Hangin' with the Fed
by
Ross M. Miller
Miller Risk Advisors
www.millerrisk.com
May 22, 2006
While watching Ben Bernanke from a safe distance to
decide whether or not I would approach him and introduce myself, he
reminded me of someone, I just didn't know who. We were both standing in a
courtyard at the newly reconstructed main building of The Cloister on Sea
Island. I was there at a Fed conference on hedge funds and had no one with
me; he was there to give the keynote address and had four Fed governors
and a minimum of four Secret Service agents with him. In conformance with
The Cloister dress code, I was wearing a Brooks Brothers navy blue blazer
and my favorite Hermès tie. Ben was wearing a well-tailored dark suit and
tie of unknown origin. (Any attempt to look at the labels would likely
have revealed the exact number of Secret Service agents in attendance.)
Figuring that I would live to regret pass up shaking
hands with arguably the most powerful man in the world, I went over and
introduced myself as my professorial self, as opposed to my alternative
personae as globetrotting consultant, best-selling author, hard-hitting
journalist, and all-around cad. We shook hands. (Unlike some I know in
positions of power, he did not Purellify himself afterwards.) I mentioned
that we had gone to different grad schools together—I was at Harvard at
exactly the same time that he was at MIT. He asked if I knew Larry
Summers. I said something vaguely complimentary about Larry. That was it.
Ben is not a very good conversationalist and lacks the charm, if we can
call it that, of his predecessor.
On later reflection, I figured out who Ben Bernanke had
reminded me of—an undertaker.
I could have offered Ben sage advice about how to do his
job, but I had already spent the first thirty years of my life learning
not to do things like that. Anyway, that is why the Web was invented.
The current thread of my commentaries dates back just
over two years to one entitled "The Bull That
Will Not Die." In that commentary, I argued that I thought that
Alan Greenspan would fail to act quickly enough to raise interest rates,
so inflationary pressures would prop up the stock market for far longer
than was commonly expected. (At the time, it was generally believed that
the stock market would collapse soon after the 2004 presidential
election.) I was off on some of the details—tech stocks did all right over
the past two years, though not as well as I had hoped—but the picture of the
economy I painted turned was better than one would expect from someone
with a Ph.D. in economics.
I do not think that the Fed realizes the full extent of
the inflationary challenge that they face. (It should be noted that I am
among an apparent minority who think that inflation is not currently—to
use Bill Gross's word—benign.) The place that they should want to be is a
world with at most a 4% fed funds rate and a negligible inflation rate—the
equivalent of 1% to 2% under the old, pre-Boskin bookkeeping system. The
way that they are going, they might never get there. (It is worrisome to
read that Thomas Hoenig, president of the Kansas City Fed, is fine with
1½% to 2½% core inflation as currently measured. The high end of
that range could easily translate to what would have been 7% overall
inflation in days of old.) The Fed may have a big pile of statistics, but
there is nothing that I observed in three days of hanging with them that
indicates that they know the first thing about human behavior, especially
in the context of expectations formation. (If the Fed hires behavioralists
in senior research positions, they do a good job of hiding them.)
The Federal Reserve should want its actions to have a
meaningful impact; otherwise, why do anything in the first place? The past
two years of telegraphed, "measured" increases in the fed funds
rate has gotten the rate from 1% to 5% with the minimal of pain, except in
the form of higher prices. Inserting "pauses" into process, as
the Fed is currently telegraphing to us, will mute their impact even
further.
The Fed must eventually give the appearance of taking
decisive action. At the current 5% fed funds rate, baby steps of 25 b.p.
seem pointless. They should immediately revert to 50 b.p. moves until
either the rate dips back below 4% or things are sufficiently stable that
fine tuning is in order. (Don't hold your breath.)
Barring some really fine May numbers or one of the
global dislocations that tends to greet new Fed chairmen, Bernanke and
company should raise the fed funds rate by 50 b.p. to 5½% at their
end-of-June meeting. Then, they should abandon all of the text from the
previous statements and draft a new statement from scratch. The Fed should
indicate that it is no longer on a fixed schedule of rate increases in
terms of their magnitude, direction, or timing. Other than that, the less
they say; the less that the market has to misinterpret. (Has anyone
figured out what "yet" means yet?) The core message should be
that the old regime is history.
The problem that the Fed faces if it continues on its
wimpy course is that it will have to raise rates well above 5½% to
convince the market that it is not about to fire up the helicopters and
the printing presses. The more that it pauses (or even mentions pausing)
the higher it will ultimately have to go.
The main reason that I wanted to get up close and
personal with Ben Bernanke was to be able to take stock of him in a way
that is only possible through direct observation. My take on Ben is that
he is one smart and serious fellow, dead serious. I do not doubt for a
moment that he understands that if he lets inflation get away from him
now, he will spend what remains his time at the Fed chasing it. If Ben
overshoots and causes a recession, which is likely, he can say that we
were overdue for one and that it was oil's fault anyway.
In case you were wondering about the Fed and hedge
funds, that commentary is coming in four weeks, roughly concurrent with
its appearance in Financial Engineering
News. Although it is difficult to tell from all the rain and cold
up here in the northeastern U.S., summer is almost here. Now that I am an
academic (for at least one more year), summer time is research time. To
balance things out for me, these commentaries will become if not entirely
frivolous, highly self-indulgent. About the most self-indulgent thing that
I can do is to look at these commentaries themselves, which I will do as
part of "The Public Side of Self" next time.
Copyright 2006 by Miller Risk Advisors. Permission
granted to forward by electronic means and to excerpt or broadcast 250
words or less provided a citation is made to www.millerrisk.com.