Must-Read: Lawrence Summers: The Fed Looks Set to Make a Dangerous Mistake

Must-Read: Let me note, in agreement with Summers, that, all four times in the past forty years that the Federal Reserve has embarked on a significant tightening cycle, the tightening has revealed significant and dangerous previously-underappreciated financial vulnerabilities.

Given the widespread perception several years ago–and as my friend Larry Summers’s chief internet apologist during the public discussion of whether Barack Obama should nominate him or Janet Yellen to chair the Fed, I know how widespread this perception was–that Larry Summers was more conservative than Janet Yellen, why she now appears much less averse to raising interest rates than he is is something that I find very interesting to note…

Lawrence Summers: The Fed Looks Set to Make a Dangerous Mistake: “The Federal Reserve’s September meeting [might] see US interest rates go up…

…[and] barring major unforeseen… will probably be increased by the end of the year…. Raising rates in the near future would be a serious error…. [It would] risk… inflation… lower than [the Fed’s target]. More than half the components of the consumer price index have declined in the past six months…. Market-based measures of expectations suggest… the next 10 years[‘] inflation will be well under 2 per cent…. Tightening policy will adversely affect employment levels…. At a time of rising inequality… tight labour markets… [are] the best social programme for disadvantaged workers…. There may have been a financial stability case for raising rates six or nine months ago…. That debate is now moot. With credit becoming more expensive, the outlook for the Chinese economy clouded at best, emerging markets submerging, the US stock market in a correction, widespread concerns about liquidity, and expected volatility having increased at a near-record rate, markets are themselves dampening any euphoria…. [Instead] raising rates risks tipping some part of the financial system into crisis….

Why, then, do so many believe that a rate increase is necessary?…. If rates were now 4%, there would [not] be much pressure to raise them…. Pressure comes from a sense that the economy has substantially normalised… and so the extraordinary stimulus of zero interest rates should be withdrawn…. Whatever merit this view had a few years ago, it is much less plausible as we approach the seventh anniversary of the collapse of Lehman Brothers. It is no longer easy to think of economic conditions that can plausibly be seen as temporary headwinds. Fiscal drag is over. Banks are well capitalised. Corporations are flush with cash. Household balance sheets are substantially repaired…. More plausible is the view that… the global economy has difficulty generating demand for all that can be produced. This is the ‘secular stagnation’ diagnosis, or the very similar idea that Ben Bernanke, former Fed chairman, has urged of a ‘savings glut’…. New conditions require new policies… steps to promote public and private investment so as to raise the level of real interest rates consistent with full employment. Unless these new policies are implemented, inflation sharply accelerates, or euphoria in markets breaks out, there is no case for the Fed to adjust policy interest rates.

Must-Read: Paul Krugman: Nobody Could Have Predicted, Interest Rates Edition

Must-Read: Paul Krugman: Nobody Could Have Predicted, Interest Rates Edition: “I did see… people praising remarks from Charlie Munger…

…declaring himself ‘flabbergasted’ by low interest rates, with a sideswipe at anyone who claims to have had some inkling:

I think everybody’s been surprised by it, including all the people who are in the economics profession who kind of pretend they knew it all along. But I think practically everybody was flabbergasted. I was flabbergasted when they went low; when they went negative in Europe–I’m really flabbergasted.

Well, negative rates were a big shock; I had thought they were ruled out by the possibility of holding cash, and hadn’t thought the mechanics through. But this kind of ‘nobody saw it coming’ remark is, if you ask me, a big dodge…. There were different degrees of wrongness here. Read that WSJ piece, or anything just about everyone on the ‘Eek! Deficits!’ side was saying, and compare it with, say, what I had to say. One reveals a world-view that has been utterly refuted by events; the other looks pretty good in the light of experience. Pretending that everyone was equally flummoxed may make those who really were clueless feel better, but it’s not the truth.

Must-Read: Stan Collender: Paul Krugman Is Wrong

Must-Read: I remember back in 1993 Alan Blinder saying at Clinton administration meetings that it was very important to look at the government’s capital account as a whole–that if we did not work hard to educate people to know that cutting government capital spending was not a net debt-reducing measure in any real sense, we would someday be sorry.

He was right. We didn’t. We are.

Sorry, Alan:

Stan Collender: Paul Krugman Is Wrong: “Krugman doesn’t get to the real problem…

…it’s not that the scolds and naysayers don’t understand the economics of government borrowing, it’s that the facts don’t matter to them. In today’s political environment, channeling Alexander Hamilton by explaining the financial realities of borrowing won’t convince many people that it’s not the Greece-like catastrophe-waiting-to-happen they continually say it soon will be. That’s why it hasn’t made any difference that the promised, right-around-the-corner federal debt-induced economic disaster hasn’t occurred…. It’s also why the scare tactics about leaving future generations with a worse economic situation has only ever dealt with half the balance sheet… [and] ignored the benefits the borrowing makes possible and the better, longer, more productive and safer life created for our children and grandchildren by, for example, advances in medical research, infrastructure, education and defense…

Things to Read on the Morning of August 23, 2015

Noted for Your Nighttime Procrastination for August 22, 2015##

Screenshot 10 3 14 6 17 PM

Must- and Should-Reads:

Might Like to Be Aware of:

Must-Read: David Roberts: Carly Fiorina Did a 4-Minute Riff on Climate Change. Everything She Said Was Wrong

David Roberts: Carly Fiorina Did a 4-Minute Riff on Climate Change. Everything She Said Was Wrong: “Fiorina’s comments are a farrago of falsehoods and red herrings…

The key to a ‘moderate’ Republican position on climate change is that it has to neutralize the science…. Denialism, concentrated in conservative white men, has become a liability among… demographics Republicans badly need to court. So the trick for the aspiring Republican moderate is to acknowledge the scientific consensus on climate change while maintaining opposition to any policy that might penalize fossil fuels or advantage renewable energy…. Fiorina seems to have pulled it off, at least in the eyes of conservatives. There’s just one problem. After acknowledging the science at the outset, literally everything Fiorina says subsequently is false or misleading. And yes, I know what ‘literally’ means….

I have chosen a representative (but not exhaustive) sample of 10 misleading or false statements to address below. 1) ‘One nation, acting alone, can make no difference at all’…. First, it’s not true…. [Second] so what?… America is doing its small part and working to coordinate with other countries doing the same, building a framework of trust…. What’s the alternative?…. 2) California ‘destroys lives and livelihoods with environmental regulations’ California’s climate regulations are indeed the most ambitious in the nation…. Looks like the state is surviving its environmental regulations so far. 3) ‘The answer to this problem is innovation, not regulation’… mean[ing] tax breaks for favored industries like natural gas and ‘clean coal.’ (If any Republican has a broader plan to spur clean-energy innovation, I haven’t seen it.)… In reality, of course, it’s not an either-or…. 4) ‘China could care less’ if we try to reduce carbon…. It is not so…. 5) ‘China is delighted we’re not spending any time or energy figuring out clean coal’ This makes no sense…. 6) ‘Coal provides half the energy in this nation still’ No, it doesn’t. Coal provides 20 percent…. It could be that Fiorina meant half the electricity… but she would still be wrong. In 2014, coal produced 39 percent…. 7) ‘To say we’re basically going to outlaw coal, which is what this administration has done…’ No, it hasn’t. US coal has taken a beating from natural gas, renewables, and efficiency–the market, in other words–but it still provides more than a third of US electricity. And EPA expects that under the Clean Power Plan, that share will be at 27 percent in 2030…. 8) ‘Do we tell people the truth, that [wind technology] slaughters millions of birds?’ A recent peer-reviewed survey of bird mortality studies found that wind turbines kill between 214,000 and 368,000 birds a year, compared with 6.8 million that die from colliding with cell and radio towers and between 1.4 and 3.7 billion killed by cats…. 9) ‘Does anybody see how unsightly those huge wind turbines are?’ The poor communities where coal power plants, oil refineries, and other fossil fuel infrastructure tends to be located probably find those polluting facilities unsightly…. People seem okay with the huge wind turbines. 10) ‘Solar is great, but solar takes huge amounts of water’ No, it doesn’t…

Must-Read: Paul Krugman: Fairy Tales

Must-Read: As Keynes is rumored to have always said when anyone asked him about where any idea came from, “it’s in Marshall”…

Paul Krugman: Fairy Tales: “The origins of the phrase ‘confidence fairy’…

…I’m pretty sure–you can never be completely sure, because things can stick in your mind–that it was an original coinage on my part, a snappy way to characterize the deep implausibility of the Alesina-Ardagna stuff that was sweeping Brussels and other corridors of power in 2010…. But confidence-fairy type arguments and critiques of the same go back a long way…. And there’s a reason. As Mike Konczal, channeling Kalecki, pointed out … arguments rejecting Keynes and declaring that only business confidence can achieve full employment serve [the] very useful political purpose… [of] empower[ing] plutocrats and big business…. This is the story of Greece right now…. Syriza [has] no policy tools, nothing it can do except try to placate investors, which means… macro punishment… [and] forced… privatization…

Paul Krugman’s July 2010 use of the phrase “confidence fairy” is certainly the very first use of it in economics I have been able to find. But Alfred (and Mary) Marshall do have their 1885 “if confidence could return, touch all industries with her magic wand…” But I cannot imagine that Paul Krugman ever had enough idle time that reading all the way into the back of Economics of Industry seemed like a good idea…

And I want to push back against the Kalecki line: I don’t doubt that rich people think high unemployment and recession disciplines both the working class and the unworthy speculators, and so leaves them able to hire at a low wage and to pick up stranded assets cheaply. But it is not really true: America’s rich would have been better off in absolute terms (albeit not in relative) with growth at the pre-2007 trend since than they are now, and would definitely have been better off both in absolute and in relative terms without the Great Depression…

Must-Read: Ezra Klein: A Better Way to Read on the Internet

Must-Read: Ezra Klein: A Better Way to Read on the Internet: “I have figured out how to read online, and it is glorious…

…Diana Kimball… developed this system for ‘a decent digital commonplace book system.’… Clippings.io will export your Kindle notes and highlights in usable, searchable form–and then plug them directly into Evernote, so they’re available whenever you need them, and sortable in every way you might imagine. The difference here is profound…. My relationship with highlighted passages and notes has gone from one in which I have to find them to one in which they can unexpectedly, wonderfully find me. A search for, say, ‘filibuster’ will call up highlights and notes I wasn’t specifically looking for, and that I had actually forgotten, but that help….

A lot of what I read, however, isn’t books. It’s news articles, blog posts, magazine features. I’ve long wanted a cleaner way to save the best ideas, facts, and quotes I come across. Now I have one. Instapaper… recently added a highlight function…. Kimball created an If That Then This recipe that automatically exports Instapaper highlights into Evernote. So now anything I highlight in an article… on Instapaper is saved into the same searchable, sortable space that my book highlights inhabit…. It’s wonderful.

But there’s one exception…. DFs are the worst…. And yet a lot of what I read is in PDF…. If anyone out there has a good solution, I’d love to hear about it.

Things to Read on the Morning of August 21, 2015

Must- and Should-Reads:

Might Like to Be Aware of:

Over at Grasping Reality: Trekonomics Teaser Clip: The Prime Directive…

Over at Grasping Reality: Manu Saadia, the author of the forthcoming book, Trekonomics, discusses the economic theories behind the creation of the Star Trek with J. Bradford DeLong, professor of Economics at UC Berkeley and former Deputy Assistant Secretary at the US Treasury. Inkshares’ Adam Gomolin is the moderator:

The prime directive…: