The Once and Future Fed – and Treasury

R. Hockett
{"title":"The Once and Future Fed – and Treasury","authors":"R. Hockett","doi":"10.1080/05775132.2021.1932143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract I argue that central banks cannot perform their familiar function of modulating credit-money aggregates without engaging in at least some degree of credit-allocation - specifically, to productive rather than speculative projects - on their own or in collaboration with finance ministries. I show further that the “spread Fed” in the U.S., operative from 1913 to 1935 and working in close collaboration with Treasury, did just that, and that it was error to end rather than supplement this practice. That error in turn stemmed from a misdiagnosis of where the Fed had gone wrong during the early 1930s. The Fed had gone wrong not in thinking “real bills” discounting necessary to good allocation and modulation of credit, but in thinking it sufficient. For while much of the money supply is endogenous as Wicksell taught, some of it is not - as Wicksell also taught. In future, the Fed will have to return to its allocative pre-1935 focus on productive investment facilitated by regional Fed discounting on the one hand, while retaining its modulatory post-1935 apparatus (FOMC, FRBNY Trading Desk, etc.) for counteracting exogenous shocks to the money supply on the other hand. It will have to attend, in other words, both to Wicksellian “bank money” and to Wicksellian “cumulative processes.” I call the upshot a “Spread,” “Wicksellian,” or “Two-Bladed Scissors” Fed.","PeriodicalId":88850,"journal":{"name":"Challenge (Atlanta, Ga.)","volume":"3 1","pages":"280 - 291"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Challenge (Atlanta, Ga.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/05775132.2021.1932143","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract I argue that central banks cannot perform their familiar function of modulating credit-money aggregates without engaging in at least some degree of credit-allocation - specifically, to productive rather than speculative projects - on their own or in collaboration with finance ministries. I show further that the “spread Fed” in the U.S., operative from 1913 to 1935 and working in close collaboration with Treasury, did just that, and that it was error to end rather than supplement this practice. That error in turn stemmed from a misdiagnosis of where the Fed had gone wrong during the early 1930s. The Fed had gone wrong not in thinking “real bills” discounting necessary to good allocation and modulation of credit, but in thinking it sufficient. For while much of the money supply is endogenous as Wicksell taught, some of it is not - as Wicksell also taught. In future, the Fed will have to return to its allocative pre-1935 focus on productive investment facilitated by regional Fed discounting on the one hand, while retaining its modulatory post-1935 apparatus (FOMC, FRBNY Trading Desk, etc.) for counteracting exogenous shocks to the money supply on the other hand. It will have to attend, in other words, both to Wicksellian “bank money” and to Wicksellian “cumulative processes.” I call the upshot a “Spread,” “Wicksellian,” or “Two-Bladed Scissors” Fed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
过去和未来的美联储和财政部
我认为,如果中央银行不参与至少某种程度的信贷分配——特别是生产性项目,而不是投机性项目——它们自己或与财政部合作,就无法履行它们所熟悉的调节信贷货币总量的职能。我进一步指出,美国1913年至1935年与财政部密切合作的“价差美联储”就是这样做的,结束而不是补充这种做法是错误的。这一错误反过来又源于对上世纪30年代初美联储错误所在的错误判断。美联储的错误不在于认为“实物票据”贴现对于良好的信贷分配和调节是必要的,而在于认为这已经足够了。正如威克塞尔所言,大部分货币供给是内生的,但也有一些并非如此。未来,美联储将不得不回归1935年之前的配置重点,一方面是通过地区性美联储贴现促进生产性投资,另一方面保留1935年之后的调节机构(联邦公开市场委员会、纽约联邦储备银行交易台等),以抵消外部对货币供应的冲击。换句话说,它必须同时关注Wicksellian的“银行资金”和Wicksellian的“累积过程”。我把这种结果称为“价差”、“威克塞尔式”或“双刃剪刀式”美联储。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Fiscal Stimulus Caused Only 1% of the 8% Rise in U.S. Inflation Institutions as Instruments of Social Welfare “Not a Thing” Seven Legal Reasons the Federal “Debt Ceiling” is Null & Void John Maynard Keynes Narrates the Great Depression: His Reports to the Philips Electronics Firm Notice of duplicate publication: “Globalization and the Labor Market: An Economic Approach.”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1