DOCSLIB.ORG

Banks Are Not Intermediaries of Loanable Funds — Facts, Theory and Evidence Zoltan Jakab and Michael Kumhof

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Banks Are Not Intermediaries of Loanable Funds — Facts, Theory and Evidence Zoltan Jakab and Michael Kumhof CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 Code of Practice CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 CODE OF PRACTICE 2007 Staff Working Paper No. 761 Banks are not intermediaries of loanable funds — facts, theory and evidence Zoltan Jakab and Michael Kumhof June 2019 This is an updated version of the Staff Working Paper originally published on 26 October 2018 Staff Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to further debate. Any views expressed are solely those of the author(s) and so cannot be taken to represent those of the Bank of England or to state Bank of England policy. This paper should therefore not be reported as representing the views of the Bank of England or members of the Monetary Policy Committee, Financial Policy Committee or Prudential Regulation Committee. Staff Working Paper No. 761 Banks are not intermediaries of loanable funds — facts, theory and evidence Zoltan Jakab(1) and Michael Kumhof(2) Abstract In the loanable funds model, banks are modelled as resource-trading intermediaries that receive deposits of physical resources from savers before lending them to borrowers. In the financing model, banks are modelled as financial intermediaries whose loans are funded by ex-nihilo creation of ledger-entry deposits that facilitate payments among nonbanks. The financing model predicts larger and faster changes in bank lending and greater real effects of financial shocks. Aggregate bank balance sheets exhibit very high volatility, as predicted by financing models. Alternative explanations of volatility in physical savings, net securities purchases or asset valuations have almost no support in the data. Key words: Banks, financial intermediation, loanable funds, money creation, bank lending, bank financing, money demand. JEL classification: E41, E44, E51, G21. (1) International Monetary Fund. Email: [email protected] (2) Bank of England. Email: [email protected] The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Bank of England or the International Monetary Fund. This is a comprehensively revised draft of our 2015 Bank of England Staff Working Paper No. 529, ‘Banks are not intermediaries of loanable funds — and why this matters’. The authors are grateful for many comments and helpful suggestions from seminar participants at Autorité de Contrôle Prudentiel et de Résolution, Banco Central do Brasil, Banco de España, Bank of Finland, Bank of Italy, Bank of Korea, Bank of Lithuania, Banque de France, BIS, Bundesbank, Central Bank of Ireland, Central Bank of the Russian Federation, CEPR-IMFS Macro-Modeling Conference, CER-ETH Zürich, Czech National Bank, ECB, Econometric Society World Congress, Her Majesty’s Treasury, Institute of International and European Affairs, International Labor Organization, Kingston University, Money Macro and Finance Conference, National Bank of Poland, Österreichische Nationalbank, Oxford-New York Fed Conference on Monetary Economics, Princeton JRCPPF Conference, Royal Economic Society Annual Conference, Sciences Po, Sheffield University, Stockholm School of Economics, Universidad Carlos III, University of Essex, University of Geneva, University of Leeds, University of Nottingham, University of Saint Andrews, University of Surrey and University of Zürich. The Bank’s working paper series can be found at www.bankofengland.co.uk/working-paper/staff-working-papers Bank of England, Threadneedle Street, London, EC2R 8AH Telephone +44 (0)20 3461 4030 email [email protected] © Bank of England 2019 ISSN 1749-9135 (on-line) 1.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Nature of Money in Modern Economy –Implications and Consequences
    JKAU: Islamic Econ., Vol. 29 No. 2, pp: 57-73 (July 2016) DOI: 10.4197 / Islec. 29-2.4 The Nature of Money in Modern Economy –Implications and Consequences Stephen Zarlenga* and Robert Poteat** *Director, American Monetary Institute (AMI), New York, USA **Senior adviser to the AMI, New York, USA Abstract. This paper discusses the great importance of the monetary question, and briefly examines some of the dominant erroneous concepts of money and their effects upon societies. It also points and links to the great progress currently being made by researchers in this field, so readers can examine them more fully. It presents very brief summaries of what some of the important new papers do. It also aims at helping instructors in outlining a reading curriculum to assist in a long overdue understanding of money power. Finally, the paper presents a money and banking system proposal which has evolved since the Great Depression of the 1930s, and is now ready for implementation and has even been introduced as potential legislation into the United States Congress. 1. Introduction Perhaps no subject as important to mankind as the Finally, the authors will describe a money and nature of money has been so neglected and banking system proposal they are very familiar misunderstood in both the popular and professional with, which has evolved since the Great Depression mind, to the great detriment of the intelligent and of the 1930s, and is now ready for implementation just operation of societies. The author’s intent is to and has even been introduced as potential legislation discuss the great importance of the monetary into the United States Congress.
    [Show full text]
  • Cornell Law School
    CORNELL LAW SCHOOL Central Bank Money: Liability, Asset, or Equity of the Nation? Michael Kumhof(1), Jason Allen(2), Will Bateman(3), (4) (5) (6) Rosa Lastra , Simon Gleeson , Saule Omarova (1) CEPR and Centre for Macroeconomics. Email: [email protected] (2) Humboldt Universität zu Berlin. Email: jason.allen@hu‐berlin.de (3) Australian National University. Email: [email protected] (4) Queen Mary University of London. Email: [email protected] (5) Clifford Chance. Email: [email protected] (6) Cornell University. Email: [email protected] Cornell Law School research paper No. 20-46 Cornell Law School Myron Taylor Hall Ithaca, NY 14853-4901 This paper can be downloaded without charge from: The Social Science Research Network Electronic Paper Collection: http://ssrn.com/abstract=3730608 Draft 5 August 2020 Central Bank Money: Liability, Asset, or Equity of the Nation? Michael Kumhof(1), Jason Allen (2) Will Bateman (3), Rosa Lastra (4), Simon Gleeson (5), Saule Omarova (6) Abstract Based on legal arguments, we advocate a conceptual and normative shift in our understanding of the economic character of central bank money (CBM). The widespread treatment of CBM as a central bank liability goes back to the gold standard, and uses analogies with commercial bank balance sheets. However, CBM is sui generis and legally not comparable to commercial bank money. Furthermore, in modern economies, CBM holders cannot demand repayment of CBM in anything other than CBM. CBM is not an asset of central banks either, and it is not central bank shareholder equity because it does not confer the same ownership rights as regular shareholder equity.
    [Show full text]
  • Schedule for May 9-11 Conference (PDF)
    WELCOME Welcome to the 39th Eastern Economic Association Annual Meetings in New York, N.Y. Our incoming President-Elect Solomon Polachek, session chairs, organizers, and review committee have done a great job putting together this year’s program, which I hope you will find as intellectually exciting as I do. The program furthers the EEA’s tradition of encouraging intellectual debate, open to all points of view. I'd particularly like to welcome those attending the conference from other regions of the country and other parts of the world. This has been a year marked by challenges in the New York area, with hurricane Sandy closing down the Association’s home office for two weeks and postponing the New York District Fed Challenge program. As many of you know, the EEA has partnered with the Federal Reserve Banks of New York and Philadelphia, and the Federal Reserve Board of Governors to sponsor the Federal Reserve Bank Challenge. This program is a competition by which five person teams from various colleges make 15-minute presentations to academics, practitioners, and Fed economists as to whether the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee should raise, maintain, or lower the targeted Fed Funds Rate. Subsequently the panel of expert judges questions the students on a wide range of issues. By working with the Federal Reserve System, the EEA is fulfilling one of its missions by promoting economic education. I would like to thank the members of the Fed Challenge Advisory Board for their service: Howard Freeman, Ray Stone, CEO Stone & McCarthy Research Associates, Hank Bitten, Former Supervisor of Social Studies and Economics at Indian Hills High School and now happily retired, Blake Gwinn, Federal Reserve Bank of New York Markets Group, Charles Steindel, Chief Economist for the State of New Jersey, student representative Victor Castaneda, and professors Julio Huato (St.
    [Show full text]
  • The Macro-Economics of Crypto-Currencies: Balancing Entrepreneurialism and Monetary Policy
    ENTREPRENEURSHIP & POLICY WORKING PAPER SERIES The Macro-Economics of Crypto-Currencies: Balancing Entrepreneurialism and Monetary Policy Eli Noam In 2016, the Nasdaq Educational Foundation awarded the Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA) a multi-year grant to support initiatives at the intersection of digital entrepreneurship and public policy. Over the past three years, SIPA has undertaken new research, introduced new pedagogy, launched student venture competitions, and convened policy forums that have engaged scholars across Columbia University as well as entrepreneurs and leaders from both the public and private sectors. New research has covered three broad areas: Cities & Innovation; Digital Innovation & Entrepreneurial Solutions; and Emerging Global Digital Policy. Specific topics have included global education technology; cryptocurrencies and the new technologies of money; the urban innovation environment, with a focus on New York City; government measures to support the digital economy in Brazil, Shenzhen, China, and India; and entrepreneurship focused on addressing misinformation. With special thanks to the Nasdaq Educational Foundation for its support of SIPA’s Entrepreneurship and Policy Initiative. Table of Contents Abstract . 1 1. Introduction . 2. 2. A History of Governmental and Private Moneys . 2 A. United States . 3 . B. Other Examples of Private Moneys . .4 . 3. The Emergence of Electronic Moneys . 5 A. Electronic Moneys . 5 B. Distributed Ledger Technology . 6. C. Blockchain Technology . 6 D. Cryptocurrencies. 8 E. An Illustration of a Bitcoin Transaction . 9 4. Advantages and Drawbacks of Crypto-Currencies . 10 A. Advantages . 10 B. Problems . 11 C. The Potential for Improvements . 15 5. The Impact of Cryptocurrencies on Macro-Economic Policy .
    [Show full text]
  • The Monetary System in Crisis
    Future Finance – Discussion Paper No. 1, 07/2015 The monetary system in crisis Monetary reform proposals, and a simple suggestion for a more effective monetary policy Dr. Matthias Kroll 1 Contents Introduction 3 1. Fundamental problems of current monetary policies 4 2. The money reformers’ proposals 6 2.1. The Chicago Plan and 100% Money 7 2.2. From 100% Money to Vollgeld 8 2.3. The Benes/Kumhof IMF Working Paper 9 2.4. Narrow Banking 10 2.5. The monetary reform proposal of Stephen Zarlenga and Dennis Kucinich 12 2.6. Additional monetary reform proposals in the area of Vollgeld reform 13 3. The current reform proposals of Vollgeld and Positive Money 15 3.1. What do Vollgeld and Positive Money reformers seek to achieve? 15 3.2. The analytical starting point of Vollgeld and Positive Money reform 16 3.3. What does the Vollgeld reform proposal envisage? 16 4. Critique of the Money Reform Proposals 18 4.1. Problems during implementation of a Vollgeld reform 18 4.2. Problems after the implementation of Vollgeld reform 19 4.3. Is excessive lending preventable without a complete Vollgeld reform? 21 4.4. Is a “Partial Sovereign Money System” sufficient for achieving monetary reform? 22 5. Developing the Partial Sovereign Money System into a new fiscal policy 23 tool of the central bank 6. Regulating the banking sector is still necessary 26 Conclusion 27 Bibliography 2 Introduction From business-friendly journalists to radical monetary reformers, there is a shared understanding that our current monetary system, consisting of the central bank and commercial banks, is facing a fundamental crisis.
    [Show full text]
  • P:99PB Conferenceplanning99p
    PROGRAM Thursday, September 23 8:00 a.m. Continental Breakfast East Garden Court Lounge Fourth Floor 8:25 a.m. Central Conference Room Fourth Floor Welcoming Remarks: Reuven Glick, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco 8:30 a.m. Session 1: Financial Intermediation and Crises Presented Papers: Joshua Aizenman and Nancy Marion, Dartmouth College Uncertainty and the Disappearance of International Credit Menzie Chinn and Kenneth Kletzer, University of California, Santa Cruz International Capital Inflows, Domestic Financial Intermediation, and Financial Crises Under Imperfect Information Discussants: Mark Spiegel, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco Roberto Chang, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta 10:00 a.m. Coffee Break East Garden Court Lounge 1 10:30 a.m. Session 2: Emerging Market Discussants: Finance Andrew Rose, University of California, Berkeley Presented Papers: Paolo Pesenti, Federal Reserve Bank Kristin Forbes, Massachusetts of New York Institute of Technology How Are Shocks Propagated 3:45 p.m. Refreshment Break Internationally? Firm-Level East Garden Court Lounge Evidence from the Russian and East Asian Crises 4:15 p.m. Session 4: Roundtable Discussion on International Monetary System Stijn Claessens and Simeon Architecture Djankov, World Bank Tatiana Nenova, Harvard University Corporate Growth and Risk around Panelists: the World Sebastian Edwards University of California, Los Angeles Discussants: Barry Eichengreen Kenneth Kasa, Federal Reserve Bank University of California, Berkeley of San Francisco Ronald McKinnon Richard Lyons, University of Stanford University California, Berkeley Richard Portes London Business School and University of California, Berkeley 12:00 p.m. Lunch Market Street Dining Room Fourth Floor 6:00 p.m. Reception Market Street Dining Room 2:00 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • The Midway and Beyond: Recent Work on Economics at Chicago Douglas A
    The Midway and Beyond: Recent Work on Economics at Chicago Douglas A. Irwin Since its founding in 1892, the University of Chicago has been home to some of the world’s leading economists.1 Many of its faculty members have been an intellectual force in the economics profession and some have played a prominent role in public policy debates over the past half-cen- tury.2 Because of their impact on the profession and in­uence in policy Correspondence may be addressed to: Douglas Irwin, Department of Economics, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755; email: [email protected]. I am grateful to Dan Ham- mond, Steve Medema, David Mitch, Randy Kroszner, and Roy Weintraub for very helpful com- ments and advice; all errors, interpretations, and misinterpretations are solely my own. Disclo- sure: I was on the faculty of the then Graduate School of Business at the University of Chicago in the 1990s and a visiting professor at the Booth School of Business in the fall of 2017. 1. To take a crude measure, nearly a dozen economists who spent most of their career at Chicago have won the Nobel Prize, or, more accurately, the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Eco- nomic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel. The list includes Milton Friedman (1976), Theo- dore W. Schultz (1979), George J. Stigler (1982), Merton H. Miller (1990), Ronald H. Coase (1991), Gary S. Becker (1992), Robert W. Fogel (1993), Robert E. Lucas, Jr. (1995), James J. Heckman (2000), Eugene F. Fama and Lars Peter Hansen (2013), and Richard H. Thaler (2017). This list excludes Friedrich Hayek, who did his prize work at the London School of Economics and only spent a dozen years at Chicago.
    [Show full text]
  • Fiscal Stimulus Programs During the Great Recession
    Fiscal Stimulus Programs During the Great Recession John B. Taylor1 Prepared for the December 7, 2018 Session on “The Recession” “Hoover Workshop Series on the 2008 Financial Crisis: Causes, The Panic, The Recession, Lessons” October 19, November 9, December 7 Five years ago, in October 2013, the Brookings Institution and the Hoover Institution jointly held a conference on the fifth anniversary of financial crisis of 2018. The conference took place simultaneously in Washington, DC and Stanford, California with simulcasting between the two locations for maximum interaction of economists and legal scholars with different research findings as reflected in the title of the conference volume Across the Great Divide: New Perspectives on the Financial Crisis. The purpose was to look for common ground, and while there was some agreement, significant differences of opinion remained about the causes, the panic, the recession and lessons about future role of government. We are now at the tenth anniversary of the crisis and the differences in findings of economic and legal research remain. But the passage of more time, and perhaps more journalistic summaries and the completion of memoirs of policy makers, has led to historical revisions which affect public perceptions of what took place and the lessons learned. This tendency exists is all policy areas, from monetary policy to regulatory policy to international policy, but it is particularly true of fiscal policy. Writing recently in the Wall Street Journal, for 1 Mary and Robert Raymond Professor of Economics, Stanford University and George P. Shultz Senior Fellow in Economics, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. This paper reviews several research papers written jointly with John Cogan.
    [Show full text]
  • BIS Working Papers No 890 How Does International Capital Flow? by Michael Kumhof, Phurichai Rungcharoenkitkul and Andrej Sokol
    BIS Working Papers No 890 How does international capital flow? by Michael Kumhof, Phurichai Rungcharoenkitkul and Andrej Sokol Monetary and Economic Department October 2020 JEL classification: E44, E51, F41, F44. Keywords: bank lending, money creation, money demand, uncovered interest parity, exchange rate determination, international capital flows, gross capital flows. BIS Working Papers are written by members of the Monetary and Economic Department of the Bank for International Settlements, and from time to time by other economists, and are published by the Bank. The papers are on subjects of topical interest and are technical in character. The views expressed in them are those of their authors and not necessarily the views of the BIS. This publication is available on the BIS website (www.bis.org). © Bank for International Settlements 2020. All rights reserved. Brief excerpts may be reproduced or translated provided the source is stated. ISSN 1020-0959 (print) ISSN 1682-7678 (online) How does international capital flow?∗ Michael Kumhofy Phurichai Rungcharoenkitkulz Andrej Sokolyx September 28, 2020 Abstract Understanding gross capital flows is increasingly viewed as crucial for both macroeconomic and financial stability policies, but theory is lagging behind many key policy debates. We fill this gap by developing a two-country DSGE model that tracks domestic and cross-border gross positions between banks and households, with explicit settlement of all transactions through banks. We formalise the conceptual distinction between cross-border saving and financing, which often move in opposite directions in response to shocks. This matters for at least four policy debates. First, current accounts are poor indicators of financial vulnerability, because in a crisis, creditors stop financing debt rather than current accounts, and because following a crisis, current accounts are not the primary channel through which balance sheets adjust.
    [Show full text]
  • The Macroeconomics of Central-Bank- Issued Digital Currencies
    The Macroeconomics of Central-Bank- Issued Digital Currencies John Barrdear, Bank of England Michael Kumhof, Bank of England February 4, 2019 The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Bank of England. Abstract We study the macroeconomic consequences of issuing central bank digital currency (CBDC) – a universally-accessible and interest-bearing central bank liability, implemented via distributed ledgers, that competes with bank deposits as medium of exchange. In a DSGE model calibrated to match the pre-crisis US, we find that CBDC issuance of 30% of GDP, against government bonds, could permanently raise GDP by as much as 3%, due to reductions in real interest rates, distortionary taxes, and monetary transaction costs. Countercyclical CBDC price or quantity rules, as a second monetary policy instrument, could substantially improve the central bank’s ability to stabilise the business cycle. JEL Codes: E41, E42, E44, E51, E52, E58, G21 Keywords: Distributed ledgers, blockchain, banks, financial intermediation, bank lending, money creation, money demand, endogenous money, countercyclical policy. Contents I. Introduction ...................................... 3 II. Electronic Money, Digital Currencies, Distributed Ledgers................. 4 A.Cryptocurrencies .................................... 6 B. Central-Bank-Issued Digital Currencies . .......... 7 III. TheProsandConsofCBDC............................ 9 A.StructuralIssues.................................. 9 B. PriceandOutputStabilityIssues
    [Show full text]
  • Central Bank Digital Currency and the Future of Monetary Policy Michael Bordo and Andrew Levin May 2017
    Central Bank Digital Currency and the Future of Monetary Policy Michael Bordo and Andrew Levin May 2017 A number of major central banks are actively exploring the initiation of sovereign digital currencies. In this analysis, we consider how a central bank digital currency (CBDC) can transform all aspects of the monetary system and facilitate the systematic and transparent conduct of monetary policy. Building on a long strand of the literature in monetary economics, we formulate a set of overarching design principles. In particular, we find a compelling rationale for establishing a CBDC that serves as a stable unit of account, a practically costless medium of exchange, and a secure store of value. In particular, the CBDC should be interest-bearing, and the central bank should adjust that interest rate to foster true price stability. I. Background Digital currency is an asset stored in electronic form that can serve essentially the same function as physical currency, namely, facilitating payments transactions; cf. BIS (2015). At present, the only forms of digital currency in wide circulation are virtual currencies created by private individuals or entities. Bitcoin is the most prevalent example, with an outstanding value of about $15 billion as of early 2017.1 Nonetheless, bitcoin has a number of intrinsic limitations. First, the total supply of bitcoin follows a predetermined path with a fixed limit; consequently, the value of bitcoin can vary markedly over time in response to fluctuations in demand or speculative motives, similar to the price of gold and other physical commodities. Second, bitcoin creation and verification involves “mining” activities that consume substantial electric power at nontrivial cost.2 In contrast, a number of central banks are actively exploring the initiation of sovereign digital currencies that would serve as legal tender and could be used by anyone.3 In contrast to bitcoin, the value of the central bank’s digital currency would be fixed in nominal terms.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Bank Digital Currency and the Future of Monetary Policy
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES CENTRAL BANK DIGITAL CURRENCY AND THE FUTURE OF MONETARY POLICY Michael D Bordo Andrew T Levin Working Paper 23711 http://www.nber.org/papers/w23711 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 August 2017 Bordo is a professor of economics at Rutgers University, director of the Center for Monetary and Financial History, a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), and a Distinguished Visiting Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. Levin is a professor of economics at Dartmouth College, visiting scholar at the International Monetary Fund and at the Bank of Canada, external advisor to the Bank of Korea, research associate of the NBER, and international research fellow of the Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR). This paper is dedicated to the memory of Allan Meltzer. We appreciate many invaluable conversations with Christopher Erceg, Oyvind Eitrheim, Peter Fisher, Marvin Goodfriend, and John Taylor, as well as helpful comments received from participants in workshops and conferences hosted by the Hoover Institution, Cato Institute, Fondo Latinoamericano de Reservas (FLAR), Bank of Canada, Banque de France, Norges Bank, Sveriges Riksbank, and the Swiss National Bank. Nonetheless, the views expressed here are solely those of the authors and do not represent the views of any other person or institution, nor those of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. © 2017 by Michael D Bordo and Andrew T Levin.
    [Show full text]