Monetary policy reaches its limits: time to get fiscal?
Share
Subscribe to our Insights
Monetary policy reaches its limits: time to get fiscal?
Ultra low interest rates have led many to conclude that monetary policy can no longer be relied upon to underpin the world economy. Governments should boost spending and cut taxes without worrying about the deficit until after inflation picks up.
Amongst economists, the most extreme proponents of fiscal policy are advocates of “Modern Monetary Theory” (MMT), several of whom are now serving as economic advisers to Democrat politicians in the United States. MMT argues that a country that issues its own currency cannot run out of money and therefore does not need to worry about the path of government debt. Instead of quantitative easing (QE) being used to buy government debt, it should be used to finance government spending. If inflation did eventually rise, higher taxes could be used to rein in spending and cool price pressures. Given that massive doses of QE by the world’s leading central banks have failed to generate much inflation since the global financial crisis, there is an implicit hope that inflation might stay low.
As an indicator of the change in the intellectual climate, central bankers, such as the outgoing President of the European Central Bank, Mario Draghi, have advocated fiscal expansion in Europe; the former head of the US Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke, has done so in the US. Even the International Monetary Fund, the world’s fiscal steward, has advocated fiscal expansion, albeit only for a select group of countries like Germany and South Korea.
Risk Disclaimer
This document and the views expressed in it contain forward-looking assessments, which can be identified by the use of terminology such as “may”, “should”, “expect”, “anticipate”, “outlook”, “projection”, “estimate”, “intend”, “continue” or “believe”.
These do not constitute investment advice or recommendations to buy or sell investments and you should not place undue reliance on such statements or returns, as actual returns and results could differ materially due to various risks and uncertainties.
This change in emphasis in the debate is very significant. It has energised those Americans on the left who feel well justified in asking: if the US was able to finance a hugely costly war in Iraq or large tax cuts under Trump without worrying about funding, then why worry about it for financing a Green New Deal? It may lead Germany to finance their own Green New Deal by borrowing rather than cutting spending elsewhere. In the UK, the Labour Party has resisted embracing MMT as they wish to appear financially responsible. Were they to gain power, this may well change.
Global fiscal thrust
2011-13 | 2014-15 | 2016-17 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Global | -0.5 | -0.3 | 0.1 | -0.2 |
Developed | -0.9 | -0.4 | 0.0 | 0.2 |
US | -1.3 | -0.7 | 0.1 | 0.6 |
Euro area | -1.2 | -0.2 | 0.0 | -0.2 |
Japan | 0.0 | -0.6 | 0.1 | -0.2 |
Emerging | 0.4 | 0 | 0.4 | -1.0 |
EM Asia | 0.5 | -0.1 | 0.6 | -1.2 |
China | 0.8 | -0.3 | 0.9 | -1.8 |
Latam | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.0 | -0.3 |
EMEA EM | -0.1 | -0.5 | -0.2 | -0.5 |
The Boris Johnson government’s fiscal commitment is so far nearly £30 billion = 1.5% of GDP.
Subscribe to our Insights
Related articles
Weekly review: US rates, Chinese debt and costly gas = bad news for equities
How can investors tackle plastic pollution?
Weekly review: Hospitalisations, spending and taxes all up – does this mean equities will go down?
Dennis Owusu-Sem, Oversight Relationship Manager, announced as FTAdviser’s diversity champion of the year 2021
Investing in our blue planet
