Blackstone Executive Vice Chairman Tony James says he's less optimistic now than before that the U.S.-China trade war could be resolved, but even a smaller deal could help...World Economyread more
The massive market transformation this month that some on Wall Street called a "once in a decade opportunity" might have just been a one-off technical move because of taxes.Marketsread more
The Pentagon will deploy U.S. forces to the Middle East on the heels of the attack on Saudi Arabian oil facilities, United States Secretary of Defense Mark Esper announced...Defenseread more
CNBC did a deep dive through the most recent Wall Street research to find stocks that analysts say are underappreciated.Marketsread more
Shares of MasterCard are up 46% this year, and 1120% since 2011, getting a boost from the strong U.S. consumer.Investingread more
CNBC sat in on an "empathy training" at Amazon PillPack's Somerville offices, which is part of new hire orientation.Technologyread more
Trade with China is the 'big unknown' for the Federal Reserve as it decides how best to support the U.S. economy, says Council on Foreign Relations Director of International...Futures Nowread more
Lobbying experts said the visit is likely an attempt to be in lawmakers' ears as they consider legislation that would impact Facebook.Technologyread more
Yardeni Research's Edward Yardeni believes the U.S. economy is picking up steam.Trading Nationread more
Iran's audacious drone and cruise missile attack on Saudi Arabia's oil producing facilities has provided a critical test yet for the Trump administration's foreign policy. A...Politicsread more
The equity markets are under stress. By some measures stock prices today are lower than they were at the beginning of the year. To me, the reason for this is relatively clear. The financial system in the United States is undergoing a dramatic shift. It is going from decades of easy money at low- to no- interest rates to a period in which money is not freely available and it costs considerably more.
Some simple statistics indicate the change. In the 9-year time frame from the end of the financial crisis in 2008 to the end of last year, the average annual growth rate in the seasonally adjusted money supply (M2) was 6.0 percent. Year-to-date, the annualized growth rate has been 3.4 percent. The average Federal Funds rate from the end of the crisis year 2008 to the end of 2017 was 0.25 percent. In 2018, it has averaged 1.75 percent. It is 2.20 percent now.
If you look at these numbers from the perspective of running a business, two thoughts come to mind. The first is that money is just not going to be available as it was and, second, it will cost more. In order to justify new projects, the business executive must decide whether the higher financing cost can be absorbed or whether it can be passed along through price increases.
Going a step further, the function of capital must be reconsidered. Does it make sense to give away hundreds of billions of dollars in common equity in a rising interest rate environment? Or, does it now make more sense to conserve capital? Should a company continue to rely on borrowed capital or should it rely on the funds it develops through its business operations to fund further growth?
One must consider the role of private equity firms and the so-called unicorns – private companies with supposed multi-billion dollar valuations. If businesses must conserve their funds and households make a similar set of decisions, where will the money come from to keep the unicorns growing? Many, if not most, do not generate free cash from their businesses.
My position, stated often in these comments, is that the Federal Reserve is executing a monetary policy that is not gradual and not well thought out. The Fed is too tight. It is shrinking its balance sheet much too rapidly (over 6 percent this year) and it is raising interest rates much too quickly. The assumption that the United States economy can absorb higher rates with slower money supply growth represents a massive change in Fed thinking.
For decades, the economy has functioned with the belief that the Greenspan "put" or the Bernanke "ease" will always be there. The belief was that economy need never worry about fund availability. Now one must question these beliefs. In so doing, the prudent decision will be to conserve capital and use it internally to fund operations.
The Fed must and, in my view, will reverse policy. Silly concepts like "neutral interest rates" will be thrown back into the dustbin of PR hype where they belong. The average Fed Funds rate from July 1954, when it was initiated, to the present has been 4.80 percent. The average Fed Funds rate in this century has been 1.71 percent. There is no "neutral rate" in these numbers.
It is time for straight thinking and realistic policy. The United States cannot shift from a financial system characterized by "free" amounts of unlimited money supply to one driven by costly funds that are not easily acquired. It cannot fund the growth in the economy, growth in the equity markets, and growth in the Federal deficit with a reduced rate of growth in its money supply.