Zirp and the double dip

By Felix Salmon
July 8, 2010
Greg Ip has an interesting argument: if we were really headed for recession, he says, the yield curve would be inverted. But you can't have an inverted yield curve when the Fed sets short rates at zero. Therefore, we won't have a double dip.

" data-share-img="" data-share="twitter,facebook,linkedin,reddit,google" data-share-count="true">

Greg Ip has an interesting argument: if we were really headed for a recession, he says, the yield curve would be inverted. But you can’t have an inverted yield curve when the Fed sets short rates at zero. Therefore, we won’t have a double dip.

Ip concedes that Japan provides an obvious counterexample of a country which had a recession and Zirp at the same time. But he’s convinced that in the US, loose monetary policy will suffice to keep us growing:

Our entire financial system relies on borrowing short and lending long and profiting from the spread. When that spread disappears, sooner or later, so does liquidity. In 2007, that happened in dramatic fashion, partly because we didn’t realise how precarious liquidity was in the vast shadow banking system. Indeed, the more I study the events of the last few years, the more I’m convinced that illiquidity contributed more to the crisis than insolvency.

What all this tells me is that as long as the yield curve remains relatively steep, it is a powerful inducement to credit creation. Credit is currently contracting, but with time the positive lending spread will recapitalise banks and awaken interest in lending. Right now is an excellent time to start a bank: just check out the enthusiasm among private equity funds for buying failed banks from the FDIC.

This is not very convincing: if zero interest rates are so good at fostering new lending, how come credit is currently contracting? After all, we’ve had zero interest rates for a good 18 months now, how long is this supposed to take?

My feeling is that we had a boom and bust in credit, and that most companies — the ones not owned by private equity shops — were sensible enough to avoid levering up during the boom. That’s how they survived the bust so easily, in contrast to banks and homeowners. They’re now sitting on large amounts of cash, and the likelihood that they’re going to start borrowing again in any serious quantity is low. Meanwhile, individuals have embarked upon a long and slow process of saving more and paying down their debts, rather than levering up. In other words, if you’re looking forward to a credit-fueled recovery, you might well be in for disappointment.

At the same time, zero interest rates are still too high: the Taylor Rule would set interest rates in the US at -1.3%. So even a Zirp is restrictive, absent quantitative easing.

None of which means we’re going to enter another recession, of course. And indeed for most people it doesn’t really matter: the key issue facing Americans today is that they can’t find jobs, and it’s increasingly obvious that positive GDP growth isn’t much better when it comes to job creation than negative GDP growth. But it does help a lot on the fiscal side of things. And if you’re worried about government finances, you should be worried sick about the possibility of a double dip. Which is real, zero interest rates notwithstanding.

More From Felix Salmon
Post Felix
The Piketty pessimist
The most expensive lottery ticket in the world
The problems of HFT, Joe Stiglitz edition
Private equity math, Nuveen edition
Five explanations for Greece’s bond yield
Comments
4 comments so far

Felix,

Americans face a number of key issues, including jobs (or lack thereof):
1/4 of home owners are underwater, and the number of bankruptcy filings is continuously rising. This means that Americans are less likely to come back as the big consumers they used to be.

Many small businesses had to close, or are facing an impossibility to go on because they can no longer rely on credit from the banks. The owners of those businesses may not necessarily join the ranks of officially unemployed, but still – they are unemployed, and can’t spend what they used to.

Posted by yr2009 | Report as abusive

[Ip concedes that Japan provides an obvious counterexample of a country which had a recession and Zirp at the same time]

If he concedes this, he does so incorrectly. Japan never had three consecutive quarters of negative growth throughout the 1990s. It had a long period of stagnation in the “lost decade”.

Posted by dsquared | Report as abusive

“…..if we were really headed for a recession, he says, the yield curve would be inverted. But you can’t have an inverted yield curve when the Fed sets short rates at zero. Therefore, we won’t have a double dip…..”

In the Peru/Bolivia altiplano region around Lake Titicaca, people know that just before a heavy storm all the frogs begin to croak. So if the wet season rains are late in arriving, the shamans and such gather together a few frogs and make them croak. This, according to the mystics, brings the rain.

Posted by ottorock | Report as abusive

Or … Paul the Octopus could be asked, for much higher odds of accuracy.

Posted by hsvkitty | Report as abusive
Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/