Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
User avatar
Topic Author
Kevin M
Posts: 15789
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 3:24 pm
Contact:

Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by Kevin M »

Thought this might be of interest (no pun intended):

Why are interest rates so low? | Brookings Institution

Kevin
If I make a calculation error, #Cruncher probably will let me know.
User avatar
bobcat2
Posts: 6076
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 2:27 pm
Location: just barely Outside the Beltway

The new blogger

Post by bobcat2 »

[Thread merged into here, see below. --admin LadyGeek]

There is a new blogger in the finance & economics blogosphere. Some guy named Bernanke and his first post concerns the level of interest rates in the US. An informing read written by someone who has both academic and real world experience on the subject he has chosen to write about. It's certainly interesting that this is the first subject he picked to write about on his blog.

Link to blog - http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/ben-bern ... tes-so-low

BobK
In finance risk is defined as uncertainty that is consequential (nontrivial). | The two main methods of dealing with financial risk are the matching of assets to goals & diversifying.
toto238
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 1:39 am

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by toto238 »

Kevin M wrote:Thought this might be of interest (no pun intended):

Why are interest rates so low? | Brookings Institution

Kevin
Great read! I've been thinking for awhile that people may be underwhelmed by what happens when the Fed eventually does increase interest rates (probably sometime later this year). Sure, short-term interest rates will rise. Money markets will probably yield a little more. But that's about it. Interest rates aren't low BECAUSE of the Fed. The Fed has kept short-term interest rates low because of larger macro-economic issues at hand.
Tom_T
Posts: 4837
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 2:33 pm

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by Tom_T »

I'm surprised. I was expecting typical economic mumbo-jumbo, but Bernanke actually wrote a very clear and understandable explanation that I, a non-economist, could grasp. He might have a future in writing now that he no longer has to use Fed-speak. :)
User avatar
Rick Ferri
Posts: 9708
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:40 am
Location: Georgetown, TX. Twitter: @Rick_Ferri
Contact:

Re: The new blogger

Post by Rick Ferri »

Ben Bernanke wrote:"What matters most for the economy is the real, or inflation-adjusted, interest rate (the market, or nominal, interest rate minus the inflation rate). The real interest rate is most relevant for capital investment decisions, for example. The Fed’s ability to affect real rates of return, especially longer-term real rates, is transitory and limited. Except in the short run, real interest rates are determined by a wide range of economic factors, including prospects for economic growth—not by the Fed."
The Education of an Index Investor: born in darkness, finds indexing enlightenment, overcomplicates everything, embraces simplicity.
dpc
Posts: 456
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 1:41 pm

Re: The new blogger

Post by dpc »

I read his first post this morning, and I found it to be one of the best and clearest explanations of the Fed's role in determining interest rates that I've read. Very well written and easily understandable even for a non-financial person such as me. My eyes did not glaze over once.
"Worrying is like paying interest on a debt that you might never owe" -- Will Rogers
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
Posts: 95696
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Contact:

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by LadyGeek »

FYI - I merged bobcat2's thread into here.
Wiki To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
jginseattle
Posts: 1125
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 7:33 pm

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by jginseattle »

A good read. Thanks for posting.
rerod
Posts: 194
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 9:05 am
Location: Iowa

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by rerod »

toto238 wrote:
Great read! I've been thinking for awhile that people may be underwhelmed by what happens when the Fed eventually does increase interest rates (probably sometime later this year). Sure, short-term interest rates will rise. Money markets will probably yield a little more. But that's about it. Interest rates aren't low BECAUSE of the Fed. The Fed has kept short-term interest rates low because of larger macro-economic issues at hand.
Bond values will drop.

My VBTLX has a duration of 5.4 years, it will lose 5.4% when interest rate kicks up by 1%,. I'm heavy into VBTLX so it could hurt, like how it performed immediately after I bought it 11/12 leason learned.

I'm ready to sell it, almost. But equities don't look so good lately.
LeighN
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 9:59 am

Bernanke: "Why are interest rates so low?"

Post by LeighN »

Another duplicate thread merged here - admin alex

The following is a blog post written by Ben Bernanke, basically justifying the Fed's past and current actions. He concludes by saying that the state of the economy--not the Fed--is the ultimate determinant of the sustainable level of real stock market returns.

Do any of you agree/disagree?

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/ben-bern ... rmedbroker
gkaplan
Posts: 7034
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:34 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Bernanke: "Why are interest rates so low?"

Post by gkaplan »

A thread previously was started this morning.
Gordon
Erwin
Posts: 1929
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 11:16 pm

Re: Bernanke: "Why are interest rates so low?"

Post by Erwin »

What Bernanke is saying is that the Fed has minimal impact on long term rates, which is correct, and, further, it is to the Fed's interest to set short term as close as possible to what he calls equilibrium rates, and in the academia is more commonly referred as natural rates, meaning the rates that would exist if the market dictated it. No one can disagree on that, as was demonstrated in the times before the 2008 crisis when for too long Greenspan kept rates too low, and now understood to be below natural rates. Most economists feel that this action was a major factor in the creation of the crisis. Much has been writen on this (and if interested can google my article "The Natural Rate of Interest Rule".)
The problem, of course, is that measuring natural rates is extremely difficult. So the Feds have to guess the number. Historically, the natural rate has been about 3% in real terms, so I am very surprised that Bernanke feels that is is now that low.
Erwin
oragne lovre
Posts: 536
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 2:34 pm

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by oragne lovre »

I've just learned a new compound word: equilibrium rate.
Thanks for the link.
The finest, albeit the most difficult, of all human achievements is being reasonable.
toto238
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 1:39 am

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by toto238 »

rerod wrote:
toto238 wrote:
Great read! I've been thinking for awhile that people may be underwhelmed by what happens when the Fed eventually does increase interest rates (probably sometime later this year). Sure, short-term interest rates will rise. Money markets will probably yield a little more. But that's about it. Interest rates aren't low BECAUSE of the Fed. The Fed has kept short-term interest rates low because of larger macro-economic issues at hand.
Bond values will drop.

My VBTLX has a duration of 5.4 years, it will lose 5.4% when interest rate kicks up by 1%,. I'm heavy into VBTLX so it could hurt, like how it performed immediately after I bought it 11/12 leason learned.

I'm ready to sell it, almost. But equities don't look so good lately.
Duration is an academic measurement, nothing more. It has little to no bearings on what will ACTUALLY happen to the value of the bonds. A higher duration means that it will be more susceptible to changes in interest rates, sure, but the magnitude of any effect isn't decided only by duration. Changes in interest rates don't happen in a vacuum. Ceteris paribus (Latin for "all else being equal/same), sure your bond fund would lose 5.4%. But the market isn't ceteris paribus. It's in constant fluctuation as everything is constantly changing. In fact, interest increasing later this year has already been priced into the price of your bond fund. What's going to change your bond fund's value is if EXPECTATIONS change. Meaning, if interest rates rise FASTER or by a higher MAGNITUDE than expected, then it'll hurt your bond fund. If interest rates rise SLOWER, though, or to a LESSER degree, then your bond fund will actually GAIN in value.

In all likelihood, the Fed will raise interest rates by maybe 0.25%. Your bond fund may drop by half a percent at most. Or more likely will gain. And the interest it pays out will outweigh any loss that the rise in interest rates causes.

For proof, look at what happened with interest rates from 2003-2007. Rates were increasing constantly during that period. What happened to Bond Funds during that period? They thrived. Total Bond Market did between 2.5% and 7% the whole time.
SpaceCowboy
Posts: 1006
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 12:35 am

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by SpaceCowboy »

Bernanke gave a class on the role of the Fed that I found to be a very clear explanation of what a Central Bank's role is. The class is available for free on iTunes U: https://itunes.apple.com/us/itunes-u/re ... 9475?mt=10
Levett
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:10 pm
Location: upper Midwest

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by Levett »

This single blog post by Ben Bernanke tells me why he must be a great teacher.

Lev
HongKonger
Posts: 1079
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 10:35 am
Location: Deep in the Balkans

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by HongKonger »

Levett wrote:This single blog post by Ben Bernanke tells me why he must be a great teacher.

Lev
However, don't they say that those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
User avatar
in_reality
Posts: 4529
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by in_reality »

HongKonger wrote:
Levett wrote:This single blog post by Ben Bernanke tells me why he must be a great teacher.

Lev
However, don't they say that those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
Who are "they" and why should we take what "they" say as accurate?
adamthesmythe
Posts: 5774
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 4:47 pm

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by adamthesmythe »

>However, don't they say that those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.

"They" may say it but it is a foolish and anti-intellectual statement.

Particularly in this case- if there is anybody who has walked the walk it is Ben Bernanke.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
Posts: 95696
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Contact:

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by LadyGeek »

rrppve wrote:Bernanke gave a class on the role of the Fed that I found to be a very clear explanation of what a Central Bank's role is. The class is available for free on iTunes U: https://itunes.apple.com/us/itunes-u/re ... 9475?mt=10
Even better, get the series directly from the Federal Reserve: FRB: The Federal Reserve and the Financial Crisis, Chairman Bernanke's College Lecture Series

Click on the four links under the heading to see the videos and supporting material:

- Origins and Mission of the Federal Reserve <-- Origins of central banking
- The Federal Reserve after World War II
- The Federal Reserve's Response to the Financial Crisis
- The Aftermath of the Crisis

-Instructor Resource: Questions for Classroom Discussion (PDF)
Wiki To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
Pacific
Posts: 1609
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 7:19 pm
Location: Lost in the middle of the Pacific

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by Pacific »

Ah, finally the answer to "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?"
User avatar
Clearly_Irrational
Posts: 3087
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:43 pm

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by Clearly_Irrational »

toto238 wrote:Duration is an academic measurement, nothing more. It has little to no bearings on what will ACTUALLY happen to the value of the bonds. A higher duration means that it will be more susceptible to changes in interest rates, sure, but the magnitude of any effect isn't decided only by duration.
One of the problems is that duration is a linear approximation of a non-linear phenomenon. Convexity is the non-linear version but it's a tougher concept to talk about. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bond_convexity
toto238
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 1:39 am

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by toto238 »

Clearly_Irrational wrote:
toto238 wrote:Duration is an academic measurement, nothing more. It has little to no bearings on what will ACTUALLY happen to the value of the bonds. A higher duration means that it will be more susceptible to changes in interest rates, sure, but the magnitude of any effect isn't decided only by duration.
One of the problems is that duration is a linear approximation of a non-linear phenomenon. Convexity is the non-linear version but it's a tougher concept to talk about. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bond_convexity
This is an excellent point. I would add, though, that changes in expectations for interest rates is going to have a larger effect on bond prices than the actual change in interest rates. If everyone is already expecting a 0.5% increase, it's already priced into the security. If it is raised instead by 0.75%, that will hurt bond prices. If it is raised by only 0.25%, it will raise bond prices.
User avatar
abuss368
Posts: 27850
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Where the water is warm, the drinks are cold, and I don't know the names of the players!
Contact:

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by abuss368 »

Hi Kevin,

Excellent article penned by the former Chairman of the Federal Reserve!

Thank you for sharing.
John C. Bogle: “Simplicity is the master key to financial success."
toto238
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 1:39 am

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by toto238 »

abuss368 wrote:Hi Kevin,

Excellent article penned by the former Chairman of the Federal Reserve!

Thank you for sharing.
I think this may be the only place on the internet where an article by Ben Bernanke can be intelligently discussed, debated, and appreciated without anyone resorting to political attacks on each other.

Bogleheads is a special place.
User avatar
Topic Author
Kevin M
Posts: 15789
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 3:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by Kevin M »

toto238 wrote:I would add, though, that changes in expectations for interest rates is going to have a larger effect on bond prices than the actual change in interest rates.
It depends what interest rate you're talking about. The interest rate relevant to a bond is the interest rate for that particular bond; i.e., the yield to maturity for the bond. Price and yield to maturity are precisely related by a mathematical formula; i.e., they are two ways of expressing the same thing. Therefore, a change in the yield to maturity for a bond will have a completely predictable and exact change in the price of the bond, and vice versa.

As explained in the blog post:
The Fed’s actions determine the money supply and thus short-term interest rates; it has no choice but to set the short-term interest rate somewhere.
So the Fed sets "the short-term interest rate", which may or may not have an impact on longer-term interest rates. QE was an attempt to influence longer-term interest rates as well, and its success can be debated, but it did not set longer-term interest rates.

This distinction can easily be seen by examining changes in the yield curve since the Fed set the Fed funds rate to essentially 0%. Play with this Dynamic Yield Curve tool, and notice how rates beyond the shortest terms have moved around a lot since 2009, while anchored at about 0% at the short end.

Expectations of future rates impacts both current prices and current yields (rates) of bonds of different maturities. Expectations can't affect one without affecting the other (since they are different measures of the same thing).

Kevin
If I make a calculation error, #Cruncher probably will let me know.
Bfwolf
Posts: 2108
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 11:19 am

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by Bfwolf »

Thanks for sharing this article. A very clear and concise explanation that a layperson can understand.
zeugmite
Posts: 1176
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:48 pm

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by zeugmite »

Bernanke wrote:The Fed’s actions determine the money supply and thus short-term interest rates; it has no choice but to set the short-term interest rate somewhere.
I'm not sure what this "no choice" quote means. The Central Bank certainly has a choice to not set a short-term rate upper bound. As for the lower bound, is Bernanke referring to the Central Bank's sole ability (by law) to set reserve ratios? Because otherwise every bank can expand money supply at will, as well. The Central Bank can certainly step away and let the market set the rate entirely. Whether that's prudent is another matter.
User avatar
kramer
Posts: 1953
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 1:28 am
Location: World Traveler

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by kramer »

What a great country this is!

This reminds me of the photo of the new US ambassador to China. He was at the airport, getting ready to fly to China. He was getting a coffee at Starbucks and he had a piece of luggage with him. The photo made huge news in China because their officials wouldn't be getting their own coffee or hauling around their own luggage.

Ben (can I call him that?) is one of the most consequential people of the 21st Century and he is patiently writing and teaching and taking questions about his tenure at the Fed. Thanks Ben!
carolinaman
Posts: 5463
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 8:56 am
Location: North Carolina

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by carolinaman »

The article makes sense and is well written. Thanks for sharing. What the article does not address is the Fed's QE which did impact interests rates by buying up huge amounts of treasuries, and driving down the interest rates.
hexagon
Posts: 113
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:32 am

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by hexagon »

HongKonger wrote:
Levett wrote:This single blog post by Ben Bernanke tells me why he must be a great teacher.

Lev
However, don't they say that those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
"They" often are wrong. Most faculty at top research universities are both doers and teachers in their area of expertise; this is certainly true for Bernanke.
Grt2bOutdoors
Posts: 25625
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:20 pm
Location: New York

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by Grt2bOutdoors »

hexagon wrote:
HongKonger wrote:
Levett wrote:This single blog post by Ben Bernanke tells me why he must be a great teacher.

Lev
However, don't they say that those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
"They" often are wrong. Most faculty at top research universities are both doers and teachers in their area of expertise; this is certainly true for Bernanke.
Agree - it's one thing to label a group, it's quite another to try and smear that label on "the" expert on the topic in question. I'll say this much, had he followed the typical playbook of the Fed back in the '30's, we likely would not be having this conversation today, many of us would be living under a bridge with a tarp over our heads and don't confuse luck with outcome. You have no idea how close we really came to going over the cliff, let me give you a hint, it was millimeters, not inches and certainly not feet.

As for Greenspan, while he is not entirely to blame for the mess, he certainly played a leading role. The Fed forgot their true role in regulating monetary policy and they failed to use their toolbox in an appropriate manner. Here we are 7 years later - are we Japan or something else? The Fed's going to raise rates - sure they are, I mean eventually one would expect that, to go lower would suggest something more catastrophic lies in wait........and then losing 5.4% or less in your fixed income holdings should be the least of your worries.
"One should invest based on their need, ability and willingness to take risk - Larry Swedroe" Asking Portfolio Questions
toto238
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 1:39 am

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by toto238 »

Grt2bOutdoors wrote: Agree - it's one thing to label a group, it's quite another to try and smear that label on "the" expert on the topic in question. I'll say this much, had he followed the typical playbook of the Fed back in the '30's, we likely would not be having this conversation today, many of us would be living under a bridge with a tarp over our heads and don't confuse luck with outcome. You have no idea how close we really came to going over the cliff, let me give you a hint, it was millimeters, not inches and certainly not feet.

As for Greenspan, while he is not entirely to blame for the mess, he certainly played a leading role. The Fed forgot their true role in regulating monetary policy and they failed to use their toolbox in an appropriate manner. Here we are 7 years later - are we Japan or something else? The Fed's going to raise rates - sure they are, I mean eventually one would expect that, to go lower would suggest something more catastrophic lies in wait........and then losing 5.4% or less in your fixed income holdings should be the least of your worries.
+1.

There is a lack of appreciation for just how much of our livelihood today we owe to the fact that Bernanke was willing to do what few others were willing to do. He took major risks, both economically and politically, and it absolutely had the potential to blow up in his face. As a result of this actions, he will likely never hold public office of any kind again as he has become too controversial. But there is no doubt in my mind that his actions were directly responsible for the fact that the US economy is not in a 1930s-type depression right now.

He wasn't the central bank manager we deserved, but he was the central bank manager we needed.
Busting Myths
Posts: 353
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 4:04 pm
Location: So Cal

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by Busting Myths »

toto238 wrote:
Grt2bOutdoors wrote: Agree - it's one thing to label a group, it's quite another to try and smear that label on "the" expert on the topic in question. I'll say this much, had he followed the typical playbook of the Fed back in the '30's, we likely would not be having this conversation today, many of us would be living under a bridge with a tarp over our heads and don't confuse luck with outcome. You have no idea how close we really came to going over the cliff, let me give you a hint, it was millimeters, not inches and certainly not feet.

As for Greenspan, while he is not entirely to blame for the mess, he certainly played a leading role. The Fed forgot their true role in regulating monetary policy and they failed to use their toolbox in an appropriate manner. Here we are 7 years later - are we Japan or something else? The Fed's going to raise rates - sure they are, I mean eventually one would expect that, to go lower would suggest something more catastrophic lies in wait........and then losing 5.4% or less in your fixed income holdings should be the least of your worries.
+1.

There is a lack of appreciation for just how much of our livelihood today we owe to the fact that Bernanke was willing to do what few others were willing to do. He took major risks, both economically and politically, and it absolutely had the potential to blow up in his face. As a result of this actions, he will likely never hold public office of any kind again as he has become too controversial. But there is no doubt in my mind that his actions were directly responsible for the fact that the US economy is not in a 1930s-type depression right now.

He wasn't the central bank manager we deserved, but he was the central bank manager we needed.
Or he kicked the can down the road...time will tell. Remember that when Greenspan left everyone hailed his tenure at the Federal Reserve and then turned on him after realizing a credit bubble had been growing for many years under his watch. What happens next will define if Bernanke's tenure was good or bad. Also, Bernanke was a Fed Governor since 2002 and was the Federal Reserve Chairman since Feb 2006 which was two years before the financial crisis occurred. He either failed to see the issues, speak up, and/or take preemptive action.
Grt2bOutdoors
Posts: 25625
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:20 pm
Location: New York

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by Grt2bOutdoors »

Busting Myths wrote:
toto238 wrote:
Grt2bOutdoors wrote: Agree - it's one thing to label a group, it's quite another to try and smear that label on "the" expert on the topic in question. I'll say this much, had he followed the typical playbook of the Fed back in the '30's, we likely would not be having this conversation today, many of us would be living under a bridge with a tarp over our heads and don't confuse luck with outcome. You have no idea how close we really came to going over the cliff, let me give you a hint, it was millimeters, not inches and certainly not feet.

As for Greenspan, while he is not entirely to blame for the mess, he certainly played a leading role. The Fed forgot their true role in regulating monetary policy and they failed to use their toolbox in an appropriate manner. Here we are 7 years later - are we Japan or something else? The Fed's going to raise rates - sure they are, I mean eventually one would expect that, to go lower would suggest something more catastrophic lies in wait........and then losing 5.4% or less in your fixed income holdings should be the least of your worries.
+1.

There is a lack of appreciation for just how much of our livelihood today we owe to the fact that Bernanke was willing to do what few others were willing to do. He took major risks, both economically and politically, and it absolutely had the potential to blow up in his face. As a result of this actions, he will likely never hold public office of any kind again as he has become too controversial. But there is no doubt in my mind that his actions were directly responsible for the fact that the US economy is not in a 1930s-type depression right now.

He wasn't the central bank manager we deserved, but he was the central bank manager we needed.
Or he kicked the can down the road...time will tell. Remember that when Greenspan left everyone hailed his tenure at the Federal Reserve and then turned on him after realizing a credit bubble had been growing for many years under his watch. What happens next will define if Bernanke's tenure was good or bad. Also, Bernanke was a Fed Governor since 2002 and was the Federal Reserve Chairman since Feb 2006 which was two years before the financial crisis occurred. He either failed to see the issues, speak up, and/or take preemptive action.
The greatest volume of issuances that went bad were those of the 2004-2005 variety. The seeds of destruction were sown years before Bernanke had significant voting influence, as those on the board were following group think instead of individual self-appraisal. It did not help that the NY Fed had the wrong management in place, too much influence and supervision of the banks was non-existent, in fact they were in bed with the banks. It was a virtual revolving door where employees were playing ring around the rosie working on the Street then going to work for the Fed in positions of power. Working for the public good, we all see how that turned out. The dissolution of Glass-Steagall amplified the problems experienced in the economy, having Wall St. banks controlling mortgage lenders, having insurance companies controlling banking enterprises and vice-versa - all of that could have been avoided. There was a reason why that Act was passed in the '30s.
"One should invest based on their need, ability and willingness to take risk - Larry Swedroe" Asking Portfolio Questions
robert88
Posts: 366
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 5:27 pm

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by robert88 »

The most interesting part of the Summers/Bernanke exchange to me is if I understand Summers correctly, he thinks the natural rate of return to capital should be -2% real or lower for the foreseeable future. If that's correct and you assume a 4% ERP, then a 50/50 portfolio should be expected to return 0% real for the foreseeable future.
zeugmite
Posts: 1176
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:48 pm

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by zeugmite »

robert88 wrote:The most interesting part of the Summers/Bernanke exchange to me is if I understand Summers correctly, he thinks the natural rate of return to capital should be -2% real or lower for the foreseeable future. If that's correct and you assume a 4% ERP, then a 50/50 portfolio should be expected to return 0% real for the foreseeable future.
Which is only fair. Why should people expect a positive real return for doing nothing? You save so much productivity, you get that much back at a later time. We've been spoiled by the good times where capital was scarcer.
User avatar
Clearly_Irrational
Posts: 3087
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:43 pm

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by Clearly_Irrational »

zeugmite wrote:Which is only fair. Why should people expect a positive real return for doing nothing? You save so much productivity, you get that much back at a later time. We've been spoiled by the good times where capital was scarcer.
That would actually be a serious problem, it would mean that businesses are having a hard time finding positive NPV projects which in turn would have negative implications for increasing total societal wealth and likely exacerbate inequality issues as everyone spends more time fighting over the size of their share of the existing pie.
robert88
Posts: 366
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 5:27 pm

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by robert88 »

Clearly_Irrational wrote:
zeugmite wrote:Which is only fair. Why should people expect a positive real return for doing nothing? You save so much productivity, you get that much back at a later time. We've been spoiled by the good times where capital was scarcer.
That would actually be a serious problem, it would mean that businesses are having a hard time finding positive NPV projects which in turn would have negative implications for increasing total societal wealth and likely exacerbate inequality issues as everyone spends more time fighting over the size of their share of the existing pie.
Politics aside, if the expected return to a 50/50 portfolio is 0-1% real, then that may be fine if you're over 70 and have already "won the game", but if you're still in the accumulation phase, that's a complete game changer in how we need to think about saving and investing for retirement.
toto238
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 1:39 am

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by toto238 »

robert88 wrote:
Clearly_Irrational wrote:
zeugmite wrote:Which is only fair. Why should people expect a positive real return for doing nothing? You save so much productivity, you get that much back at a later time. We've been spoiled by the good times where capital was scarcer.
That would actually be a serious problem, it would mean that businesses are having a hard time finding positive NPV projects which in turn would have negative implications for increasing total societal wealth and likely exacerbate inequality issues as everyone spends more time fighting over the size of their share of the existing pie.
Politics aside, if the expected return to a 50/50 portfolio is 0-1% real, then that may be fine if you're over 70 and have already "won the game", but if you're still in the accumulation phase, that's a complete game changer in how we need to think about saving and investing for retirement.
When people predict that returns can't be as high as they were in the past, I think of the guy who predicted that by 1900 everything of importance that could be invented had already been invented. Or when Bill Gates asked "Why would anyone need more than 4K of RAM?".

I don't know for sure what the future holds. But people predicting a long-term stagnation in the capital markets is as old as capital markets. Could it happen? Sure. But what use is that information to me? I'm already saving all I can afford to save. I don't control the economy by myself. I control what I can control, and hope for the best.
User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
Posts: 95696
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Contact:

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by LadyGeek »

toto238 wrote:...Or when Bill Gates asked "Why would anyone need more than 4K of RAM?".
On a minor point, the statement should be "640 K" of RAM. See: Bill Gates
Wiki To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.
toto238
Posts: 1914
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 1:39 am

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by toto238 »

LadyGeek wrote:
toto238 wrote:...Or when Bill Gates asked "Why would anyone need more than 4K of RAM?".
On a minor point, the statement should be "640 K" of RAM. See: Bill Gates
Thank you for that clarification. A common misquote I fell for.

But the overall arching point remains. We can't predict the future. The "doom and gloomers" have been around since the beginning of time. And whenever something bad happens, as eventually something bad WILL happen, they gloat about how right they were. But they ignore the decades they spent being wrong before being right for one year, and then go back to being wrong for a decade.

Sure the markets may not produce as great returns going forward as they have in the past. But what's the actionable lesson here? If i'm not investing my savings, what else can I do with that money? I need to be able to provide for myself when I'm older. I'm not crazy about the "have a bunch of kids and hope one of them will support you" route.
zeugmite
Posts: 1176
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:48 pm

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by zeugmite »

toto238 wrote:If i'm not investing my savings, what else can I do with that money? I need to be able to provide for myself when I'm older. I'm not crazy about the "have a bunch of kids and hope one of them will support you" route.
You're investing your savings into other people who have a bunch of kids and hoping one of them will support you because their folks wrote you a piece of paper. Doesn't inspire more confidence, really. :mrgreen:
Valuethinker
Posts: 49038
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:07 am

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by Valuethinker »

Grt2bOutdoors wrote:
Busting Myths wrote:
toto238 wrote:
Grt2bOutdoors wrote: Agree - it's one thing to label a group, it's quite another to try and smear that label on "the" expert on the topic in question. I'll say this much, had he followed the typical playbook of the Fed back in the '30's, we likely would not be having this conversation today, many of us would be living under a bridge with a tarp over our heads and don't confuse luck with outcome. You have no idea how close we really came to going over the cliff, let me give you a hint, it was millimeters, not inches and certainly not feet.

As for Greenspan, while he is not entirely to blame for the mess, he certainly played a leading role. The Fed forgot their true role in regulating monetary policy and they failed to use their toolbox in an appropriate manner. Here we are 7 years later - are we Japan or something else? The Fed's going to raise rates - sure they are, I mean eventually one would expect that, to go lower would suggest something more catastrophic lies in wait........and then losing 5.4% or less in your fixed income holdings should be the least of your worries.
+1.

There is a lack of appreciation for just how much of our livelihood today we owe to the fact that Bernanke was willing to do what few others were willing to do. He took major risks, both economically and politically, and it absolutely had the potential to blow up in his face. As a result of this actions, he will likely never hold public office of any kind again as he has become too controversial. But there is no doubt in my mind that his actions were directly responsible for the fact that the US economy is not in a 1930s-type depression right now.

He wasn't the central bank manager we deserved, but he was the central bank manager we needed.
Or he kicked the can down the road...time will tell. Remember that when Greenspan left everyone hailed his tenure at the Federal Reserve and then turned on him after realizing a credit bubble had been growing for many years under his watch. What happens next will define if Bernanke's tenure was good or bad. Also, Bernanke was a Fed Governor since 2002 and was the Federal Reserve Chairman since Feb 2006 which was two years before the financial crisis occurred. He either failed to see the issues, speak up, and/or take preemptive action.
The greatest volume of issuances that went bad were those of the 2004-2005 variety. The seeds of destruction were sown years before Bernanke had significant voting influence, as those on the board were following group think instead of individual self-appraisal. It did not help that the NY Fed had the wrong management in place, too much influence and supervision of the banks was non-existent, in fact they were in bed with the banks. It was a virtual revolving door where employees were playing ring around the rosie working on the Street then going to work for the Fed in positions of power. Working for the public good, we all see how that turned out. The dissolution of Glass-Steagall amplified the problems experienced in the economy, having Wall St. banks controlling mortgage lenders, having insurance companies controlling banking enterprises and vice-versa - all of that could have been avoided. There was a reason why that Act was passed in the '30s.
This is the point Barry Eichengreen makes in his new book: comparing 1930s to now and the financial crises. This time, the regulatory response has been more muted.

I attended a talk by him when the book came out-- very interesting man, one of the great economic historians of international money and the 1930s.
Valuethinker
Posts: 49038
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:07 am

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by Valuethinker »

Clearly_Irrational wrote:
zeugmite wrote:Which is only fair. Why should people expect a positive real return for doing nothing? You save so much productivity, you get that much back at a later time. We've been spoiled by the good times where capital was scarcer.
That would actually be a serious problem, it would mean that businesses are having a hard time finding positive NPV projects which in turn would have negative implications for increasing total societal wealth and likely exacerbate inequality issues as everyone spends more time fighting over the size of their share of the existing pie.
The volatility of returns is so great, empirically, that I don't think we can make generalizations. Look at the history of 10 year returns achieved, and how volatile they have been (stocks, bonds, real estate).

It's perfectly possible we are going through a period, like the late 1960s/ early 70s, or the 1930s, or the 1870s, when capital just does not earn a positive return.

In some theoretical economic sense that's irrational (but only in the long term), but the macroeconomy has moved to that point, and that's what's available to people who are investors (accumulators of capital) at this stage in their life cycle. Japan as a country seems stuck in this point.

Essentially I am arguing for the 'Secular Stagnation' thesis and I think it's quite real. If you want to go all Marxian, this is your surplus accumulation crisis-- too much capital chasing too little return.

We are also at the dawn of an amazing technological transformation (the internet, 3d printing, robotics, mobile services, implications of mass data storage and mining, etc.) and that historically has destroyed the return on capital of the previous incumbents. The new fields attract so much investing that the entrepreneurs don't do well either, except for a small number of winners.

Think of the 100s of software companies that were in the office or OS field-- down to Microsoft, basically. Or the hundreds of PC manufacturers. All those online retailers and Amazon is still far and away the dominant one. Search engines? All those handheld computers (Psion, Palm?) and we wind up with Apple owning the market. etc.
mrwheelerdealer
Posts: 118
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 7:35 pm

Professor Damodaran's on Fed's control of interest rates

Post by mrwheelerdealer »

Hey folks,

I came across an interesting article by Professor Aswath Damodaran written in 2013 titled, " The Fed and Interest Rates: Lessons from Oz ". http://aswathdamodaran.blogspot.com/201 ... -from.html .Professor Damodaran referred to it in one of his recent NYU MBA Valuation classes when discussing how everybody seems to be 100% sure that when the Fed raises the rates it will affect the interest rates on bonds, stating that the Feds influence is not as powerful as everyone thinks, and the fact that bonds lose value is just a response to people thinking that the Fed is I control, but the intrinsic value has not necessarily changed. My first question is he is the only person I've ever come across to make such a statement, and therefore, event ought he data seems to back him, I am skeptical. Furthermore, even after reading the article a few times, I cannot honestly say I understand why the Fed should not have a considerable amount of control over interest rates. Any input would be greatly appreciated.
The Biggest Risk is to not take one
lack_ey
Posts: 6701
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2014 10:55 pm

Re: Professor Damodaran's on Fed's control of interest rate

Post by lack_ey »

You may be interested in reading from a certain Bernake himself about interest rates and the role of the Fed, including a four-part "why are interest rates so low?" series here. Whether you believe what he says or not, the perspective should at least explain some things:
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/ben-bernanke

I've seen the arguments from others also that the Fed's power with respect to setting longer-term interest rates is limited. That said, even if the primary driver is economic fundamentals, the Fed still has some influence (and furthermore, the perception of influence is self-fulfilling and amplifies any effect), which more than some people would prefer and enough to upset them. Furthermore, what does "considerable amount of control" really mean? Two people who have the same understanding of the Fed's influence may disagree about whether that constitutes a considerable amount or not.
Alex Frakt
Founder
Posts: 11589
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:06 pm
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by Alex Frakt »

Merged above two posts to this thread. This whole discussion of the Feds power to set interest rates is borderline off-topic macroeconomic theory. But forecasting inflation is part of what is going on here, which may have an impact on portfolio construction, so we'll keep it open. But let's at least keep it to one thread - admin alex.
nobsinvestor
Posts: 302
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2014 1:36 pm

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by nobsinvestor »

Can anyone explain how, as a previous poster mentioned, rates increased from 2003-2007 but most bond fund NAV's rose in value? Was it because the rate changes turned out to be much less/slower than expected?
User avatar
ogd
Posts: 4876
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 11:43 pm

Re: Bernanke's Blog: why are interest rates so low?

Post by ogd »

nobsinvestor wrote:Can anyone explain how, as a previous poster mentioned, rates increased from 2003-2007 but most bond fund NAV's rose in value? Was it because the rate changes turned out to be much less/slower than expected?
The post above was about Total Bond Market. Unfortunately, that's not necessarily a good example, because the 2003 starting point was pretty bad for corporate bonds (Enron having just happened), so from those high yields reflecting risk wariness in 2003, the yield of TBM actually rose very little over the period. Clearly, this is not the case today and TBM (and inv-grade bonds) are almost Treasury-like.

A better example is the Treasury fund VFIUX, which did see much deeper NAV losses (up to 12% at one point), but in terms of total return it was quite reasonable -- maximum drawdown vs market-rate cash (which itself was returning more and more) was only about 5.7%, and you had to be fast to catch/avoid even that amount.

In general, it's not productive to look at the NAV movements in isolation, because they also depend on the composition of the fund -- VFIUX had a lot of premium bonds in 2003 owing to the preceding period of higher rates. Premium bonds are expected to lose some value in exchange for their higher coupons, but this doesn't affect their total return (except wrt taxes). And there are other effects to consider. More on this in this recent thread: viewtopic.php?f=10&t=162728#p2450813 .
Post Reply