Central banks are wrong to abandon key guardrails - FT中文网
登录×
电子邮件/用户名
密码
记住我
请输入邮箱和密码进行绑定操作:
请输入手机号码,通过短信验证(目前仅支持中国大陆地区的手机号):
请您阅读我们的用户注册协议隐私权保护政策,点击下方按钮即视为您接受。
观点 FT财富之管理

Central banks are wrong to abandon key guardrails

Emerging markets can teach us all a lesson about the importance of not relying solely on discretion
00:00

The writer is a former central banker and a professor of finance at the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business

Macroeconomic policy in industrial countries has become much more discretionary of late, and not necessarily in a good way. When sensible, it is focused on the long term, and moves to stabilise the economic cycle rather than accentuate it. So the government should shrink deficits when the economy is doing well, even as monetary policy gets tighter, and the opposite should happen when the economy is doing poorly. One benefit of pulling back policy stimulus in boom times is that it preserves the capacity to intervene in downturns.

However, few politicians like to cut back when the economy is doing well, and central bankers might be unwilling to incur public ire by raising rates just as the party gets going. Countries with dysfunctional politics are particularly prone to overspending and contractionary policies set in only when there are no other alternatives.

Recognising the folly of such cycle-accentuating policies, many industrial countries previously adopted self-constraining guardrails such as inflation-targeting frameworks for the central bank, deficit rules and debt brakes for the government, and so on. Over time, as they saw economic volatility in industrial countries moderate, a number of emerging markets got religion and adopted these guardrails.

So far, so Economics 101. The global financial crisis of 2008 upended the political consensus. Central banks came under scrutiny, not so much for missing the pre-crisis risk-taking, but for not doing enough to revive growth — after all, inflation was consistently below target post-crisis. And so they pulled out all the stops, holding rates at zero for long periods, and engaging in quantitative easing. The Federal Reserve even changed its framework to target average inflation, committing to be more tolerant if it materialised.

Even before economies had normalised, though, the pandemic hit in 2020, followed by the Ukraine war. Government spending took off, with the rationale that these rare events were nobody’s fault, and everyone’s suffering should be alleviated. Fiscal concerns and constraining guardrails were overridden.

In the US, every constituency, from pensioners to airlines, was appeased through multiple rounds of stimulus. A bond market anaesthetised by Fed bond buying showed little concern. The spending contributed to inflation that the Fed, held back by its more tolerant framework, was initially slow to address. However, even as it has raised rates rapidly, the US continues with fiscal deficits of a size never seen outside recessions. With Congress divided, it is hard to see these shrinking significantly. Monetary policy is fighting fiscal policy, a textbook no-no.

There seems to be little urgency to rein in spending elsewhere either. Europe intends to return to its rules on deficits next year, but it is unlikely these will be enforced for some time. The over-indebted Japanese government’s latest supplementary budget is intended to help citizens with rising prices, even as inflation is taking off.

Interestingly, some emerging markets such as Brazil and Mexico have been much more cautious in expanding deficits. Borrowing was contained. They raised rates early, when they saw signs of inflation. Consequently, they have not experienced the usual emerging market jitters. Orthodox policy guardrails have stabilised their outcomes, despite significant domestic political volatility.

Notwithstanding such examples, there is a tendency among some industrial country policymakers to claim they do not need to restore their abandoned guardrails. They assume they will use discretion wisely. If only! Politics are likely to become yet more dysfunctional, not just in the US, but also in Europe, as countries grapple with ageing, immigration and climate action, even as debt service eats away more and more government revenues. In this regard, the German Constitutional Court’s decision to restore pre-pandemic constraints on deficits should be welcomed.

With the inflation genie unleashed, central banks need to refocus their frameworks on combating high inflation rather than being tolerant of it. The Fed seems to have rightly abandoned average inflation targeting, not least because recent high levels may require it to go well below 2 per cent if it is to reach a reasonable average. When inflation is tamed, the Fed will have to revisit its framework, perhaps restoring much of the pre-pandemic one.

Of course, reinstating macroeconomic guardrails may not do much to constrain Donald Trump, who even threatens democracy if he is restored to power. But as emerging markets have learnt, every little helps.

版权声明:本文版权归FT中文网所有,未经允许任何单位或个人不得转载,复制或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵权必究。

中国如何改变AI估值的游戏规则

竞争优势的本质已经超越了埃隆•马斯克旗下XAI Holdings所追求的垂直整合模式。

战时创伤会代代相传

第二次世界大战的政治影响或许正在逐渐消退,但个人所承受的创伤却难以抹去。

萨姆•奥尔特曼的眼球扫描项目“世界”在美国首次亮相

特朗普政府对加密货币的友好态度为该公司在美国的推出扫清了道路。

充满敌意的互联网如何让我们疯狂

网络上最后的友爱与创造力正被所谓的人工智能浪潮席卷而去。

外国公司涌入“熊猫债券”市场,寻求在中国避险

较低的融资成本和对美中关系恶化的防护吸引了跨国公司。

珍妮特•耶伦警告称,特朗普关税将带来“极其不利”的影响

前美国财政部长表示,全球最大经济体发生衰退的几率“大幅上升”。
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×