Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
interestrateripoff

Debt Levels, Big Monetary Stimulus On Tap At G20

Recommended Posts

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/04/19/uk-g20-eu-debt-idUKBRE93I01220130419

Finance leaders of the G20 economies on Friday were set to debate specific targets for reigning in debt levels and the potential dangers from the latest round of aggressive easing of monetary policy from the world's biggest central banks.

They were also poised to demand swifter resolution to setting guidelines for financial benchmarks like the Libor interest rate in the wake of a global rate-rigging scandal.

But a rethinking of the austerity push among the world's biggest economies loomed as the biggest talking point. Advanced economies, particularly in Europe, have undertaken sharp austerity drives in recent years to curb growing debt, but those efforts have at times damaged economies already suffering from capital flight and under-investment from the private sector.

EU Economic and Monetary Affairs Commissioner Olli Rehn told Reuters in an interview on Thursday that a period of reduced spending and borrowing was necessary to calm markets concerned about out-of-control debt levels, particularly in peripheral European countries. That time has passed, he said.

"Decisive action was taken. Now as we have restored the credibility in the short-term, that gives us the possibility of having a smoother path of fiscal adjustment in the medium-term," he said.

The United States has opposed committing to any targeted level of public debt as a percentage of GDP, a common way to measure a nation's debt burden.

"I think an issue that will come up ... is the issue of hard targets, or not, for debt-to-GDP," Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty told reporters on Thursday.

Everyone has taken measures to ensure the debt burden keeps growing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://uk.reuters.co...E93I01220130419

Advanced economies, particularly in Europe, have undertaken sharp austerity drives in recent years to curb growing debt, but those efforts have at times damaged economies already suffering from capital flight and under-investment from the private sector.

the most popular stupid comment I see so often mainly from the left part of the political spectrum

so if the austerity (spending only what you earn) is so bad and damaging, where is the money to continue with the unsustainable debt and spending going to come from? printing presses? default? hyper inflation?

it is not just our political leaders are economical morons. even the top journalists are just the same. As Maggie said: they always run out of other people money ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many have said it would end with a crack-up boom then total collapse. There's a giant wall of 'funny money' just sitting there. This change of language in the last few months looks like they're getting ready to finally allow it to flow?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advanced economies, particularly in Europe, have undertaken sharp austerity drives in recent years to curb growing debt, but those efforts have at times damaged economies already suffering from capital flight and under-investment from the private sector.

It's so moronic that Reuters doesn't even make it to fish and chip wrapping.

Did austerity cause the economic collapse?

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's so moronic that Reuters doesn't even make it to fish and chip wrapping.

Did austerity cause the economic collapse?

Germany's inability to force vast amounts of debt/credit into their system via a house price bubble led to their lowest unemployment rate in decades. But we dont talk about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/text-g20-communique-meeting-washington-172848259.html

Communiqué

Meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors

Washington, 18-19 April 2013

1. We, the G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors, met to discuss the current situation in the global economy and to bring forward the policy agenda for our Leaders’ summit in September.

Global Economy and G20 Framework for Strong, Sustainable and Balanced Growth

2. We reaffirmed our determination to raise growth and create jobs.

3. The global economy has avoided some major tail risks and financial market conditions continue to improve. However, global growth has continued to be too weak and unemployment remains too high in many countries. The recovery remains uneven and is progressing at different speeds with emerging markets experiencing relatively strong growth, the United States demonstrating a gradual strengthening of private demand, and the recovery in the euro area as a whole yet to materialize. Policy uncertainty, private deleveraging, fiscal drag, impaired credit intermediation, and a still incomplete rebalancing of global demand continue to weigh on global growth prospects. Medium-term challenges are also present in many economies, including those related to fiscal sustainability and financial stability.

4. We have agreed that while progress has been made, further actions are required to make growth strong, sustainable and balanced. Some countries have taken steps to stimulate activity since we last met. In particular, Japan’s recent policy actions are intended to stop deflation and support domestic demand. In addition, Korea announced an active macroeconomic policy package. However, much more is needed to fulfill our commitment to address the ongoing weakness in the global economy. Major policy priorities remain largely the same. In the euro area the foundations of economic and monetary union should be enhanced, including through an urgent movement towards banking union, further reducing financial fragmentation, and continued strengthening of banks’ balance sheets. Further progress toward a balanced medium-term fiscal consolidation plan is necessary for the United States, although significant deficit reduction has already been achieved. Japan should define a credible medium-term fiscal plan. Large surplus economies should consider taking further steps to boost domestic sources of growth. We will continue to implement ambitious structural reforms to increase our growth potential and create jobs.

5. Maintaining fiscal sustainability in advanced economies remains essential. Advanced economies will develop medium-term fiscal strategies by the time of the St Petersburg Summit in line with the commitments made by our Leaders in Los Cabos. We will present and review our strategies at our next meeting.

6. We reiterate our commitments to move more rapidly toward more market-determined exchange rate systems and exchange rate flexibility to reflect underlying fundamentals, and avoid persistent exchange rate misalignments. We will refrain from competitive devaluation and will not target our exchange rates for competitive purposes, and we will resist all forms of protectionism and keep our markets open. We reiterate that excess volatility of financial flows and disorderly movements in exchange rates have adverse implications for economic and financial stability. Monetary policy should be directed toward domestic price stability and continuing to support economic recovery according to the respective mandates of central banks. We will be mindful of unintended negative side effects stemming from extended periods of monetary easing.

International Financial Architecture

7. Completing the ongoing reforms of IMF governance is indispensable for enhancing its credibility, legitimacy and effectiveness. For this reason the ratification of the 2010 IMF Quota and Governance Reform is urgently needed. We support the IMF Executive Board’s decision to integrate the process of reaching a final agreement on a new quota formula with the 15th General Review of Quotas. We remain committed, together with the whole IMF membership, to agree on the quota formula and complete the 15th General Quota Review by January 2014 as agreed at the Seoul Summit and reiterated in Cannes and Los Cabos. We attach high importance to securing continued progress in meeting this objective, including on key elements at the September St Petersburg Summit and subsequently at the October 2013 G20 Ministerial and IMFC meetings. We reaffirm our previous commitment that the distribution of quotas based on the formula should better reflect the relative weights of IMF members in the world economy, which have changed substantially in view of strong GDP growth in dynamic emerging market and developing countries. We reaffirm the need to protect the voice and representation of the IMF poorest members as part of this General Review of Quotas.

8. In pursuit of our goal of strengthening the existing practices of public debt management, we ask the IMF and the World Bank to consult with their members regarding the implementation and a possible review of the “Guidelines for Public Debt Management”. This will help ascertain if amendments are required to take into account, among other things, evolution in the issuance environment and the emergence of complex interactions between public debt management, monetary and fiscal policies. We look forward to an update on this work by our July meeting and a progress report to the Leaders’ Summit in September. We also note the ongoing work of the OECD to review leading practices for raising, managing and retiring public debt. We welcome the ongoing efforts to strengthen the Fund’s public debt sustainability analysis framework for market-access countries, which is focused on key risks from high debt burden and its profile, macro-fiscal developments, and contingent liabilities. We expect that this will complement our work on medium term fiscal strategies.

9. We reaffirm the important role that Regional Financing Arrangements (RFAs) can play in the global financial safety nets. Further facilitating the dialog among RFAs, as well as strengthening cooperation and increasing complementarities between the IMF and RFAs, while safeguarding the independence of the respective institutions, could support financial stability and thus help promote growth. We note the IMF work on stocktaking of its engagement with RFAs, as well as the recent G20/IMF seminar that reviewed developments in RFAs and explored options for enhancing their cooperation with the IMF. Starting from this basis, and building on the principles for IMF-RFA cooperation we agreed in Cannes, we will discuss possible ways to further enhance that cooperation at our next meeting, in order to assess possible options for further policy recommendations by the time of the Leaders’ Summit in St Petersburg.

10. We will contribute to a successful International Development Association (IDA) 17 replenishment, as well as African Development Fund (AfDF) 13 replenishment.

Long-term Financing for Investment

11. We underscore the importance of long-term financing for investment, including in infrastructure, in enhancing economic growth and job creation. We are taking forward work on this issue, including through adoption of the Terms of Reference of the new G20 Study Group, with inputs envisaged from the World Bank Group, OECD, FSB, IMF, UN, UNCTAD, and from participating countries. These inputs will cover their experience and good practices in creating the necessary conditions for mobilizing long-term financing for investment and promoting a sound investment climate. We will consider the Study Group’s work plan and any additional policy recommendations later this year. We welcome progress by the OECD on the High Level Principles for long-term investment financing by institutional investors and look forward for a report by our next meeting.

Financial Regulation

12. Half of G20 jurisdictions have now issued final regulations to implement Basel III, and the remainder commits to do so as soon as possible in 2013. We welcome the assessments, in some cases initial and ongoing, by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision of consistency of these regulations with its framework and look forward to further progress on ensuring the conformity of the regulations with the Basel III text. We look forward to the July report on comparability of risk-weighted assets. We will undertake the necessary legislative steps to implement resolution powers and tools consistent with the FSB’s Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes, including the legal basis for cross-border cooperation and coordination. Our objective is to allow authorities to resolve financial institutions in an orderly manner. The FSB will report to the St Petersburg Summit on the progress made towards ending “too big to fail”. We note the progress in implementation of OTC derivatives reforms and we are committed to complete the remaining legislative and regulatory frameworks for these reforms. We look forward to the macroeconomic impact study of OTC regulatory reforms, which is underway. We urge the key regulators to intensify their efforts to address cross-border derivatives issues and report by our July meeting specific and practical recommendations to resolve by the St Petersburg Summit remaining cross-border conflicts, inconsistencies, gaps and duplicative requirements. We also call for a feasibility study on how information from trade repositories can be aggregated and shared among authorities, so as to enable comprehensive monitoring of risks to financial stability. Jurisdictions should remove barriers to trade reporting by market participants, with particular attention to removing barriers to reporting of counterparty information and to information access by authorities. We look forward to further policy recommendations for the oversight and regulation of the shadow banking sector by the Leaders’ Summit. We support the Regulatory Oversight Committee of the Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) initiative in their efforts to launch the Global LEI Foundation as soon as possible. We reiterate our call on the IASB and FASB to finalize by the end of 2013 their work on key outstanding projects for achieving a single set of high-quality standards.

13. We welcome the work of the BIS and IOSCO to improve the oversight and governance frameworks for financial benchmarks, and call on the FSB to coordinate and guide work on the necessary reforms to short-term interest rate benchmarks and to report in July on progress towards oversight and governance frameworks for financial benchmark reform for consideration at the Summit. We support the launch of the FSB’s peer review on national authorities’ steps to reduce reliance on credit rating agencies’ ratings, and ask for a status report including the work by standard setting bodies to be presented to the Leaders at the St Petersburg Summit. We take note of the IOSCO Report on Transparency and Competition Among Credit Rating Agencies. We ask the FSB to examine the need for further work in this area in the light of current domestic and regional regulatory initiatives.

14. More needs to be done to address the issues of international tax avoidance and evasion, in particular through tax havens, as well as non-cooperative jurisdictions. We welcome the Global Forum's report on the effectiveness of information exchange. We commend the progress made by many jurisdictions, but urge all jurisdictions to quickly implement the recommendations made, in particular the 14 jurisdictions, where the legal framework fails to comply with the standard. Moreover, we are looking forward to overall ratings to be allocated by year end to jurisdictions reviewed on their effective practice of information exchange and monitoring to be made on a continuous basis. In view of the next G20 Summit, we also strongly encourage all jurisdictions to sign or express interest in signing the Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters and call on the OECD to report on progress. We welcome progress made towards automatic exchange of information which is expected to be the standard and urge all jurisdictions to move towards exchanging information automatically with their treaty partners, as appropriate. We look forward to the OECD working with G20 countries to report back on the progress in developing of a new multilateral standard on automatic exchange of information, taking into account country-specific characteristics. The Global Forum will be in charge of monitoring. We welcome the progress made in the development of an action plan on tax base erosion and profit shifting by the OECD and look forward to a comprehensive proposal and a substantial discussion at our next meeting in July.

15. We reiterate our support for FATF work, notably the identification and monitoring of high-risk jurisdictions with strategic AML/CFT deficiencies. We must tackle the risks raised by opacity of legal persons and legal arrangements, and encourage all countries to take measures to ensure they meet the FATF standards regarding the identification of the beneficial owners of legal persons, other corporate vehicles and trusts, that is also relevant for tax purposes.

Financial Inclusion

16. We welcome the launch of the Financial Inclusion Support Framework. We welcome the upcoming Seminar on “Women and Finance” and the launch of the Women’s Finance Hub hosted by the SME Finance Forum, which will provide best practices and knowledge sharing. We call on the Global Partnership for Financial Inclusion to report on the gaps and challenges in the global environment for SME finance, as well as potential policy responses, by our July meeting. We welcome the Financial Action Task Force’s revised Guidance on Financial Inclusion as an important step in helping to create an enabling regulatory environment for innovative financial inclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the most popular stupid comment I see so often mainly from the left part of the political spectrum

so if the austerity (spending only what you earn) is so bad and damaging, where is the money to continue with the unsustainable debt and spending going to come from? printing presses? default? hyper inflation?

it is not just our political leaders are economical morons. even the top journalists are just the same. As Maggie said: they always run out of other people money ...

No. All money is debt. By reducing debt you are destroying money and this causes deflation which leads to bankruptcies. The money supply needs to constantly expand and the only way at the moment to do this is by increasing government debt. And that is exactly what is happening. The coalition government never planned to introduce austerity, that was just a way of satisfying Tory voters who think the economy works in the same way as a household budget.

They are not spending other peoples money, the money was created from nothing. They are devaluing other peoples money but that is different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so if the austerity (spending only what you earn) is so bad and damaging, where is the money to continue with the unsustainable debt and spending going to come from? printing presses? default? hyper inflation?

That's only true on a personal level.

When the corporate sector stops investing then individuals lose their jobs and the whole economy starts a downward spiral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Germany's inability to force vast amounts of debt/credit into their system via a house price bubble led to their lowest unemployment rate in decades. But we dont talk about that.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tory voters who think the economy works in the same way as a household budget.

It does, its thinking it doesn't that's got so many countries into so much trouble, the simple truth is for any person, company or nation is, if you live beyond your means then eventually you will end up in trouble, if you can find anything wrong with the above statement, please post it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does, its thinking it doesn't that's got so many countries into so much trouble, the simple truth is for any person, company or nation is, if you live beyond your means then eventually you will end up in trouble, if you can find anything wrong with the above statement, please post it.

Investment.

A company that is failing had better start investing in new business lines, new equipment, something to turn things around.

The problem with the austerity debate is that it is has been polarised into a fight between more government spending and less government spending.

That's almost irrelevant. The important question is how should the government be spending money in order to fix structural problems in the economy.

If that requires some short-term borrowing, if it requires cuts in some areas, well so be it.

Instead of discussing how much the government should do, it would be more productive to discuss what the government should do.

Edited by (Blizzard)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does, its thinking it doesn't that's got so many countries into so much trouble, the simple truth is for any person, company or nation is, if you live beyond your means then eventually you will end up in trouble, if you can find anything wrong with the above statement, please post it.

A household cannot create money. A private bank and the government can. That is the difference. It has nothing to do with "living beyond our means". The government HAS to create debt. If it does not loans cannot be repaid and the economy grinds to a halt. If our currency was finite you might have a point. As it is not, you do not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A household cannot create money. A private bank and the government can. That is the difference. It has nothing to do with "living beyond our means". The government HAS to create debt. If it does not loans cannot be repaid and the economy grinds to a halt. If our currency was finite you might have a point. As it is not, you do not.

Why can debt interest not be paid by a constant money supply being recycled through the economy? In theory and/or in practice

That's not a rhetorical question, I'd like to understand this sort of thing much better than I do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. All money is debt. By reducing debt you are destroying money and this causes deflation which leads to bankruptcies. The money supply needs to constantly expand and the only way at the moment to do this is by increasing government debt. And that is exactly what is happening. The coalition government never planned to introduce austerity, that was just a way of satisfying Tory voters who think the economy works in the same way as a household budget.

They are not spending other peoples money, the money was created from nothing. They are devaluing other peoples money but that is different.

Except government debt bought by the public doesnt increase the money supply nor does paying off debt held by the same.

Edited by Police

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why can debt interest not be paid by a constant money supply being recycled through the economy? In theory and/or in practice

That's not a rhetorical question, I'd like to understand this sort of thing much better than I do.

As far as I am aware it is because the debt increases while the money supply stays the same and eventually the money could not be spent fast enough to cover the growth of the debt. The debt is never paid off, with interest it just keeps growing and money has to be spent faster and faster to ensure that bankruptcies, defaults etc. do not occur..

From wiki:

The velocity of money is the average frequency with which a unit of money is spent on new goods and services produced domestically in a specific period of time.

It would eventually get to the point where even computers could not process the transactions fast enough.

This is the best link I can find at the moment that kind of explains some of the problems with debt and the velocity of money :

http://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2013/04/01/is-there-enough-money-to-pay-off-debt-plus-interest-a-closer-look/

Except government debt bought by the public doesn't increase the money supply nor does paying off debt held by the same.

The money the public are using to buy these guilts is debt and will have interest linked to it.

Government debt is also bought by the Bank of England through its QE program which has directly increased the money supply:

http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/5747/economics/money-supply-bank-lending-and-quantitative-easing/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why can debt interest not be paid by a constant money supply being recycled through the economy? In theory and/or in practice

That's not a rhetorical question, I'd like to understand this sort of thing much better than I do.

It can be, but it is inflationary, printing pieces of paper does not create wealth, it devalues the currency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A household cannot create money. A private bank and the government can. That is the difference. It has nothing to do with "living beyond our means". The government HAS to create debt. If it does not loans cannot be repaid and the economy grinds to a halt. If our currency was finite you might have a point. As it is not, you do not.

That created money needs to be paid back.

Love the comment The government has to create debt to repay loans :lol::lol:

The gold standard was finite, all fiat monetary systems fail as they all fall to the temptations of printing, 0.5% interest rates is back door printing.

If you believe that you can live beyond your means then you are sadly wrong, as starving people in Greece are finding out right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Germany's inability to force vast amounts of debt/credit into their system via a house price bubble led to their lowest unemployment rate in decades. But we dont talk about that.

What's most depressing is that Germany didn't do it by accident. They saw that they needed to keep their cost base low, including housing and wages, in order to compete with China in the medium term. The fact that other economies had no viable strategy is not Germany's fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's most depressing is that Germany didn't do it by accident. They saw that they needed to keep their cost base low, including housing and wages, in order to compete with China in the medium term. The fact that other economies had no viable strategy is not Germany's fault.

Germany is a country, its incapable of thinking.

If you think all this was planned, you are sadly mistaken, the eventual outcome of all this is a breakup of the Euro which will cost ALL the countries that entered into the madness a fortune.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The money the public are using to buy these guilts is debt and will have interest linked to it.

Thanks for the non sequitur; completely irrelevant to the point that government indebting itself creates more money. Clearly, in the majority of cases it doesn't. Just like in the majority of cases, government paying back debt doesn't destroy money.

Government debt is also bought by the Bank of England through its QE program which has directly increased the money supply:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt

You've chosen to pick one government. Care to comment on the rest?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the non sequitur; completely irrelevant to the point that government indebting itself creates more money. Clearly, in the majority of cases it doesn't. Just like in the majority of cases, government paying back debt doesn't destroy money.

Thinking about this you are right. Although the bonds they sell have interest related to them and therefore requires an expansion of the money supply, unlike commercial banking, the transaction itself does not increase the money supply.

You've chosen to pick one government. Care to comment on the rest?

From wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_supply

The primary tool of monetary policy is open market operations. This entails managing the quantity of money in circulation through the buying and selling of various financial assets, such as treasury bills, government bonds, or foreign currencies. Purchases of these assets result in currency entering market circulation (while sales of these assets remove money from circulation).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the non sequitur; completely irrelevant to the point that government indebting itself creates more money. Clearly, in the majority of cases it doesn't. Just like in the majority of cases, government paying back debt doesn't destroy money.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt

You've chosen to pick one government. Care to comment on the rest?

Surely QE expands the money supply?

QE new debt issuence buys the already issued debt with new (funny money) QE debt; whereas conventionally government issued debt, is goverment debt bought by already issued debt, already in the system, NOT QE funny money debt. So defecit spending does not increase the money supply, as it sucks money/debt, already issued debt from the system? Am i right?

But does QE debt expand debt issuence, as it buys already issued debt, so it too sucks old debt from the system. That debt then sits on the BoE balance sheet until maturity, and the coupon price is settled via the treasury/tax revenue? Someone once said that QE, lowers short term bond yield rates on goverment debt? They may have a point?

Is QE money actually entering the monetry system, effecting velocity at all? Or is it lowering short term government borrowing costs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely QE expands the money supply?

Well yes, any government debt bought by a primary bank (central bank included) expands the money supply - buts that why I said "the public" and most public debt in the world is held by the public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. All money is debt. By reducing debt you are destroying money and this causes deflation which leads to bankruptcies. The money supply needs to constantly expand and the only way at the moment to do this is by increasing government debt. And that is exactly what is happening. The coalition government never planned to introduce austerity, that was just a way of satisfying Tory voters who think the economy works in the same way as a household budget.

They are not spending other peoples money, the money was created from nothing. They are devaluing other peoples money but that is different.

Agreed

I have eventually come to the same conclusion. Debt must continue to rise so that the new debt money can fund company profits. If debt levels stay the same half of company's will make a loss and the other half a profit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Investment.

A company that is failing had better start investing in new business lines, new equipment, something to turn things around.

Once a fisherman has caught all the fish in the lake is there any point in carrying on fishing or investing in new equipment?

The lake owner (the government) will have to restock the lake before it's worth the fisherman investing any money in new equipment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 245 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.