Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:04am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:04am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:04am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:04am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:04pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:04am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:04am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:04pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:04pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
Non-Economic Questions of the Day
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
The Stress Test Blind Alley
Apr 24 20098:04am EDT -
Happy Hour
Apr 23 20099:04pm EDT -
Recovery Without Rebalancing
Apr 23 20096:04pm EDT -
The Shape of Your Recession
Apr 23 20095:04pm EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

Time For a Fed Statement Overhaul
In the wake of all the Kremlinology spurred by yesterday's Federal Reserve meeting, I'm wondering if it might not be time to revisit the manner in which the Fed releases its statements.
I do agree with the way in which the Fed now formally announces what its Fed funds target rate is: there's really no reason not to. But the rest of the statement is so overanalyzed that it might be time to move to a different system. I'm talking, here, about the way in which market observers obsess over the tiniest of differences between this statement and the last: see, for example, Mark Thoma, William Polley, Barry Ritholtz, and countless others.
The problem is that the Fed's statement doesn't change very much from one meeting to the next, which is a recipe for the narcissism of small differences. I wouldn't be surprised to find that a significant chunk of any given FOMC meeting is given over not to monetary-policy matters but rather to the exact wording of the subsequent communiqué. And that, if true, would be a waste of valuable FOMC time.
For instance, the markets spent much of yesterday wondering exactly what the difference is between these two sentences:
Recent readings on core inflation have been somewhat elevated.
Core inflation remains somewhat elevated.
This is a waste not only of the FOMC's time, but also of the time of hundreds of analysts who suddenly find themselves in the position of rune-readers.
The full minutes are released, with a delay, and I wouldn't suggest that the Fed try to speed up their release necessarily. But perhaps a different Fed governor could write the statement each meeting, and sign it. So each one would be in a different voice, and the markets would no longer have to bother themselves with trying to make apples-to-apples comparisons.
In any case, I think the best solution would be something which would concentrate the markets on the substance of what is being said, rather than on the silly differences between what is said this time and what was said last time. Surely that must be possible somehow.






