• 15 hours How The Stock Market Predicts Electoral Victory
  • 23 hours Tesla's "Battery Day" Could Deal A Blow To Cobalt Miners
  • 2 days New TikTok Deal Hopes To Bypass National Security Concerns
  • 2 days Where Will Gold Go From Here?
  • 3 days COVID-19 Is Fueling A Pastic Waste Crisis
  • 3 days Gold Output Set To Decline
  • 4 days Uber And Lyft Look To Go Electric
  • 5 days COVID-19 Is Crushing Palladium Demand
  • 6 days This ‘Once-Boring’ Tech Company Is Now Super Hot
  • 7 days Will Air-Based Protein Be Our Future Food?
  • 7 days Google Pledges To Go Carbon-Free By 2030
  • 8 days A New Twist In The TikTok Saga
  • 8 days Gold Inches Closer To $2,000
  • 9 days Delivery Drones Are Coming Sooner Than You Think
  • 9 days Traders See More Volatility Ahead For Commodities
  • 10 days How COVID-19 Is Transforming The World's Sovereign Wealth Funds
  • 10 days Electric Vehicle Demand Set To Outpace Battery Metal Production
  • 11 days Copper Continues To Outperform
  • 12 days The Jury Is In: ESG Is A Megatrend Now Worth $250B
  • 12 days Today’s Young Adults Aren’t Leaving the Nest
How The Ultra-Wealthy Are Using Art To Dodge Taxes

How The Ultra-Wealthy Are Using Art To Dodge Taxes

More freeports open around the…

Is The Bull Market On Its Last Legs?

Is The Bull Market On Its Last Legs?

This aging bull market may…

Paul Kasriel

Paul Kasriel

Paul joined the economic research unit of The Northern Trust Company in 1986 as Vice President and Economist, being named Senior Vice President and Director…

Contact Author

  1. Home
  2. Markets
  3. Other

A Heretic On The FOMC?

I almost fell out of my chair when reading the minutes of the August 9 FOMC meeting. What rocked me? The following sentence: "Another participant mentioned, however, that recent sluggish growth of the monetary aggregates suggested that the stance of policy was not overly accommodative." Can you believe that someone on the FOMC actually has put "M" back in monetary policy? What's more, even a Fed Board staffer made a telling comment about the behavior of the monetary aggregates. To wit: "Despite the recent slow growth of M2, its velocity remained low relative to the level that would be expected based on its historical relationship with opportunity cost." So, not only has M2 growth been slow, but faster velocity growth is not compensating for it.

The chart below shows the history of the year-over-year percent change in the real M2 money supply (nominal M2 divided by the CPI). As of July 2005, real M2 was up only 0.6% vs. year ago. The nadir of real M2 growth prior to the 2001 recession was 2.0% in July 2000. Real M2 growth in July 2005 was below what it was just prior to the 1960 recession and the unofficial "mini" recession of 1967. Although real M2 growth currently is above what it was in the recovery following the 1990 recession, money velocity growth was much stronger at that time. Although real M2 is not as reliable a leading indicator as it used to be, it still is reliable enough to be included as a component of the Conference Board's Leading Economic Indicators index. And its trend growth behavior still provides good qualitative information about the trend growth in economic activity. Real M2 growth currently is sending a warning signal about the future trend growth of real economic activity. At least one FOMC member has taken notice. I would not be surprised if the tone of discussion at the September 20 FOMC meeting is somewhat more guarded about the strength of the economy going forward. That is, the comment that monetary policy remains accommodative may be on the way out.

Back to homepage

Leave a comment

Leave a comment