Getty Images

A balloonist in Bristol, southwest England checks the ropes as he prepares for take-off Friday. Bristol’s annual International Balloon Fiesta is Europe’s largest hot air balloon festival and attracts thousands of spectators. This year’s perfect weather conditions allowed more than 100 balloons to rise into the skies above the city on the river Avon.

 

Avoiding Europe’s Carbon Trading Missteps

Early carbon trading efforts in the European Union flopped because regulators created too many credits and gave them away for free. Washington wants to do better.

 


Export Jump Brings Hope for End of Crisis

German’s Federal Statistics Office released export figures for June on Friday, and they have a lot of people smiling. Exports grew to 68.5 billion euros, a 7 percent rise over May’s figure. The data is the latest in a string of positive economic news being released around the world.

 

Democratic lawmakers welcomed news of slightly improved July jobless numbers Friday, crediting the stimulus package enacted earlier this year and vowing to pursue more relief efforts in the months to come. [Read More]

 

Your conventionally minded editor isn’t used to seeing a Federal Reserve chairman take his monetary policy show on the road. Then again, we’re from the old school, and we’re not used to seeing pigs fly either. But we’re obviously out of touch in the 21st century.

Ours is a world where formality gives way to “transparency,” which comes in an ever-widening rainbow of colors. Fed chairman Ben Bernanke’s “publicity tour” is certainly something new in the bag of central banking tricks. We thought that participating in so-called town hall forums and taking questions from the audience was an art reserved for politicians and talk-show hosts. We’re wrong. It’s also now just another tool in the otherwise dull business of managing money supply.

The old veneer of banking ceremony is fading, giving way to a penchant for empathy and personality tours. Imagine our surprise when we discovered that Mr. Bernanke was “disgusted” by some of the Fed’s recent actions, as he explained to an inquiring member of the audience in yesterday’s PBS television episode. Speaking of the various bailouts last fall, the Fed head confessed: “Nothing made me more angry than having to intervene, particularly in a few cases where companies took wild bets.” Perhaps he might have simply said that the devil made him do it. Personally, we’d have like to see some tears to make the confession more convincing.

In any case, at least we know our Fed chairman is now sympathetic to the working man. Sure, the central bank has made some tough decisions, but it also has a heart. Expressing compassion of a sort for the little guy when setting interest rates and engaging in other activity looks to be the new new thing. Big, impersonal banking institutions are out; warm and fuzzy I-feel-your-pain monetary policy is in.

Is any of this surprising in the media-infested 21st century? Perhaps not. Indeed, Mr. Bernanke, whose term is up next year, is running for re-election to the Fed and of course he’s intent on pulling every lever available on his behalf. Of course, before we can decide if his campaign is worthy of support we’ll need to see his monetary policy platform. If it’s superior to the plans of the rival candidates vying to run the Fed, well, perhaps Ben deserves another term.

To get the word out, Mr. Bernanke may want to consider running television ads in key districts. Sure, it’ll be hard to capture viewers’ attention by proclaiming to have a better monetary policy than the other guy. Television, it seems, just wasn’t made for dispensing the finer points of quantitative easing and the value of watching M1 vs. M2. But, hey, that’s a minor obstacle. Ben needs to speak to the man on the street, especially in those swing-voter districts that could tip the balance in what promises to be a tight race.

Actually, there’s a bigger problem. Fed chairman aren’t popularly elected, at least not yet. And last we checked, there are no obvious rival candidates openly campaigning for the Ben’s position, at least not yet. Instead, the Fed chief is appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, or so we’re told.

Appearances can be Deceiving by James Picerno

As a result, any resemblance between Mr. Bernanke’s campaign for re-election—sorry, we meant reappointment—is merely coincidental.

 

There is something inherently counterintuitive, if not absurd, in the perception that a 1% increase in the inflation of my flower-pot is more damaging than the enormous swings we have all just experienced in the value of our wealth.

Translating the above into wonk-speak, if there is one major shake-up that this financial crisis should bring about, it is, in my opinion, the re-thinking of monetary policy as we know it… including the role of asset prices in the framing of policy rules and objectives.

To be sure, there have been plenty of papers arguing why asset prices should NOT be the direct focus of policy-makers (rather, an indirect objective, to the extent that they influence the prices of goods and services)—including by our Fed Chairman himself.

But I find these arguments wanting… To start with, they tend to rest on assumptions that have not been conclusively determined by economists (such as the size of wealth effects on consumption); or, they posit an asset bubble process that is exogenous, including to the policy tool itself (admittedly, the latter more reflects economists’ ignorance/ disagreement on how bubbles are formed).

But beyond these “small-scale” criticisms, the most important weakness I see has to do with what is currently a “consensus” about the objective of monetary policy itself. Unless one begins to rethink what monetary policy should be about, and what it should target, the arguments for or against asset-price targeting become frustratingly circular.

Monetary Policy Make-over by Models & Agents

 

From World Affairs Journal:

“Nineteen eighty-nine was a most extraordinary year. There are other years that are imprinted on historic memory, but most of them were occasions for horrible events (1917 or 1939) or disappointing ones (1789 or 1848) or the conclusions of great tragedies (1648 or 1945). The year 1989 was that rare moment when dramatic things happened that were overwhelmingly beneficent. As we watched the world change before our eyes, we learned many things. Looking back today on how the world has evolved in twenty years since that momentous time, we can distill several additional insights.”

Read Essay

 

From the Mises Institute:

Obama and the Economy by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

© 2012 New Jersey CFO Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha