Blogs

Geo-Graphics

A graphical take on geoeconomics.

Latest Post

China’s Central Bank is Becoming the Developing World’s “Payday Lender”

With the developing world’s growing use of costly and opaque “payday loans” from China’s central bank, the IMF and World Bank need to demand far greater transparency from Beijing. 

Read More
China
Was Ukraine Tapered?
For Ukraine’s beleaguered bond market, the seminal event of 2013 was Ben Bernanke’s now-famous taper talk of May 22.  As today’s Geo-Graphic shows, it sent yields soaring to levels they never came back from. Ukraine was uniquely susceptible to taperitis, having been sporting a current account deficit of 8% of GDP—considerably worse than other big victims such as India, Brazil, Indonesia, Turkey, and South Africa.  Its current political crisis clearly has deep roots, yet it is interesting to speculate as to whether Yanukovych could have held on had it not been for the country’s spiraling debt costs—sent spiraling by the Fed last May. International Monetary Fund: Executive Board Assessment of Ukrainian Assistance Financial Times: Yanukovich and Putin Shake On It Wall Street Journal: EU, U.S. Rush to Stabilize Ukraine After Ouster The Economist: A Tale of Two Countries   Follow Benn on Twitter: @BennSteil Follow Geo-Graphics on Twitter: @CFR_GeoGraphics Read about Benn’s latest award-winning book, The Battle of Bretton Woods: John Maynard Keynes, Harry Dexter White, and the Making of a New World Order, which the Financial Times has called “a triumph of economic and diplomatic history.”
Budget, Debt, and Deficits
“It’s the Growth, Stupid” (Or Half of It): Unemployment in North Carolina
In July, North Carolina cut off unemployment benefits for those who have been on benefits for 19 weeks, down from 99.  This made it a test run for what would happen nationally after January 1, when the federal extension of unemployment benefits expired. The steep drop in North Carolina’s unemployment rate after the benefit cut has attracted enormous attention from the media and blogosphere.  Two data-armed camps have formed, one, including the Wall Street Journal editorial board, arguing that the North Carolina experiment has been a success, driving up employment, and the other, including Paul Krugman, arguing that it has been a failure, driving people out of the labor force entirely. So did the medicine make the patient better or give him new problems?    We would suggest that it couldn’t have done nearly as much of either as each side claims. U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) growth in the second half of the year was fairly robust (4.1% annualized in Q3, 3.2% in Q4).  The acceleration in growth was coincident with the policy change, and could account for at least part of the impact on unemployment.  As the graphic above shows, other states also experienced large drops in unemployment in Q3 and Q4. We used South Carolina’s unemployment figures – historically tightly aligned with North Carolina’s – to predict what North Carolina’s unemployment rate would have been in the absence of the policy change.  On the basis of the fall in South Carolina’s unemployment rate in Q3 and Q4, North Carolina’s unemployment rate should have fallen from 8.9% to 8%.  Instead, it fell to 6.9%.  This suggests that roughly half the fall can be attributed to the policy change; the other half was just down to good old-fashioned better growth. Heritage Foundation's Foundry: Examining North Carolina’s Falling Unemployment Rate WSJ's Real Time Economics: What Happens When Unemployment Benefits Are Cut? North Carolina Offers a Clue Washington Post's Wonkblog: What Happens When Jobless Benefits Get Cut? Let’s Ask North Carolina Hagedorn, Karahan, Manovskii, & Mitman: Case Study of Unemployment Insurance Reform in North Carolina   Follow Benn on Twitter: @BennSteil Follow Geo-Graphics on Twitter: @CFR_GeoGraphics Read about Benn’s latest award-winning book, The Battle of Bretton Woods: John Maynard Keynes, Harry Dexter White, and the Making of a New World Order, which the Financial Times has called “a triumph of economic and diplomatic history.”
Europe and Eurasia
“The Euro Crisis Is Dead! Long Live the Euro Crisis!”
You’ve got to hand it to Mario Draghi.  Never in the history of central banking has one man accomplished so much with so few words and even less action. Since having announced the creation of the Outright Monetary Transaction (OMT) program in August 2012, Draghi has had the pleasure of sitting back and watching yield spreads between Spanish and German government bonds fall relentlessly without having to buy a single bond.  Italian spreads have done the same. If only it were this easy to repeat the trick for unemployment, the spread for which has widened steadily over this period—as shown in the graphic above. Not surprisingly, Spaniards are unimpressed with the eurozone’s contribution to the country’s well-being.  According to a recent Pew survey, only 37% of Spaniards think the Spanish economy has been strengthened by European economic integration.  The corresponding figure in Italy and Greece is a mere 11%. Here’s the rub.  Draghi himself seems to believe that such economic integration is an important element in the eurozone’s long-term survival—central bank action is not enough. This is why OMT assistance is actually conditional on the country being on an EU-approved reform program.  “There are clear limits to what monetary policy can and should aim to achieve,” he told an audience in Munich last February.  “We cannot solve deep-rooted problems in the structure of Europe’s economies.” The euro crisis is not over. The Guardian: Spain's Unemployment Rise Tempers Green Shoots of Recovery Financial Times: Spain's Blockbuster 10-Year Bond Raised Draghi: The Policy and the Role of the European Central Bank During the Crisis Draghi: Introductory Remarks at the French Assemblée Nationale   Follow Benn on Twitter: @BennSteil Follow Geo-Graphics on Twitter: @CFR_GeoGraphics Read about Benn’s latest award-winning book, The Battle of Bretton Woods: John Maynard Keynes, Harry Dexter White, and the Making of a New World Order, which the Financial Times has called “a triumph of economic and diplomatic history.”
  • Monetary Policy
    Which Fed Guidance Should We Believe?
    In October 2012, the Fed issued what came to be called a “pledge” to keep its target interest rate near zero through mid-2015.  The market immediately reacted as the Fed wanted, centering expectations on a rate hike in mid-2015. At its next meeting, the Fed abandoned date-based guidance in favor of data-based guidance: a pledge to keep rates near zero until the unemployment rate fell below 6.5%.  The Fed emphasized, however, that the two pledges were consistent, as it didn’t expect unemployment to fall below that level until mid-2015. The Fed justified the shift from date-based to data-based guidance by stating that the latter “could help the public more readily understand how the likely timing of an eventual increase in the federal funds rate would shift in response to unanticipated changes in economic conditions and the outlook.” But has it? Fast forward, and the unemployment rate has been falling much faster than the Fed anticipated back then; the Fed now expects it to dip below 6.5% later this year.  Yet the market has revised its rate expectations in the opposite direction; it now believes a hike will not come until late 2015. For its part, the Fed has said nothing to nudge the market toward its amended (data-based) guidance; in fact, it is now suggesting that rates are likely to stay low “well past the time” the unemployment rate reaches 6.5%. Chairman Bernanke had in June of last year also indicated that QE3 monthly asset purchases could be expected to end when unemployment hit 7%, whereas a tapering of asset purchases is only now just starting with unemployment at 6.7%. All this suggests that the Fed’s experiment with data-based guidance is a flop. The 6.5% guidance may have been announced to help the public understand how the Fed would respond to “unanticipated changes in economic conditions,” but the Fed appears to have buried it because the unanticipated changes in the unemployment rate came about for unanticipated reasons – in particular, a big drop in the labor force participation rate. Before the Fed moves on to the next generation of guidance markers, it ought to think twice about the risks of worsening, rather than improving, the signal-to-noise ratio in its communications.  The jolt to the bond markets from the chairman’s unanticipated taper talk last May suggests what’s at stake as the Fed reverses the trajectory of policy from accommodation to tightening. New York Fed: Primary Dealer Surveys Federal Reserve: Minutes from the December 11–12, 2012 FOMC Meeting Financial Times: Four Problems That Question the Efficacy of Forward Guidance Hilsenrath: Jobs Report Alone Unlikely to Alter Fed’s Course   Follow Benn on Twitter: @BennSteil Follow Geo-Graphics on Twitter: @CFR_GeoGraphics Read about Benn’s latest award-winning book, The Battle of Bretton Woods: John Maynard Keynes, Harry Dexter White, and the Making of a New World Order, which the Financial Times has called “a triumph of economic and diplomatic history.”  
  • Monetary Policy
    "It's the Inflation, Stupid"
    “Based on labor market data alone, the probability of a reduction in the pace of asset purchases has increased,” said Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis President James Bullard on December 9.  Indeed, Fed watchers have been firmly focused on the improving labor market data in their handicapping of the prospects for an imminent Fed “taper” of its monthly asset purchases, known as “QE3,” which it began back in September 2012. Yet the Fed has a dual mandate, the second aspect of which, inflation, has been galloping away from the Fed’s target.  Indeed, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) justified the launch of QE3 by referring specifically to the need to “ensure that inflation, over time, is at the rate most consistent with its dual mandate.” And “inflation,” Bullard noted, “continues to surprise to the downside.” As the FOMC begins two days of meetings, we benchmark the Fed’s performance against each element of its mandate as well as a combination of the two.  As today’s Geo-Graphic shows, the Fed’s preferred inflation measure has been moving away from the Fed’s 2% target faster than unemployment has been declining towards the 5.6% midpoint of the Fed’s range of longer-run estimates.  Since QE3 began, inflation has declined from 1.7% to 0.7% (at its last reading in October) as unemployment has fallen from 7.8% to 7%.  As our small inlaid graphic shows, if the Fed were placing equal emphasis on inflation and unemployment there would be no grounds for beginning to taper its monthly asset purchases at this time—the Fed is today farther away from its dual-mandate benchmark than it was when it launched QE3 last year. Wall Street Journal: Fed Faces Tough Decision on Bond-Buying Financial Times: Strong U.S. Jobs Data Raise Expectations of Fed Taper Economist: Is QE Deflationary?   Follow Benn on Twitter: @BennSteil Follow Geo-Graphics on Twitter: @CFR_GeoGraphics Read about Benn’s latest award-winning book, The Battle of Bretton Woods: John Maynard Keynes, Harry Dexter White, and the Making of a New World Order, which the Financial Times has called “a triumph of economic and diplomatic history.”