it, and now want to take us to Italian and Spanish debt levels, to "solve this". Does this sound like a horror movie yet? It should.

We have three options:

1) Continue down the current path, and in 4 years, nationalize Treasury markets and collapse the dollar. This is where we go back to 2nd World living standards. This is exactly where the Keynesian fools are taking us.

2) End all QE, all bailouts, all deficits. Let the economy collapse and ride out a massive depression. We could see a GDP contraction upwards of 20%, but we'd save the dollar, our own asses, and US global hegemony in the process.

3) Invent some type of revolutionary technology, like free energy, faster-than-light travel, or teleportation, that would effectively "soak up" all this outstanding debt, without impacting our living standard in any meaningful way.

Thank you for bringing the discussion back to this. I agree 99%. The only 1% I would point out is that Japan has been running trade deficits the last few months, if memory serves. That changes the dynamic there considerably.
 
Quote from Tsing Tao:

Thank you for bringing the discussion back to this. I agree 99%. The only 1% I would point out is that Japan has been running trade deficits the last few months, if memory serves. That changes the dynamic there considerably.

My pleasure. We got lost in the reeds, there.

Could you elaborate on the trade deficit?
 
Quote from Tsing Tao:

As for your answer on shrinking the balance sheet when their SOMA portfolio matures, I'm sorry for not seeing your question. Of course it would. But how would this reduce the amount of money in the system?

Additionally, if they stop adding to their balance sheet, what do you think will happen to the market? Ie, if they cancel throwing $85B into the market every month, what do you anticipate will happen?

Again, I don't see how you are not understanding this: when a bond/MBS in SOMA matures/paysoff, the money comes out of the money supply to replace the security on the Fed Balance Sheet: the money supply decreases.

As for what happens when they stop buying treasuries? My personal belief as a former treasuries trader and a current global macro trader: rates go up and equities go up: not because there's no buyer, but because the Fed is signaling (or, likely, confirming) that we are in good times again.

(I'm sorry I really don't want to move forward with the side tracked discussion about MBS; I hate the freaking MBS space - it's why I stopped trading it at some point in my career; It's a really complicated area that's a LOT more liquid that most people think (in fact, just below treasuries), but I'm sick of talking about it. I think a good introduction text on the subject will clear up a lot of your questions)
 
Quote from achilles28:

My pleasure. We got lost in the reeds, there.

Could you elaborate on the trade deficit?

Japan%20Trade%20Balance.jpg


Japan used to enjoy creditor status, but with trade deficits like this that have to be funded (if it continues), they'll be our bosom buddies soon enough.
 
Quote from CT10Gov:

Again, I don't see how you are not understanding this: when a bond/MBS in SOMA matures/paysoff, the money comes out of the money supply to replace the security on the Fed Balance Sheet: the money supply decreases.

Ok, let me say it a different way, perhaps I'm not being clear with where I'm going. On a 10 year note, when does the cash enter the money supply and when does it come out?

Quote from CT10Gov:


As for what happens when they stop buying treasuries? My personal belief as a former treasuries trader and a current global macro trader: rates go up and equities go up: not because there's no buyer, but because the Fed is signaling (or, likely, confirming) that we are in good times again.

Agree, back in the "old normal". With our debt now, there's no way we can afford for rates to go up, and unless we get on a sustainable debt reducing track (fat chance there) we'll never be able to tolerate higher interest payments. Ever. Ergo, don't expect the expansion of the Fed's sheet to take place. It will continue to expand. Perhaps even "exponentially".

When the Fed gets out of the US debt market, bond holders are going to demand much, much higher rates for the risk their taking on.

Quote from CT10Gov:


(I'm sorry I really don't want to move forward with the side tracked discussion about MBS; I hate the freaking MBS space - it's why I stopped trading it at some point in my career; It's a really complicated area that's a LOT more liquid that most people think (in fact, just below treasuries), but I'm sick of talking about it. I think a good introduction text on the subject will clear up a lot of your questions)

I don't have a lot of questions, and I never wanted to talk about it in the first place :) However, I would like to personally thank you for engaging in a stimulating conversation without personal attacks. I tip my hat to you, sir, even if you are a Fed Apologist :p
 
Quote from Tsing Tao:

Ok, let me say it a different way, perhaps I'm not being clear with where I'm going. On a 10 year note, when does the cash enter the money supply and when does it come out?


When the Fed buys a 10Y note for its SOMA, it will pay the dealer cash. So, cash is released into the dealer's account. When the 10Y note matures, the Fed as the holder of that note, is entitled to the notional value of the note. That amount is then paid from the money supply(*) to the Fed.

(*) Well, the treasury pays the notional. But the treasury pays it from the G part of GDP via tax or expenditure cuts (ha!) and not the magical fed balance sheet, so it's the same as money out of the money supply.

This, by the way, if why the Fed reinvest the pay downs and interest from SOMA... otherwise, it's effectively shrinking the money supply. To be clear: no change in the SOMA account leads to a shrinking money supply

Quote from Tsing Tao:


When the Fed gets out of the US debt market, bond holders are going to demand much, much higher rates for the risk their taking on.

Yes.... what's the problem? Yield will go up... 2%, 3%, 4%, etc... as it should. This is how it's suppose to work, no? The Fed exits when the economy rebounds, and rate will move in the expansion cycle of the economy.

Quote from Tsing Tao:

However, I would like to personally thank you for engaging in a stimulating conversation without personal attacks. I tip my hat to you, sir, even if you are a Fed Apologist :p

Thank you, I'm only engaging because I don't think you are an ET loon.

Quote from Tsing Tao:

even if you are a Fed Apologist :p

Hey now.... I thought we are being civil. For the record, I'm not sure what the Fed is doing will work; If it does, it will validate Bernanke's life work on how to deal with a depression. If it doesn't.... well, I hope it does.

But that being said, I do think the VAST majority of popular critique of the Fed is based on complete ignorance of how the Fed works.
 
Quote from CT10Gov:

When the Fed buys a 10Y note for its SOMA, it will pay the dealer cash. So, cash is released into the dealer's account. When the 10Y note matures, the Fed as the holder of that note, is entitled to the notional value of the note. That amount is then paid from the money supply(*) to the Fed.

(*) Well, the treasury pays the notional. But the treasury pays it from the G part of GDP via tax or expenditure cuts (ha!) and not the magical fed balance sheet, so it's the same as money out of the money supply.

This, by the way, if why the Fed reinvest the pay downs and interest from SOMA... otherwise, it's effectively shrinking the money supply. To be clear: no change in the SOMA account leads to a shrinking money supply



Yes.... what's the problem? Yield will go up... 2%, 3%, 4%, etc... as it should. This is how it's suppose to work, no? The Fed exits when the economy rebounds, and rate will move in the expansion cycle of the economy.



Thank you, I'm only engaging because I don't think you are an ET loon.



Hey now.... I thought we are being civil. For the record, I'm not sure what the Fed is doing will work; If it does, it will validate Bernanke's life work on how to deal with a depression. If it doesn't.... well, I hope it does.

But that being said, I do think the VAST majority of popular critique of the Fed is based on complete ignorance of how the Fed works.

The Fed apologist comment was a joke, hence the smiley following it.

As for the 10y note, the cash goes into the dealer account right away, and it is this increase in the money supply that would combat any near term attempt at hiking rates (not that I believe that will ever happen, which brings me to my next response)...


Quote from CT10Gov:


Yes.... what's the problem? Yield will go up... 2%, 3%, 4%, etc... as it should. This is how it's suppose to work, no? The Fed exits when the economy rebounds, and rate will move in the expansion cycle of the economy.

Agree, this is how it's supposed to work. I just don't see how the Fed can ever let yields go up knowing that when we do, we won't be able to afford it.
 
Quote from Tsing Tao:

Agree, this is how it's supposed to work. I just don't see how the Fed can ever let yields go up knowing that when we do, we won't be able to afford it.

Okay, maybe this is the part that's not connecting: the fed will WANT rates to go up when the economy is in solid expansion. The Fed will keep the rates down until that happens.

We can't afford it? Why the hell not? We can easily afford a 4-5x increase in interest payment (not to mention higher revenue when we are in expansion mode). And I'm unwilling to bet that the US can't roll its debt as it gets into expansion. This aint' going to be greece - we got land and aircraft carriers.
 
Quote from Tsing Tao:

it is this increase in the money supply that would combat any near term attempt at hiking rates

I'm totally confused by this... SOMA is part of the monetary policy. So is hiking rates.... why would one need to combat the other?

Further, again, no more purchase in SOMA is actually contractionary. So, no SOMA purchase + hiking rates will work in the same direction.
 
Back
Top