If you have no idea what the above quote means, you are not alone.
Here is the origin of the abbreviation "QE" Financial reporters decided a few years ago to accept a new term for what is largely an old concept.
That term is quantitative easing.
Consequently, "QE1" is a reference to the Fed's expansionary monetary policy during the latest serious recession, in 2008 and 2009.
QE2 refers to the Fed's started that in September,2012, with the economy still moving
Monetary Policy - The way it used to be
Historically, the fed's main tool for monetary policy has been the purchase and sale of U.S government securities, usually Treasury Bills.
When the Fed has wanted to engage in expansionary monetary policy, it bought U.S Treasuries in the open market, thereby increasing reserves in the banking system.
In the process, the money supply grew, which increased aggregate demand
Excess reserves (those over and above legally required reserves) were used by banks to expand loans.
Contractionary monetary policy was just the opposite - the Fed sold U.S government securities, thereby reducing reserve.
The end result was decrease in the money supply in circulation and a decrease aggregate demand .
That was then, but the Fed's ordinary monetary policy took on a new twist in response to the financial panic of 2008
The Fed started to like other assets
During the first 95 years of its existence, the Federal Reserve dealt with U.S. government securities only. All that changed in 2008 when the Fed decided that it had to target specific sector in our economy.
So, instead of engaging in traditional expansionary monetary policy, the Fed started buying assets other than U.S. government securities. This was something that had never been done before
The assets purchased by the Fed included (and still include) short-term corporate debt, short-term loans to bank, mortgage-backed securities, mostly issued by the government-sponsored corporations Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, other debt issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and preferred shares in the former investment bank Bear Stearns and in the insurance company American International Group.
Oh, and let’s not forget that for well over a year the Fed engaged in foreign currency swaps with other countries – perhaps that was considered the icing on the larger cake.
All of those of all of those assets clearly increased the size and composition of the Fed’s balance sheet.
For much of its more recent existence, the Fed “owned” anywhere from several billion to sever hundred billion dollars of U.S. Treasury securities. But by 2911 , the Fed’s assets totaled more than 25 trilion (including many hundreds of billion in “new securities it had bought as part of its quantitative easing policy” ) Throughout 2012 and 2013, Fed assets remained in the range 2.8 to 2 trillon
So, in a sentence, the Fed’s traditional monetary policy abruptly changes in 2008.
Rather than seeking to stimulate the entire economy in general, the Fed decided to provide credit to parts of financial markets (and even specific corporations) that its history had the chair of the fed and its board of directors used such discretionary policy to benefit specific sector of economy.
Why wasn’t there an outbreak of inflation
When the Fed aggressively adds to the money supply in circulation by buying U.S. government securities, the banking system suddenly has excess reserve.
Not wanting to lose out on potential income from those excess reserve, depository institutions increase their loans, the money supply rises, and aggregate demand increases. At least that is the way economists used to tell the story.
While qe1 qe2 and so forth got the headline, however there was a revolution in central banking in the United States.
Starting on 1 oct 2008, The fed bean paying interest on reserves- all reserve including excess reserve.
While some monetary economists for years have argued that interest be paid on excess reserve, none ever demand that interest be paid on required reserve, policy change by the fed converted excess reserves into an income-earning asset for banks, and thus fundamentally altered the nature of the conduct of monetary policy.
If you are the manager of a bank and know that the fed will pay interest on excess reserve, you are not so keen to loan out those reserves to business and individuals.
After all, if you make loan to business and individuals, you run a risk.
During recession of 2007-2009, that collect interest checks from u.s government on all of your reserves and wait to see what happens?
Well, that is exactly how most banks have proceeded over the past few years. The number tell the story. When they did not earn interest, excess reserves were a drag on bank profit and so bank kept them to a aged 2-3 billion.
During 2011 they peaked at over 1.6 trillion since then have routinely stay above 1 trillion.
Thus, most of the reserve inject into the baking system since 2008 have endd up not in new loans, new money, and new new spending.
Instead, the ended up siting in the form of new excess reserves. The means that the “expansionary” quantitative easing of fed was almost completely offset by its decision to pay interest on excess reserve.
The result was little increase in aggregrate demand and little upward pressure on inflation – at least in the short run.
On wanting more inflation
For several years, the Fed has told reporters and expert alike that it was worried about deflation.
Deflation has been associated with bad times the Great depression in the USA for example, and the “lost decade” of 1990s in the Japanese economy. In justification of its quantitative easing 2 in Nov 2010, The fed pointed to the need for a little bit of inflation, to avoid a deflationary downward spiral.
Actually, as measured by the personal consumption expenditure price index, there had been inflation running at about 1.2% annually, a number that was bumping up around 2% toward the end of 2010, when the Fed announced qe2. In other words, based on the Fed’s historically preferred price index, there was no sign of deflation, so it seemed strange that the Fed argued in favor of quantitative easing to avoid deflation
The source of the publicity, in 2010 the Fed switched from the personal consumption ferred measure of inflation. The CPI gives almost double the weight index. Giving that housing prices fell quite dramatically during the years 2006-2010, it is not surprising that the CPI showed some deflation, especially in 2008.
Getting back to quantitative easing
Even if the Fed’s argument about deflation was based on no more that a switch in price indexes, its desire to prime the pump for the faltering U.S. economy is genuine.
The recession that started in Dec 2007 pushed the unemployment rate above 10%, and the rate was slow to drop back below 9%.
So the Fed argued that qe2 would lower long-term interest rate and thereby give the economy a boost.
Qe3 was similarly justified on the ground that the unemployment rate had been slow to drop below 8%
When the Fed buys up government and other debt obligations, it will push investors into stocks and cooperate bonds- raising the latter’s some homeowners refinance their mortgages.
Some businesses will be helped, too, because they will have access to cheaper credit.
Such analysis is quite traditional and at times has worked in the short run.
In the long run, in contrast, large-scale purchase of debt, whether labeled money supply, a higher rate of inflation and a return of interest rates to their previous and even higher levels.
So, the Fed might well be thought of as begin on a tightrope of its own making. The huge infusion of reserve into the banking system helped moderate the recession of 2007-2009, but the payment of interest on reserves slowed the recovery from that recession. The presence of large excess reserves presents a huge potential threat inflation down the road, but if the reserve are pulled out of the banking system too fast, the economy will surely sink back in recession.
It is the classic case of the two-handed economic policy problem. On the one hand, the economy is threatened by severe inflation. On the other hand, it is threatened by a relapse into recession. Stay tuned, for this is one drama that will work itself out in front of your very eyes.