US interest rates
- The Netflix dilemma -- updated
- Fujitsu's new blockchain offering: really cheap or really expensive?
- Nothing But the Shirt on Your Back
- Universities of Britain: cosying up to crypto is a bad look
- How to make a living in the cult of meritocracy
- Spotify: Drake-oil salesmen
- Oh, the digital humanity
- Building a blockchain Britain in Bloxwich, because ...?
- Sports are not markets, predictions ain't investment
- Spot the difference, Steinhoff edition
- Larry Robbins, a cautionary tale
- The node to serfdom
- Carney is down with the crypto kids
- Samsonite: inventory, excess baggage, and unresolved questions
- It might be a long wait for “the equivalent alternative to ICOs”
- Don't blame it on the sunshine
- In corporate America, brands develop you
- One in ten dollars of US housing were anonymous
- Should AT&T worry more about its debt?
- Who cares if Elon is incinerating capital?
The idea that US healthcare costs are spiralling out of control is based on false assumptions, says Nathan Tankus
In this guest post, Bill Nelson, formerly a deputy director of the Federal Reserve Board’s Division of Monetary Affairs and the current chief economist of The Clearing House, explains how the open-ended asset purchase programme caused Fed officials to rethink their approach to managing the balance sheet.
Options prices imply record-high confidence in the inflation outlook and little fear of interest rate risk. No wonder stock markets are melting up.
Thursday December 14 will go down in history as the day that the Walt Disney Company wrote a new chapter in the history of a once feared empire, and settled the destiny of one who was taught to wield mysterious power by a wise and wizened old master. But enough of Star Wars, Luke Skywalker and his mentor Yoda, writes Matthew Vincent. In other news, Disney is buying the entertainment assets of the 21st Century Fox empire, and deciding the destiny of James Murdoch, who had run the business for his father: the legendary media mogul Rupert.
How are central banks expected to function if the world’s smartest economists and policymakers can’t even agree on the basics?
Back in November 2013, nearing the end of his term as Fed chair, Ben Bernanke offered perhaps the clearest articulation of his views on the mechanisms through which the Fed’s distinct policies affect monetary conditions. My colleague Gavyn Davies then described the critical element in Bernanke’s speech as the separation principle, writing:
The latest batch of forecasts shows the Fed deliberately tightening policy to cause growth to slow and unemployment to rise.
Just more than three years ago, Janet Yellen gave the Michel Camdessus lecture at the IMF, titled Monetary Policy and Financial Stability. The thrust of the speech was that “monetary policy faces significant limitations as a tool to promote financial stability”. As Yellen summarised the point then: