Log in

View Full Version : Wall Street celebrates Fed announcement, sending US stocks to record highs



Czy
19th December 2013, 20:12
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/12/19/fomc-d19.html


By Barry Grey

19 December 2013

Wall Street celebrated yesterday’s decision of the US Federal Reserve Board to virtually guarantee near-zero interest rates for at least another year, while gradually cutting back its massive bond purchases, by sending the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index to record highs.

The stock indexes began to soar Wednesday afternoon after the Fed’s policy-making Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) released its statement following a two-day meeting. Prices continued to spiral upward during a press conference by outgoing Fed chairman Ben Bernanke, who repeatedly assured the banks and corporations that, despite the beginning of “tapering” of the Fed’s quantitative easing bond-buying program, monetary policy would remain “highly accommodative” for the foreseeable future.

In plain language, this means the US central bank will continue to make credit available to the major banks on a virtually unlimited and nearly free basis, promoting ever-higher stock prices, corporate profits and personal wealth for the rich and the super-rich.

Bernanke several times during his hour-long press conference pointed to the “extended forward guidance” on interest rates given by the Fed in its policy statement. He was referring to language amending the Fed’s previous pledge to begin increasing its benchmark federal funds rate once the official unemployment rate fell to 6.5 percent.

Wednesday’s FOMC statement says: “The Committee now anticipates… that it likely will be appropriate to maintain the current target range for the federal funds rate well past the time that the unemployment rate declines below 6.5 percent…” (Emphasis added).

This language was calculated to offset market concerns over a paring back of Fed asset purchases, by making an unprecedented pledge to keep interest rates at historic lows.

To drive home the point, Bernanke told the assembled press: “Nothing we did today was intended to reduce accommodation.” In response to a reporter’s question, he stated categorically that the spigot of cash to the financial markets would remain open under his likely successor, current Fed vice chairman Janet Yellen, nominated by President Obama to succeed Bernanke when he steps down on January 31.

The Dow ended the trading day up 292 points, or 1.8 percent, closing at a record high of 16,167. The S& P 500 jumped 29 points (1.7 percent) to a record 1,810. The Nasdaq composite index soared 46 points (1.2 percent), closing at 4,070.

The Fed has kept its benchmark interest rate at between zero and 0.25 percent since the end of 2008. The policy statement it released Wednesday suggests it could remain at the near-zero level until 2016, after which it would likely remain below 2 percent.

For most of this period, the Fed has also been pumping huge amounts of cash into the financial markets by purchasing Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities in three separate rounds of what it has called “quantitative easing” (QE). To do so, it has effectively printed trillions of dollars to subsidize the banks, hedge funds and big speculators.

The combination of virtually free credit and cash infusions has had the intended effect of fueling an unprecedented boom in the stock market and financial assets in general. Since late 2008, the Fed’s asset holdings have ballooned from $870 billion to nearly $4 trillion—one measure of the scale of the use of public funds to prop up the financial elite.

The S&P 500 index has nearly tripled in value since hitting a low of 666 in the spring of 2009, following the Wall Street crash of September 2008. This year alone, it has risen by 25 percent.

The current round of QE began in September 2012, with the Fed buying $85 billion a month ($1 trillion a year) of Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed assets. For some months, the Fed has been talking of beginning to trim its asset purchases, claiming such a move to be warranted by an improving labor market.

In fact, the real economy, beneath the frenzied money-making in the financial markets, remains mired in slump, with unemployment at near-depression levels, notwithstanding official figures that grossly understate the level of joblessness. In its statement Wednesday, the Fed pointed to a decline in the official jobless rate to 7.0 percent, but it knows full well that most of the decline is the result of millions of long-term unemployed people dropping out of the labor market, and therefore not being counted in the government’s estimate.

The US economy has grown at an average annual rate of just 2.3 percent since the recession officially ended in June 2009. This compares to a 4.1 percent average for the first four years of other expansions since World War II.

In an economic forecast that accompanied its Wednesday policy statement, the Fed predicted the US economy would grow by only 2.2 percent to 2.3 percent for all of 2013, with the official jobless rate ending the year at 7.0 to 7.1 percent. The central bank forecasts that the economy will grow by 3.0 percent to 3.4 percent in 2015, and between 2.5 percent and 3.2 percent in 2016.

By 2016, according to the Fed’s estimates, the jobless rate will have declined to 5.3 percent to 5.8 percent. In May 2007, prior to the financial meltdown, the official unemployment rate was 4.4 percent.

The FOMC statement makes the point that inflation is running well below the Fed’s target rate of 2 percent. This is part of a broader phenomenon, with inflation in Europe at less than 1 percent. The extremely low inflation rate is a further expression of the deeply recessionary, even deflationary, state of the real economy.

The main reason for the Fed’s move to gradually reduce its asset purchases is fear that the financial bubble it has fueled will burst, triggering another financial crisis even worse than the 2008 disaster. The FOMC statement said the Fed would, beginning in January, reduce its monthly purchases of Treasury bonds from $40 billion to $35 billion, and cut its purchases of mortgage-backed securities from $35 billion to $30 billion, for a net reduction in asset-buying from $85 billion to $75 billion.

The statement said the Fed would “likely reduce the pace of asset purchases in further measured steps at future meetings.”

The Fed’s ongoing windfall for Wall Street takes place the very week that the Obama administration and Congress pushed through a budget that allows unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed to lapse, slashes federal employee pensions and continues the “sequester” budget-cutting framework. It also coincides with the near-completion of a farm bill that will further slash food stamp benefits for millions of Americans.

The class axis of government policy—directed at impoverishing the working class and further enriching the corporate-financial elite—could hardly be more naked.

Prof. Oblivion
20th December 2013, 05:26
For most of this period, the Fed has also been pumping huge amounts of cash into the financial markets by purchasing Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities in three separate rounds of what it has called “quantitative easing” (QE). To do so, it has effectively printed trillions of dollars to subsidize the banks, hedge funds and big speculators.


What does this mean?



In fact, the real economy, beneath the frenzied money-making in the financial markets, remains mired in slump, with unemployment at near-depression levels, notwithstanding official figures that grossly understate the level of joblessness. In its statement Wednesday, the Fed pointed to a decline in the official jobless rate to 7.0 percent, but it knows full well that most of the decline is the result of millions of long-term unemployed people dropping out of the labor market, and therefore not being counted in the government’s estimate.


All measures of unemployment LTM are down. U6 went down from 14.4% to 13.2%. U6 during the Great Depression peaked at around 35%.


The FOMC statement makes the point that inflation is running well below the Fed’s target rate of 2 percent. This is part of a broader phenomenon, with inflation in Europe at less than 1 percent. The extremely low inflation rate is a further expression of the deeply recessionary, even deflationary, state of the real economy.


This doesn't even make sense. Low inflation isn't deflationary. Negative inflation is deflationary.


The main reason for the Fed’s move to gradually reduce its asset purchases is fear that the financial bubble it has fueled will burst, triggering another financial crisis even worse than the 2008 disaster. The FOMC statement said the Fed would, beginning in January, reduce its monthly purchases of Treasury bonds from $40 billion to $35 billion, and cut its purchases of mortgage-backed securities from $35 billion to $30 billion, for a net reduction in asset-buying from $85 billion to $75 billion.

There is, by not even a single data point, no indication whatsoever that there is a "financial bubble" created by Fed monetary policy. This right wing libertarian garbage has no place on a leftist forum. Based on articles I've read by WSWS recently it seems like they're just recruiting libertarians to write for them.

Proteus2
20th December 2013, 22:57
For most of this period, the Fed has also been pumping huge amounts of cash into the financial markets by purchasing Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities in three separate rounds of what it has called “quantitative easing” (QE). To do so, it has effectively printed trillions of dollars to subsidize the banks, hedge funds and big speculators.


What does this mean?


It means that the very same people who love taking about free markets never participate in them. These banks wouldn't make a cent if it wasn't for the taxpayer. They're just machines for hoovering up taxpayers cash.

Prof. Oblivion
20th December 2013, 23:32
That didn't answer my questions. How does "printing money" "subsidize the banks, hedge funds and big speculators"? By lowering interest rates? That affects everyone.

Also, your post made zero sense because mine to which you responded had nothing to do with tax money.

Proteus2
20th December 2013, 23:50
That didn't answer my questions. How does "printing money" "subsidize the banks, hedge funds and big speculators"? By lowering interest rates? That affects everyone.

Also, your post made zero sense because mine to which you responded had nothing to do with tax money.

Usually what the banks do does effect everybody. Printing the money might affect the power of the currency overall but it is primarily to boost dividends and salaries and give a synthetic boost to growth figures. As per the tax thing, it of course has an effect on tax payers. The fed is not an abstract entity, its using domestic taxes to feed the big banks. Printing more notes lowers the value of the taxpayers money and purley on a moral slant, why should US citizens do anything for private tyrannies?

Prof. Oblivion
21st December 2013, 00:21
Usually what the banks do does effect everybody. Printing the money might affect the power of the currency overall but it is primarily to boost dividends and salaries and give a synthetic boost to growth figures. As per the tax thing, it of course has an effect on tax payers. The fed is not an abstract entity, its using domestic taxes to feed the big banks. Printing more notes lowers the value of the taxpayers money and purley on a moral slant, why should US citizens do anything for private tyrannies?

Fed policy is based on economic, not financial indicators. Also, QE doesn't inflate the currency. This common right-wing trope is discredited by the fact that this money doesn't enter the economy but rather sits in the banks' reserve accounts. The purpose is to lower long term interest rates and rebalance bank balance sheets. I don't think you know much about the Fed or the money creation system.

AmilcarCabral
21st December 2013, 01:30
USA is turning into India or Saudi Arabia. What a tragedy, a few getting super rich, while most americans are getting poorer, because of these neoliberal dollar devaluation policies are causing a rise in all the food prices of supermarket shelves. But since most people are not very scientific, since most people are not curious about the underlying causes of their destruction of their own living standards and their own shitty lives without any pleasures, with all their money they are earning literally belonging to electricity corporations, mortgage corporations. And not even 1 dollar for a chocolate bar, or to go out to eat pizza with the family on weekend. What would probably happen in this country that is very anti-politics, where the majority of young teens and young americans are totally anti-politics is that many girls witll get into internet porn, or prostitution as a way to earn extra money and pay bills and males into illegal black market activities in the near future. There is also the threat of the rise of property theft, and other forms of crimes. Because nations that are not very politically aware and conscious about how politics plays a role in the real world, resort to crimes as a tool of survival



https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/12/19/fomc-d19.html

Proteus2
21st December 2013, 03:19
Fed policy is based on economic, not financial indicators. Also, QE doesn't inflate the currency. This common right-wing trope is discredited by the fact that this money doesn't enter the economy but rather sits in the banks' reserve accounts. The purpose is to lower long term interest rates and rebalance bank balance sheets. I don't think you know much about the Fed or the money creation system.

Hang on now. Of course it inflates, there is more notes per wealth, ie, inflation. Its cheaply mortgaging taxes for banks. Even if it sits in the vaults it is underwritten capital that a bank can use to loan. it must inflate even if it is actually ethereal.

Prof. Oblivion
21st December 2013, 03:59
Hang on now. Of course it inflates, there is more notes per wealth, ie, inflation. Its cheaply mortgaging taxes for banks. Even if it sits in the vaults it is underwritten capital that a bank can use to loan. it must inflate even if it is actually ethereal.

Banks aren't capital constrained.

Proteus2
21st December 2013, 04:44
Banks aren't capital constrained.

??? I'm not sure what that means. The government is basically using QE to underwrite the possible losses by the big banks. Investment banks don't make money, they are always underwritten by the state. Its inflating the bubble and inviting it to explode. Investment banks, in their simplest definition, are private institutions that use federal funds to pay dividends and salaries because they are in themselves unviable businesses incapable of real surplus but they have huge political power and the state reacts to aid them.

Prof. Oblivion
21st December 2013, 04:57
??? I'm not sure what that means.

Banks don't borrow based on the capital they hold.


The government is basically using QE to underwrite the possible losses by the big banks.

Only in terms of the toxic assets being purchased, otherwise the government is just using the banks' reserve accounts to improve the banks' balance sheets. The primary purpose of QE is to bring down the long end of the yield curve.


Investment banks don't make money, they are always underwritten by the state.

I don't even know what this means.


Its inflating the bubble and inviting it to explode.

There is no financial bubble.


Investment banks, in their simplest definition, are private institutions that use federal funds to pay dividends and salaries because they are in themselves unviable businesses incapable of real surplus but they have huge political power and the state reacts to aid them.

Uh, what? What is it exactly that you think an investment bank does?

Proteus2
21st December 2013, 05:28
Banks don't borrow based on the capital they hold.

Doesn't say much. I could claim my cat doesn't borrow based on the capital it holds. I'm not sure if its relevant.


Only in terms of the toxic assets being purchased, otherwise the government is just using the banks' reserve accounts to improve the banks' balance sheets. The primary purpose of QE is to bring down the long end of the yield curve.

I basically agree. These huge companies have economic/political power and this means state aid for whatever crisis.

I reply to the rest later because I need links and its to late. Anyway thanks.

AmilcarCabral
21st December 2013, 05:48
Dear brothers and sisters: The truth is that in the near future the pound of chicken will be go up to about 2 dollars per pound. And then pretty soon to about 3 dollars per lb. Right now the pound of a whole fryer chicken (A basic food, basic form of protein) costs about 1 dollar to 1.50 per lb. While the chicken leg quarters are priced between 5.90 per 10 lbs. in Wal Mart and 6.90 per 10 lbs. in other supermarkets. The oppressed and low-wage families rely on chicken leg quarters, for their meat and protein needs. Pretty soon chicken leg quarters will also get more expensive. In the near future we will have to share food with others. We cannot just preach communist, we have to practice communist sharing. It would be good idea to buy food for the prisoners as well and the elderly in nursing homes.

We have to think more about others, than our own selves

BIXX
21st December 2013, 10:26
Dear brothers and sisters: The truth is that in the near future the pound of chicken will be go up to about 2 dollars per pound. And then pretty soon to about 3 dollars per lb. Right now the pound of a whole fryer chicken (A basic food, basic form of protein) costs about 1 dollar to 1.50 per lb. While the chicken leg quarters are priced between 5.90 per 10 lbs. in Wal Mart and 6.90 per 10 lbs. in other supermarkets. The oppressed and low-wage families rely on chicken leg quarters, for their meat and protein needs. Pretty soon chicken leg quarters will also get more expensive. In the near future we will have to share food with others. We cannot just preach communist, we have to practice communist sharing. It would be good idea to buy food for the prisoners as well and the elderly in nursing homes.

We have to think more about others, than our own selves


This line of thought only applies if you have enough money to worry about others.

What I would like to see is people stealing food. It's cheap and (which a bit of practice) easy. Plus a lot of places will give you vegetables if you say it's to feed an animal, and we can dumpster dive.

Prof. Oblivion
21st December 2013, 15:59
Doesn't say much. I could claim my cat doesn't borrow based on the capital it holds. I'm not sure if its relevant.

It's 100% relevant because you claimed that they did:

Hang on now. Of course it inflates, there is more notes per wealth, ie, inflation. Its cheaply mortgaging taxes for banks. Even if it sits in the vaults it is underwritten capital that a bank can use to loan. it must inflate even if it is actually ethereal."



I basically agree. These huge companies have economic/political power and this means state aid for whatever crisis.


No, you don't agree at all. That is why I am arguing with you about it. This entire thread you've specifically disagreed with me, precisely regarding what you just quoted and said you agreed with.

ckaihatsu
21st December 2013, 21:31
Fed policy is based on economic, not financial indicators. Also, QE doesn't inflate the currency. This common right-wing trope is discredited by the fact that this money doesn't enter the economy but rather sits in the banks' reserve accounts. The purpose is to lower long term interest rates and rebalance bank balance sheets.


Agreed, and 'thanks' for this part.





Dear brothers and sisters: The truth is that in the near future the pound of chicken will be go up to about 2 dollars per pound. And then pretty soon to about 3 dollars per lb. Right now the pound of a whole fryer chicken (A basic food, basic form of protein) costs about 1 dollar to 1.50 per lb. While the chicken leg quarters are priced between 5.90 per 10 lbs. in Wal Mart and 6.90 per 10 lbs. in other supermarkets. The oppressed and low-wage families rely on chicken leg quarters, for their meat and protein needs. Pretty soon chicken leg quarters will also get more expensive. In the near future we will have to share food with others. We cannot just preach communist, we have to practice communist sharing. It would be good idea to buy food for the prisoners as well and the elderly in nursing homes.

We have to think more about others, than our own selves


While this might be good rhetoric for a populist political speech, the scaremongering comes right out of the libertarian playbook -- anticipating hyperinflation in the real economy when in fact there's nothing of the sort going on, or even *likely* to happen.

Inflation has been negligible, and really the *opposite* is the case -- *deflation* (or over-valuation) is prevailing as a result of the stagnating economy, the Fed's underwriting of risk, runaway cash-hoarding, and the accompanied lack of investment in productive activity.





I'll [...] add that really the *converse* is the case -- it's *deflation* that's no good for wage-earners, because in such a case -- like today -- businesses are *hoarding* cash and *not* investing in growth, as for employment. Instead, capital is 'running for cover' and looking to simply *retain value* at the lowest risks possible to wait out a no-growth economy. Flights of capital in this way are what cause bubbles, or the over-valuation of certain assets, like Bitcoin -- which, incidentally, are of no use to workers since it's just money that's effectively taken out of circulation.

ckaihatsu
25th December 2013, 18:50
---





[I've] come to recognize the [quantitative easing] program for what it really is: the greatest backdoor Wall Street bailout of all time.




http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303763804579183680751473884

cyu
27th December 2013, 02:03
How much money people have to spend determines how resources are allocated in the economy. If the rich can afford to pay a lot for plastic surgery and botox, then a lot of health care resources will be allocated to providing plastic surgery and botox for the rich. If the poor cannot afford to pay a lot for vaccines, then not much health care resources will be allocated to providing vaccines for the poor.

But it goes much further than simply health care resources. If the rich can pay a lot for mansions, yachts, or helicopters, then a lot of educational, raw material, and engineering resources will be allocated toward providing mansions, yachts, and helicopters for the rich. And if the poor cannot afford to pay much, then not much economic resources will be providing food, health care, or housing for the poor.

The greater the gap between rich and poor, the more economic resources are misallocated.

What does this have to do with banks and other financial institutions? The more control that is concentrated in fewer hands, the less transparent their decisions are, the easier it is for those who are in control to make themselves exceedingly rich. If it destroys resource allocation to the point of open revolt, it may lead to rolling heads, regardless of whether the revolutionaries claim communist ideology or not.