A potential problem is looming, and the media are pursuing a new story that builds on the following chain of reasoning: 1) higher inflation is coming;2) if CBs increase interest rates debts will explode and recession may ensue; 3) CBs are caught in an impossible dilemma 1/12
It´s perhaps too complex for some tweets, but.. Registered inflation this year is bound to be higher than present forecasts, resulting from one-off price spikes and base effects That will not start a sustained high inflation process, but temporary higher inflation is possible 2/
For example, Euro Area inflation increased suddenly from several months at -0.3% to +0.9% in Jan. This jump resulted mostly from several base effects, especially the change to German VAT. Inflation expectations increasing but higher in the US than in the EA 3/
The major one-off base effect will come from oil prices that decreased abysmally in March 2020 and have recovered. Some estimates put US inflation in April reaching 4%! After vaccinations, later in the year, pent-up consumer demand will also increase prices.4/
Despite the increased spending of accumulated savings, the savings rate will remain higher than before Covid for precautionary reasons (Fig 1). No permanent spending spree will materialise. Wages will remain subdued for a while (Fig2). Higher but not high inflation is coming.5/
However, seeing a slight inflation increase, old hands will start to hyperventilate (wrongly) about high inflation, some even thinking about old monetarism (this monetarism would require another thread). They will increase pressure on Central Banks (CBs) 6/
Temporary slightly higher inflation will increase bond yields, so investors must reduce or hedge duration.Higher yields tend to affect discount rates by more than the expectation of earnings-reaction to higher nominal growth & stock prices may suffer. (CBs shouldn´t intervene) 7/
CBs will not react to inflation going above 2% for a while. The FED already said it by adopting an average inflation targeting framework that allows for higher inflation offsetting the previous underperformance. The ECB & others will have to follow suit. 8/
My 1st tweet media story would require that inflation goes PERSISTENTLY higher, e.g.>3%<4%, unlikely as it seems. But let´s assume that inflation obliges. Would CBs refrain from increasing policy rates? No. Would debt sustainability explode? It depends... 9/
Inflation is associated with many things that the basic story ignores. Going up, it´s accompanied by higher nominal GDP level and growth. That helps to absorb old debt in a lower ratio to GDP. Overall outcomes depend on policies & nominal GDP growth vs nominal interest rate.10/
It´s well known that after WW II, higher growth and inflation contributed to the absorption of the war debt. True, a bit of financial repression also helped, but that doesn´t imply unchanged interest rates. In many cases, there was no need for fiscal austerity. 11/
The situation is different now. We cannot count on the real growth rates like the ones after WW II as we are still in a secular stagnation phase. But then this means that without sustained higher growth, persistently high inflation becomes more unlikely.12/12

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Vitor Constâncio

Vitor Constâncio Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @VMRConstancio

10 Feb
Not surprisingly, my previous tweets on bitcoin were misinterpreted by many. I didn´t predict the demise of bitcoin. I just pointed out that bitcoin changed its nature. From an initial aim of being a currency, it changed into an accepted asset for investment 1/9
As an asset, the future of bitcoin seems assured if it doesn´t become excessively volatile. Last year, various financial institutions, preceding Tesla, started to invest a very small part of their portfolios in bitcoins. As I said, the allocators of wealth stepped-in. That..2/
That reinforced the fact that bitcoin could not be a general currency for regular transactions by regular people. To buy one bitcoin it costs now (it´s going down a bit this morning) ≈ 45900 dollars or ≈ 37900 euros, in the currencies that everyone uses. So,… 3/
Read 9 tweets
8 Feb
Tesla just announced that it had bought 1.5 billion dollars of bitcoin and could in the future sell cars in bitcoins. Since this morning both Bitcoin and Tesla are going up in the market. Maybe there is afterall something in the saying that“Bitcoin is Tesla without the cars”1/ 20
Musk is seen as a genius, a true Midas, by many investors and millennials. For them he can never go wrong. He became recently the richest man in the world dur to Tesla stock valuation (+353% yoy). He moves markets and today´s announcement is “kind of legitimise “ bitcoin 2/
Tesla shares attained $870 which represents a Price/ Earnings ratio of 1.747 (!) on the basis of last year´s profits. Apple is at 37 and the S&P firms average is 23 (against a historical average ≈16). Future profits would have to increase a lot to justify a more normal ratio 3/
Read 20 tweets
19 Jan
Replying @ndrea_terzi The ECB cannot do yield curve control the Japanese way because it cannot hint at 19 10Y yields levels as objectives. To use the new EU Commission debt yields is not effective as maturities are longer, the amount is small (much below € 750bn) ..and 1/
..because it isn't (and cannot become) an equal benchmark to all countries' debt and the ECB has said to be committed to avoid fragmentation. The same applies to the use of OIS rates (that a few have advocated) besides the point that 10Y maturities are too thin a market. 2/
The only way the ECB could apply a sort of yield curve control approximately like Japan would be to concentrate purchases of countries' bonds on e.g. 10 years maturities without fixing any target for the 19 yields, hoping to attain some desired levels by calibrating well the ../3
Read 4 tweets
23 Dec 20
The US approved a new relief/stimulus package of almost 1 tr USD (4.5% GDP) on top of the 2.2 tr of last March. The commentariat said it would not be enough and more would be necessary next year. Big Government expenditures increasing more than in any other country 1/
Biden called it just “a down-payment” and (surprise) Trump called it an unsuitable “disgrace” and is threatening to veto it. He wants $2000 for each citizen (below $75000 annual income) instead of the law´s $600. The 5593 pages law (!) is full of “pork-barrel” measures 2/
e.g.” a $2.5 billion break for racecar tracks and..$6.3 billion write-off for business meals” or it “creates an independent commission to oversee horse racing, a priority of Senator Mitch McConnell” 3/nytimes.com/2020/12/22/us/…
Read 6 tweets
10 Dec 20
As a package of measures had been promised, markets were able to anticipate the ECB´s decisions ± correctly. The longer horizon for the TLTROs was perhaps a bit of a surprise but is the more relevant measure supporting credit supply, despite no change in the tier multiplier. 1/
The increase and extension of PEPP (and APP) offer a way to avoid any future cliff-effect by allowing a gradual phase-out of the programme. QE, when sovereign yields are already so low, has per se diminishing returns in terms of its impact on the economic recovery 2/
Further QE can, however, be effective if fiscal policy continues to be suitably expansionary, leading to sizable new debt issuance.The ECB “presence for longer”, is, of course, reassuring in that perspective. An insufficient fiscal stimulus continues to be a big risk for 2021. 3/
Read 6 tweets
27 Nov 20
The excellent ECB Financial Stability Review, ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/fsr/ec… illustrates well the 2 main risks I see for the EA economy next year: possible insufficient fiscal stimulus and weakening of bank credit supply. The FSR mentions “a slightly tighter fiscal stance" in 2021 1/
The FSR correct statement “fiscal tightening at a time when output gaps are still projected to be negative could exacerbate the current economic situation.”, caused some stir and many comments in social media. The same regarding the accompanying chart 2/
The FSR uses the Commission forecasts showing a slight increase of the cyclically-adjusted primary budget balance from -3.2% this year to -2.9% in 2021. 0.3% is a small change not comparable with the mistake of 2012/13 when it went from -0.6% in 2011 to +0.5 & +1.4 in 2012/13 3/
Read 12 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!