Estive a ler um discurso do actual presidente do FED de 2002.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/boardDocs ... efault.htm
O discurso é interessante, entre outras razões, porque antecipa muitas das medidas tomadas pelo FED nos últimos meses. No entanto houve dois aspectos que não compreendi.
Antes de expôr as minhas duas dúvidas vou só salientar uma passagem do texto que, sendo óbvia, me parece algo exótica dita assim à luz do dia de modo tão explícito! A ideia é que, sendo o dinheiro fiat, ou seja, podendo imprimi-lo à vontade, nunca poderá haver um cenário de deflacção, pois o FED teria apenas de imprimir mais dinheiro e injectá-lo na economia para aumentar o consumo. A pergunta óbvia é então, mas se sabemos que essa é a política desse governo, quem teria interesse em guardar dinheiro fiat como garantia??? A longo prazo a impressão de dólares vai continuar, mas os recursos continuarão mais ou menos iguais. É por isto que acredito na desvalorização do dólar a longo prazo, países como a China irão trocá-lo por commodities ou outra moeda com uma política menos voltada para a impressão de mais dinheiro. A passagem sobre o fiat money é esta:
"As I have mentioned, some observers have concluded that when the central bank's policy rate falls to zero--its practical minimum--monetary policy loses its ability to further stimulate aggregate demand and the economy. At a broad conceptual level, and in my view in practice as well, this conclusion is clearly mistaken. Indeed, under a fiat (that is, paper) money system, a government (in practice, the central bank in cooperation with other agencies) should always be able to generate increased nominal spending and inflation, even when the short-term nominal interest rate is at zero.
The conclusion that deflation is always reversible under a fiat money system follows from basic economic reasoning. A little parable may prove useful: Today an ounce of gold sells for $300, more or less. Now suppose that a modern alchemist solves his subject's oldest problem by finding a way to produce unlimited amounts of new gold at essentially no cost. Moreover, his invention is widely publicized and scientifically verified, and he announces his intention to begin massive production of gold within days. What would happen to the price of gold? Presumably, the potentially unlimited supply of cheap gold would cause the market price of gold to plummet. Indeed, if the market for gold is to any degree efficient, the price of gold would collapse immediately after the announcement of the invention, before the alchemist had produced and marketed a single ounce of yellow metal.
What has this got to do with monetary policy? Like gold, U.S. dollars have value only to the extent that they are strictly limited in supply. But the U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost. By increasing the number of U.S. dollars in circulation, or even by credibly threatening to do so, the U.S. government can also reduce the value of a dollar in terms of goods and services, which is equivalent to raising the prices in dollars of those goods and services. We conclude that, under a paper-money system, a determined government can always generate higher spending and hence positive inflation."
Agora as minhas duas dúvidas e agradecia desde já qualquer esclarecimento:
Em primeiro lugar Bernanke afirma que o FED pode manter as taxas de juro das government bonds (treasurty bills etc) baixas, fazendo "unlimited purchases" da dívida. Será que é isto que tem vindo a acontecer? Será por isto que a taxa da dívida america está tão baixa?? Como é que podemos saber se o FED tem comprado a dívida americana recentemente?
"So what then might the Fed do if its target interest rate, the overnight federal funds rate, fell to zero? One relatively straightforward extension of current procedures would be to try to stimulate spending by lowering rates further out along the Treasury term structure--that is, rates on government bonds of longer maturities.9 There are at least two ways of bringing down longer-term rates, which are complementary and could be employed separately or in combination. One approach, similar to an action taken in the past couple of years by the Bank of Japan, would be for the Fed to commit to holding the overnight rate at zero for some specified period. Because long-term interest rates represent averages of current and expected future short-term rates, plus a term premium, a commitment to keep short-term rates at zero for some time--if it were credible--would induce a decline in longer-term rates. A more direct method, which I personally prefer, would be for the Fed to begin announcing explicit ceilings for yields on longer-maturity Treasury debt (say, bonds maturing within the next two years). The Fed could enforce these interest-rate ceilings by committing to make unlimited purchases of securities up to two years from maturity at prices consistent with the targeted yields. If this program were successful, not only would yields on medium-term Treasury securities fall, but (because of links operating through expectations of future interest rates) yields on longer-term public and private debt (such as mortgages) would likely fall as well.
Lower rates over the maturity spectrum of public and private securities should strengthen aggregate demand in the usual ways and thus help to end deflation. Of course, if operating in relatively short-dated Treasury debt proved insufficient, the Fed could also attempt to cap yields of Treasury securities at still longer maturities, say three to six years. Yet another option would be for the Fed to use its existing authority to operate in the markets for agency debt (for example, mortgage-backed securities issued by Ginnie Mae, the Government National Mortgage Association)."
Em segundo lugar Bernanke diz que é possível manipular o valor do dólar comprando dívida pública de outros países. Não compreendo esta ideia. Como é que o dólar poderia ser alterado pela compra da dívida de outros países?
"I need to tread carefully here. Because the economy is a complex and interconnected system, Fed purchases of the liabilities of foreign governments have the potential to affect a number of financial markets, including the market for foreign exchange. In the United States, the Department of the Treasury, not the Federal Reserve, is the lead agency for making international economic policy, including policy toward the dollar; and the Secretary of the Treasury has expressed the view that the determination of the value of the U.S. dollar should be left to free market forces. Moreover, since the United States is a large, relatively closed economy, manipulating the exchange value of the dollar would not be a particularly desirable way to fight domestic deflation, particularly given the range of other options available. Thus, I want to be absolutely clear that I am today neither forecasting nor recommending any attempt by U.S. policymakers to target the international value of the dollar."
Obrigado desde já pelos esclarecimentos!!
