Home > Bank of England, Monetary Policy > UK Aggregate Demand Policy and Air France Flight 447

UK Aggregate Demand Policy and Air France Flight 447

I hope readers will excuse this wildly inappropriate and unnecessarily tasteless analogy, but discussion of UK demand policy increasingly reminds me of the Air France 447 disaster, a tragic plane crash back in 2009.  The investigators found that the pilots ignored stall warnings and not only allowed the plane to fall out of the sky, but acted in precisely the wrong way to correct the fall:

… the jet continued to respond to the commands until impact. Those commands, however, were consistently inappropriate for a plane approaching a stall at high altitude. Instead of pointing the nose down in order to regain speed, the pilot at the controls drove it higher, worsening the loss of forward momentum and depriving the plane of lift.

In the UK, the nominal economy remains under the control of monetary policy.  The monetary policy stance, however, is consistently inappropriate for an economy with a deficiency of aggregate demand.  Instead of steering the economy towards faster growth, our central bankers keep aiming to drive inflation lower, depriving the economy of demand.

Over to Gavyn Davies, with an interesting discussion on “gilt cancellation” earlier this month, continued this week.  This latest policy innovation comes courtesy of Adair Turner (candidate to be the next BoE Governor) who had floated, but quickly retracted, the idea of “cancelling” some of the government bonds which have accumulated on the Bank’s balance sheet through QE.  Mr Davies concluded that doing so would boost aggregate demand (nominal GDP):

Now consider what would happen if the bonds held by the central bank were cancelled, instead of being one day sold back into the private sector. Under this approach, the long-run restraining effect of bond sales would also be cancelled, so there should be an immediate stimulatory effect on nominal demand in the economy. If done without amending the path for the budget deficit itself, this would increase the expansionary effects of past deficits on nominal demand, and would also reduce the outstanding burden of public debt associated with such deficits.

The argument Davies is making here is a familiar one about the effectiveness of a permanent versus temporary expansion of the monetary base.  It is thus based entirely around expectations; that destroying a portion of the Bank’s assets boosts nominal GDP exactly because it is a way to signal that (some of) the monetary base expansion will be permanent, and will not (can not) be soon reversed by selling those assets again.

There is an implicit assumption that this plan would be useful because the Bank are not satisfied with the current growth rate, or level of, nominal GDP produced by QE to date.  But as documented ad nauseum, this is neither their expressed view nor their revealed preference. The Bank has set expectations around the permanence (and continuation) of QE which are clearly anchored to the 2% inflation target (or more accurately, the inflation forecast).  And the Bank has been successful in keeping nominal GDP growing at a rate which is more than sufficient to hit the inflation target; witness years of an above-target CPI rate.

Like the poor Air France pilots, in discussion of appropriate policy we scramble around desperately seeking to avert a crash.  The government isn’t spending enough – let’s flip that switch!  Banks aren’t lending enough, let’s pull that lever!  We must have “structural issues”, the cause must be supply-side!  And all the while there is no consideration of the one thing that really matters: the nose is pointing the wrong direction.

If the Bank (and/or HM Treasury) wants faster nominal GDP growth it is neither necessary nor sufficient to start cancelling gilts.  I’m not sure that policy tool would be particularly useful; it is possible for the Bank to contract the monetary base by issuing bills or similar non-monetary liabilities.  So I cannot see that the inflation target would automatically lose credibility as a nominal anchor.

What is necessary to avoid another crash is to simply point the nose in the right direction: abandon the inflation target and tell us you want faster nominal GDP growth.  Set expectations around a clear nominal target, a level target, and print enough money to get expectations pointing the right way.

  1. Bill le Breton
    October 31, 2012 at 17:08

    Did I dream it or did BoJ just commit to 91 trillion yen of unlimited loans to commercial banks? Do we now have to wait the statutory 15 year lag for that to happen here?

  2. Bill le Breton
    October 31, 2012 at 17:12

    that should read unlimited loans and a further 11 trillion qe to take it to 91t … but you get the point, I hope.

  3. October 31, 2012 at 21:33

    Hi Bill. Unlimited subsidies to the banking sector? Sounds like Funding for Lending!

    I looked up the BoJ policy announcement. In their forecasts today they say they expect the CPI to fall 0.1% yoy in 2012, and rise 0.4% next year. In other words, they expect to succeed in fighting off deflation. But not much more. Sound familiar? :)

    Click to access gor1210b.pdf

  4. Bill le Breton
    November 1, 2012 at 17:45

    Quite so … and in 15 years time, we shall be doing the same with our central bank intervening only when the 0% figure is threatened on the deflationary side, Britmouse.

    An interesting glimpse of the year 2027 (or much earlier) here from Jim Leaviss http://www.bondvigilantes.com/blog/2012/10/24/jims-video-from-tokyo-cup-noodles-lessons-about-qe-from-the-edo-period-and-the-fiscal-multiplier-effect/

    And where is our Narayana Kocherlakota http://www.minneapolisfed.org/news_events/pres/speech_display.cfm?id=4985 such admirable clarity

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: