Interest Rate Hike : A Reflection On The Present And Future

Using quantitative easing has helped the recovery of the USA and other developing countries. The Fed’s then limited their ability to pursue more measures, but congress ignored those appeals to help support the economy. The Fed’s decided to use smaller steps to help investor expectations and to prevent a possible financial crisis in Europe. In 2011 it was announced that the FED’s would hold short-term interest rates close to zero percent through 2013; to help support the economy. Soon after it was announced that using the “twist” operation would push long-term interest rates down, by purchasing $400 billion in long-term treasury securities with profits from the sale of the short-term government debt. Inaugurating a policy to help shape market expectations, which will raise interest rates at the end of 2014.

During the Federal Reserve meeting in April 2016, the range was left unchanged for federal funds at 0.25 percent to 0.5 percent (TRADING ECONOMICS, 2016). Labor markets experience growth confirmed by policy makers, yet economic activity was monitored as being slow (TRADING ECONOMICS, 2016). The risks associated with the financial developments of the country have ceased (TRADING ECONOMICS, 2016). The average percentage of interest rate in the U.S. averaged at 5.8. March of 1980 a record high was recorded at 20% (TRADING ECONOMICS, 2016). The lowest interest rates were recorded in the month of December 2008 at 0.25% (TRADING ECONOMICS, 2016).

During the Federal Reserve meeting in April 2016, the range was left unchanged for federal funds at 0.25 percent to 0.5 percent (TRADING ECONOMICS, 2016). Labor markets experience growth confirmed by policy makers, yet economic activity was monitored as being slow (TRADING ECONOMICS, 2016). The risks associated with the financial developments of the country have ceased (TRADING ECONOMICS, 2016). The average percentage of interest rate in the U.S. averaged at 5.8. March of 1980 a record high was recorded at 20% (TRADING ECONOMICS, 2016). The lowest interest rates were recorded in the month of December 2008 at 0.25% (TRADING ECONOMICS, 2016).

The discussion of whether the Federal Reserve should raise the federal funds rate is a highly contentious one. Members of the Federal Reserve (“Fed”) and academic economists disagree about what constitutes appropriate future macroeconomic policy for the Unites States. In the past, the Fed had been able to raise rates when the unemployment rate was under 5% and inflation was at a target of 2%. Enigmatically, since the Great Recession and despite a strengthening economy, year-over-year total inflation since 2008 has averaged only 1.4%—as measured by the Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index (“PCE”). Today, PCE inflation is at 1-1.5% and has continuously undershot the Fed’s inflation target of 2% three years in a row. (Evan 2015) In the six years since the bottom of the Great Recession the U.S. economy has made great strides in lowering the published unemployment rate from about 10% back down to about 5.5%. In light of this data, certain individuals believe that the Federal Reserve should move to increase the federal funds rate in 2015 because unemployment is near 5% and inflation should bounce back on its own (Derby 2015). However, this recommendation is misguided.

The Federal reserve needs to increase interest rates in the next year in order to reduce inflation. With low unemployment, the government is placing strain on the economy by lowering taxes and increasing spending. When the economy reaches its maximum output, prices increase while output remains the same. This could be what is happening now, with economic overheating on the horizon. However, the Federal Reserve could stifle this inflation by hiking interest rates over the next year. This would decrease the money supply and thus reduce inflation to its targeted level. It would also provide some leverage for the Fed to lower rates in the case of a recession.

Eric Rosengren, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, and John Williams, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, have both been known as “doves” in their individual monetary policy opinions and votes over the last five years. Since the summer of 2015, there has been a notable change in Rosengren’s rhetoric in the pursuit of normalization to the point where Rosengren is now actively suggesting an increase in interest rates in the very near future in order to promote growth in the economy, and as of the FOMC meeting on September 21st, 2016, was one of three dissenting votes (out of ten) for keeping rates low. Rosengren supports his new change of face with factors that will be discussed at length in this paper such as the pace of growth, the up-sides to higher rates, and the danger lurking in a prolonged low-rate economy. In similar (but not identical) fashion, John Williams is turning to the belief that rate hikes will be necessary sooner, rather than later if the Fed wishes to continue to spur growth in the United States economy, as opposed to letting the economy overheat into recession. Williams supports this point with evidence similar to Rosengren involving the pace of growth, the upside to higher rates, and the danger lurking in a prolonged low-rate economy. Eric Rosengren’s recent flip provides an interesting vantage point on both camps in the Federal Reserve. By comparing and contrasting the rhetoric of Rosengren (a former dove) and Williams

The Federal Reserve System is the most powerful institution in the United States economy. Functioning as the central bank of the United States, acting as a regulator, the lender of last resort, and setting the nation’s monetary policy via the Federal Open Market Committee, there is no segment of the American economy unaffected by the Federal Reserve [endnoteRef:1]. This power becomes even more substantial in times of “unusual and exigent circumstances,” as Section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act gives authority to the Board of Governors to act unilaterally in lending and market making operations during financial crisis[endnoteRef:2]. As illustrated by their decision making in the aftermath of the 2007-2008 Great Recession,

To begin, The Federal Reserve System opted to raise interest rates that were placed near zero years ago in order to aid the economy’s growth and prevent inflation from exceeding the target number. Several factors including: the five percent drop in the unemployment rate, and the increase in wages, and the outlook on future inflation contributed to the Federal Reserve’s decision take this action. However, the increase in interest rates in December has generated mixed results, and it appeared the Federal Reserve would announce the interest rates were going to increase again. Instead, Janet Yellen, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, announced that there were better days ahead for the economy, and a slow and careful approach to future increases in the interest rate would serve the economy best, ensuring the growth is maintained. Although the interest rates remained the same early in 2016, they are expected to increase during the June meeting of the Federal Reserve. but cited the economy needed low interest rates in order for the economy to maintain growth. I find it interesting that Yellen continues to worry about inflation growing in the coming years, although the interest rate increase should keep inflation in check through its effect of the economic markets. Yellen sites that she would like the inflation to become and stay at 2 percent each year. However, the current inflation rate is .9 percent, so the the economy is a long way from achieving its target inflation rate

To begin, the article explains the Federal Reserve’s plan to take a careful approach to enacting contractionary monetary policies, policies used to decrease money supply, in the future. Last December the Federal Reserve raised the interest rates after they had been near zero for years to ensure inflation was kept in check and to promote economic growth. It appeared the economy would be in for another increase in the interest rates sometime this year, but the Feds have rethought that strategy. If the Federal Reserve were to continue to raise interest rates it would have short-run and long-run effects on the Money Market, Goods and Services Market, Planned Investment, Phillip Curve, and Aggregated Supply and Demand. These effects are aspects that have to be considered because they express and explain the effects the increase in interest rates has on the economy and explain if the Federal Reserve is enacting the correct policy to achieve their goal.

Recently, the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee (FOMC) strongly floated the idea of another interest-rate hike, with the last one being a very minor one after seven years of 0% short-term interest rates. (CITE) While the decision to raise rates may be a foregone conclusion, it is important to note the various effects such a hike will have on the economy as a whole. Everything from the housing market to debt markets to emerging markets will be affected. The ripple effect from such a decision could affect the economy for years to come. With all of these factors in mind, I believe that the Federal Reserve should raise interest rates now.

The Federal Reserve raised the Federal Funds Rate on December 16, 2015 and economists are arguing whether the move was right or not. This is the first time the Fed increased the rate in almost a decade. As usual, there are lots of pros and cons after the new policy was announced. Some economists agree with the move, while others maintain their position that it is still too early to decide.

The Federal Reserve Act lays out the monetary policy that states that the Board of Governors and the Federal Open Market Committee should look for "to support effectively the aims of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates." The pre-requirement for highest sustainable growth and employment rates along with long term interest rates is price stability in the long run. Long run stable prices prevents merchandise, services, materials and labor from getting distorted by inflation and hence turn out to be good indicators to the proficient distribution of resources and consequently add to better and higher standards of living (Meyer, 2004). Moreover, price stability promotes saving and generates capital since the risk of inflation causing attrition of asset values is decreased and hence people are driven to save more and business tend to invest more.

The last five years have shown that traditional monetary policies predicated on interest rate management by the Federal Reserve no longer deliver the economic growth they were once believed to. Keynesian economics has proved to not be as effective as once thought, which has led to the Federal Reserve choose alternative means to stimulate the economy and indirectly manage exchange rates (Hakkio, 1986). The uncertainty over interest rate polices has fortunately not led to increases in inflation, which has typically been the case in the past (Kopcke, 1988). The current economic conditions and the approaches the Federal Research are taking however are cause for concern, and from a personal standpoint many decisions are being evaluated more precisely.

The Federal Reserves concerns are many; because of the economic diversity of our country. In November 2002, the fed reduced the targeted federal funds rate 50 basis points, to 1.25 percent. The policy easing allowed the Committee to return to an assessment that the risks to its goals were balanced. The Fed has inflation expectations well contained, and the additional monetary stimulus seemed to offer worthwhile insurance against the threat of persistent economic weakness and substantial declines in inflation from already low levels.

On September 18, 2013 the Federal Reserve reaffirmed its view that a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy will remain appropriate for a considerable time after the asset purchase program ends and the economic recovery strengthens. In addition, the committee agreed to continue its monthly $85 billion purchase of Treasury and mortgage-backed securities as long as the unemployment rate remains above 6.5 percent. Inflation between one and two years ahead is projected to be no more than a half percentage point above the Committee's 2 percent longer-run goal and longer-term inflation expectations continue to be well anchored .