Get 40% Off
⚠ Earnings Alert! Which stocks are poised to surge?
See the stocks on our ProPicks radar. These strategies gained 19.7% year-to-date.
Unlock full list

End Of Fed's Stimulus Won't Settle Debate Over Its Effectiveness

Published 10/29/2014, 04:12 PM
Updated 10/29/2014, 04:30 PM
End Of Fed's Stimulus Won't Settle Debate Over Its Effectiveness

By Meagan Clark - For six years, the Federal Reserve’s unprecedented stimulus program poured trillions of dollars into the U.S. economy to maintain about 2 percent inflation and low borrowing costs. The idea behind so-called quantitative easing was that the Fed purchased bonds and pushed investors into riskier assets like stocks to prop up financial markets and recharge money flows after the Great Recession.

Now, as the Fed’s efforts wind down to a close, economic historians are looking back and debating how effectively the three phases of quantitative easing (QE) boosted the economy. The matter is ripe for debate because even the experts will never know for sure how the economy would have fared without the stimulus.

“It’s very hard to go back and say what would have happened had we not done something,” said John Canally, chief economic strategist for LPL Financial. “We do know what did happen: the economy recovered.”

Indeed, the S&P 500 stock index is up 129 percent since QE began in 2008, while gross domestic product, adjusted for inflation, is up 9.8 percent. The unemployment rate has dropped one percentage point to just below 6 percent, and inflation is up from 1.1 percent to 1.7 percent, under the Fed’s 2 percent goal. Auto sales are up 61 percent, and housing starts are up 56 percent.

But economists cannot say how much of this change occurred as a direct result of Fed intervention. In addition, some might argue that the tepid pace of economic recovery shows quantitative easing didn’t do enough, Canally added. And many other factors like the government’s bailout of automakers also contributed to the economy’s return to health.

Critics of the Fed's policy, like J.D. Foster of the Heritage Foundation, argue that QE has a key weakness: Eventually the Fed must unload the bonds it now owns. Selling the bonds, when the economy is in better health and interest rates are rising, will cause rates to rise faster, which will effectively kill off the recovery, Foster argues.

The Fed began QE1 in November 2008, when the government began backing banks after the catastrophic collapse of the financial service firm Lehman Brothers. In the past, the Fed had cut short-term interest rates to zap the economy into greater spending, but this time those rates were already near zero, so the Fed turned to QE to turbocharge the economy. In 2008, sales of homes, cars and other items were steeply dropping, so the Fed wanted easy money (think credit) to entice Americans back into spending.

© Reuters/Brian Snyder. Federal Reserve Chair Janet L. Yellen

As the economy began improving, the Fed halted purchases in June 2010, but then restarted purchases only two months later when the Fed decided the economy wasn’t growing quickly enough. In November 2010, the Fed announced a second round of QE, and in September 2012, a third round. Then in June 2013, then-Fed Chair Ben Bernanke announced a “tapering” of the Fed’s QE program contingent upon positive economic data.

“The Fed has been able to taper into 2014 without ill effect on the economy,” said Greg McBride, chief financial analyst for Bankrate.com. “Now the economy is growing consistently and at a faster pace than it was prior to QE3.”

As of this month, the Fed had accumulated a record $4.48 trillion in bonds. The effects on the U.S. economy, a lift to inflation and lid on borrowing costs, will continue months beyond the end of the purchases.

Latest comments

Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.