Clicking on banner ads enables JWR to constantly improve
Jewish World Review Feb. 28, 2001 / 5 Adar, 5761

Jack Kemp

Jack Kemp
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
James Glassman
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Jackie Mason
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Roger Simon
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports

It's time to end deflation --
NEITHER tax cuts nor interest rate cuts - as desirable as both may be - can stop the economy from shrinking, given current monetary policy by the Federal Reserve Board. We are up to our ears in a historically rare monetary deflation that will force prices and wages to fall just as monetary inflations require prices and wages to rise. It is the result of Alan Greenspan's overzealousness during these last four years of economic growth - the result of the Republican tax cuts of 1997 and the Internet-driven productivity surge.

Today's conventional wisdom is that the economy has slowed and may be heading toward a recession because it had been expanding under the pressure of "irrational exuberance" and the bubble finally burst. I strongly disagree.

The economy will revive the minute the Fed ends the deflation and stops starving the economy of the liquidity it needs to grow. As much as I believe a tax rate cut is desirable and will increase long-run economic growth, a tax cut will not end the deflation, and the rather modest tax cut proposed by President George W. Bush will do little to offset the consequences of deflation. In fact, if the Fed does not meet the increased demand for liquidity that even a modest tax rate reduction will stimulate, the deflation will only get worse.

Now, I'm no economist, but I've been a student of economic policy and on the front lines of economic policymaking for more than 30 years. In my opinion the Fed is repeating the mistakes it made in the early 1980s, when the Reagan tax rate reductions caused an increase in the demand for dollar liquidity that the Fed, under the leadership of Paul Volcker, refused to supply, causing the price of gold to collapse from $600 to $300 and putting the economy into a deep recession.

When the Fed opens its doors for business every morning, it has basically only one lever that it can push and pull: It can buy bonds (which injects liquidity into the banking system) or sell bonds (which withdraws liquidity). The only question, then, is what criteria does the Fed use to tell it when to buy and sell bonds and how much of them to buy or sell?

Demand-side Keynesians would have the Fed calibrate the injection and withdrawal of liquidity into and out of the economy by targeting short-term interest rates. This is the model currently used by the Greenspan Fed, which has created the mess we are in.

Monetarists would have the Fed simply increase the money supply at the same constant rate they believe the economy is capable of growing over the long run. This was the model in use by the Volcker Fed when it put the economy into a deep recession at the beginning of the Reagan administration in 1981 and 1982.

"Supply-side" economists who hearken back to the pre-Keynesian classical school of economics contend that the Fed should seek to provide the economy with the amount of liquidity demanded by market participants under the specific circumstances at the time. The Fed can determine whether markets are demanding more or less liquidity, and thus whether it should buy or sell federal bonds, by watching inflation-sensitive commodity prices, especially the price of gold. If commodity prices are stable, the Fed is meeting the demand for money; if they are rising, the Fed is injecting too much liquidity into the economy and should sell bonds to mop up the excess; and if they are falling, the Fed is starving the economy of liquidity and should buy bonds to inject new money into the system.

We will know if and when the Fed decides to end the current deflation when the price of gold stops falling and begins to rise from $255 an ounce back toward $300 an ounce, its price just before the Fed undertook to slow the economy and "tame" the stock market back in June 1999. Lowering short-term interest rates a half-point at a time at six-week intervals will not succeed, and in fact there reason to fear that it may actually exacerbate the problem.

As David Gitlitz, president of D.G. Capital Advisers observes, "If borrowers, lenders and the banking system expect lower interest rates, then demand for bank reserves will drop, putting downward pressure on the Fed's targeted interest rate, which perversely will require the Fed to withdraw liquidity to prevent the targeted interest rate from falling below its targeted value. That is what the Fed is doing today."

The fact that expectations are ahead of the Fed means it is forced to react contrary to its stated policy goal. Eventually, markets will come to believe the Fed is done lowering interest rates and the delay in the economic recovery will end. Until then, however, we may be waiting on the Fed to cure a situation it is only making worse.

There is another, even more troubling problem with the Fed's arbitrarily targeting interest rates in an effort to fine-tune the economy. Just like 1981, we are about ready to cut tax rates, which will unleash more productive activity and increase the demand for money. If the Fed does not adequately meet that demand for money, the deflation we are already suffering will only become worse, and what is now a mere slowdown could turn into a full-blown economic contraction.

Jack Kemp is co-director of Empower America and Distinguished Fellow of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Comment by clicking here.


02/21/01: Building blocks of humanity
02/15/01: Trumping the propaganda
02/06/01: The Gipper at 90
01/30/01: Kicking off a season of economic growth
01/24/01: The Bush tax agenda
01/17/01: Debating the Clinton legacy
01/10/01: No need for another Social Security commission
01/03/01: Truly a Golden Age, if we can keep it
12/27/00: The Grinch who turned off the holiday lights
12/20/00: Forging ahead
12/13/00: A new tax system for the 21st Century
12/07/00: Global government in retreat
11/30/00: An open letter to Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan
11/21/00: Don't forget the guy in charge
11/15/00: Civic virtue, civic vice
11/08/00: Memo to the president-elect
10/31/00: Scare tactics won't work
10/24/00: Prosperity in the balance
10/11/00: Al Gore's economics of fear
10/03/00: Al Gore IS debatable
09/27/00: Government should protect our online privacy
09/13/00: The most important issue
09/05/00: Defeating the Gore blitz
08/29/00: Workers of the world, rejoice
08/22/00: Just the facts, Mr. President
08/08/00: Reclaiming Lincoln's legacy
06/23/00: A renaissance for urban America?
06/16/00: Capital access can bridge 'digital divide'
06/08/00: Some friendly advice for Rick Lazio
05/26/00: Is the economy being saved or destroyed?
05/22/00: Immigration and the promise that is America
05/12/00: Stock market roulette or snobbery?
05/04/00: Is Rule of Law whatever we say it is?
05/01/00: Myths happen

© 2000, Copley News Service