Liz Peek
  • Articles
  • Videos
  • Radio
  • About
  • Contact
screen_shot_2017-10-20_at_115459_am_1
October 20, 2017

Trump loves cheap credit — bad news for Taylor’s Fed chances

Liz Peek Articles

John Taylor, darling of conservative economists, will not be the next Fed Chair. Why? Because President Trump will not want to change a winning game. He is, after all, very fond of winning.

President Trump said he will make his selection for Federal Reserve chair before he leaves for Asia on Nov. 3. In pursuit of that goal, Trump has been interviewing possible successors to Janet Yellen, whose four-year term ends on Feb. 3.

As is normal for this White House, insiders are pushing candidates whose ideologies span a wide spectrum. The president has indicated that he will consider reappointing Yellen; he met with her briefly Thursday.

He has also interviewed John Taylor, a well-respected Stanford economist whose view of the Fed role differs markedly from that of the current chair. Other possible picks, who more or less bridge the divide between Taylor and Yellen, include National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn, Federal Reserve Governor Jerome “Jay” Powell and former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh.

John Taylor is well known for endorsing a less interventionist Fed, and for his so-called “Taylor Rule.” That guideline, as Taylor wrote in a 2016 Wall Street Journal op-ed, “calls for central banks to increase interest rates by a certain amount when price inflation rises and to decrease interest rates by a certain amount when the economy goes into a recession.”

He advocates for a clear, rules-based monetary strategy, not, as critics have charged, for inflexibility.

When he introduced his rule in 1993, the expectation was that when inflation is in line with the Fed’s targeted level and the economy is operating at full potential, the real federal funds rate would be 2 percent — about its historical average.

That may sound like what has taken place under Janet Yellen, but Taylor says the Fed has kept interest rates too low for too long, policies that have contributed to the sluggish recovery and for credit distortions. He also would not have condoned the ground-breaking quantitative easing program, which has led to the Fed’s current unprecedented holdings of $4.5 trillion in Treasuries and mortgage-backed securities.

He says the Fed’s moves have created uncertainty, driven investors into riskier assets seeking yield and that ultra-low rates have led to excess government spending.

In practical terms, if he were head of the Fed, Taylor would probably push rates up faster than the gradual increase being orchestrated by Yellen, and he would reduce the Fed’s balance sheet more aggressively. Many think that could be risky to economic growth and to the stock market. That could in turn be risky to President Trump.

Arguments over the fine points of monetary policy are unlikely to move the president. Conservative economists like Larry Kudlow have told Trump that higher rates and a stronger dollar, especially in conjunction with tax cuts, would encourage investment in the U.S. and lead to higher productivity and growth.

But the president will hear from others who say that only by gradually reining in the loose money will he safeguard the best thing going for his administration — the booming stock market. Since Election Day, the S&P is ahead 19 percent, a fact that Trump regularly notes with enthusiasm.

With the liberal media critical of every step he takes, the president can rightly enjoy the anonymous kudos bestowed by investors who cheer easy money, the prospect of a tax cuts and lighter regulations on industry. Why would he put that at risk?

That will be the advice he gets from Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, who is said to be recommending Jay Powell for the Fed post. Powell would, in effect, be a Yellen surrogate. He has mostly agreed with her management.

Reappointing Janet Yellen herself would be politically toxic, since many Trump supporters dislike the aggressive measures undertaken by the Fed in recent years.

Visiting Hoover Institute fellow Kevin Warsh represents a Goldilocks choice — appeasing those who are critical of Yellen’s policies, yet he’s not as controversial as Taylor. Gary Cohn is close to Trump; that could weigh in his favor.

Cohn has been a strong advocate of loosening financial regulations imposed by Dodd-Frank in the wake of the financial crisis. Since rulemaking comes under the aegis of the Fed, that could boost his prospects.

The president has said on numerous occasions he favors low interest rates. Of course he does; he’s a real estate developer, an industry that thrives on cheap credit.

That will also drive him to a Yellen-esque pick. In the end, though, Trump’s choice will most importantly signal comfort with the status quo and a stock market that continues to hit new highs. That will not be Taylor.

TheHill.com

Published on The Hill

Netflix subscriber adds beat estimates as original shows lure viewers John Kelly showed us what incredible dignity, honor and truthfulness look like

Related Posts

Democrats’ bizarre affection for illegal aliens

Articles

Democrats’ bizarre affection for illegal aliens

Republicans need to grow a spine and support Trump’s agenda

Articles

Republicans need to grow a spine and support Trump’s agenda

Screenshot 2019-06-26 07.54.58

Articles

What Kamala Harris buzz is telling us. Read between the lines, America

Recent Posts

  • Democrats’ bizarre affection for illegal aliensDemocrats’ bizarre affection for illegal aliens
  • Republicans need to grow a spine and support Trump’s agendaRepublicans need to grow a spine and support Trump’s agenda
  • Screenshot 2019-06-26 07.54.58What Kamala Harris buzz is telling us. Read between the lines, America
  • Screenshot 2025-05-02 at 8.06.58 AMChina underestimates Trump and his trade war — America is ready for battle

Tweets by Liz

Unable to load Tweets

Follow

Liz on Facebook

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons

Liz Peek

2 days ago

Liz Peek

My Morning Rant:
John Hawley, Senator from Missouri, is out with a blistering attack on Republicans in Congress who want to “cut” Medicaid spending. He declares those in favor of Medicaid reforms contained in the House bill “a noisy contingent of corporatist Republicans — call it the party’s Wall Street wing” who are not on board with working-class Americans and who want to “build our big, beautiful bill around slashing health insurance for the working poor”. www.nytimes.com/2025/05/12/opinion/josh-hawley-dont-cut-medicaid.html
What rot. Working Americans of all classes are sick and tired of an ever-growing amount of their hard-earned taxes going to fund those who are not working. This is not a Wall Street issue- it’s a fairness issue. Though some groups say most Medicaid recipients are working, that is not true. A study by AEI showed that “In December 2022, 44 percent of non-disabled working age Medicaid recipients without children worked at least 80 hours” per month, compared to 72% not receiving Medicaid. Focusing on “prime working ages of 25 to 54, the share working at least 80 hours was 51 percent among Medicaid recipients and 84 percent among non-Medicaid recipients.” So why would 49% not be working?
Here’s the problem: the Medicaid changes that GOP legislators want to make don’t target “the working poor”, they target able-bodied men and women who are not working, and who historically would not have qualified for Medicaid benefits. Only when Obama rescinded the work requirements for Medicaid did the program blow up entirely and become the drain on the fiscal purse that we see today. As he states in his op-ed, Hawley’s problem is this: “Today [Medicaid] serves over 70 million Americans, including well over one million residents of Missouri, the state I represent.” Hawley, who was elected last fall by a 14-point margin, fears he’ll lose ground with those million recipients if he embraces fiscal common sense. Or maybe he fears losing the support of healthcare professionals, who donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to his campaign. www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/josh-hawley/summary?cid=N00041620
Our country has seen a long-term decline in able-bodied men working. The labor participation rate for that group is 89.1% which sounds high until you realize that it was 97.1% in 1960. That’s a huge slide, with troubling implications for U.S. productivity. If you believe, as I do, that work is healthy, it is also bad news for the individuals who are, at least in some cases, gaming the system.
Instead of railing about sincere efforts to reform an out-of-control entitlement, why doesn’t Hawley turn his attentions to improving job opportunities and training in his state? Or attracting more employers? And, where are his ideas for cutting federal spending, which is too high and which is hurting our nation? Some $50 billion in Medicaid outlays funds fraud or constitutes “improper payments.” What is Hawley doing to confront that?
Maybe I would be more impressed with his arguments but for his having published his screed in the New York Times- is that the most efficient way to speak to working-class Americans? Bernie Sanders probably thinks so, and so does Josh Hawley.
… See MoreSee Less

Link thumbnail

Sen. Josh Hawley – Campaign Finance Summary

Fundraising profile for Sen. Josh Hawley – Missouri

Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 4
  • Shares: 1
  • Comments: 2

Comment on Facebook

We have to end the idea that working for McDonalds at the counter is the end game career wise. It’s what you do in high school and college to pay your bills. If you want to be in that industry, you need to think manager then owner as that is the career.

Uniparty in action. They are there to Take money, not help The People.

Liz Peek

3 days ago

Liz Peek

Democrats have no platform, no message and no leader. BUT- they have decided (weirdly) to go to bat for criminals in the country illegally (a tautology.) Considering we had an election but six months ago that was all about immigration – it’s hard to fathom
… See MoreSee Less

Link thumbnail

LIZ PEEK: Democrats' bizarre affection for illegal aliens

Today’s Democratic leaders appear to have forgotten that curbing illegal immigration was a driving force behind Donald Trump’s astonishing 2024 political comeback.

Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 9
  • Shares: 1
  • Comments: 0

Comment on Facebook

Liz Peek

5 days ago

Liz Peek

No rant today- it’s Mothers’ Day for heavens sake!
But…a heartfelt shout-out to all the women who work so hard to care for, protect, teach, defend and love their children. Nothing could be more important – or more rewarding. Children are truly God’s greatest gift!
Congratulations and Happy Mothers’ Day to all!
… See MoreSee Less

Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 13
  • Shares: 0
  • Comments: 0

Comment on Facebook

LOAD MORE

Tags

AGENDA AIR FORCE BIG GOVERNMENT BORDER WALL CHINA CLINTON CONGRESS CYBERWAR DEMOCRATS DRAIN THE SWAMP E-VERIFY ECONOMY ELON MUSK FILLIBUSTER FREEDOM CAUCUS FREEDOM WATCH GOP GORSUCH GRADUATION HACKING HEALTH CARE HILLARY IMMIGRATION INFRASTRUCTURE KUSHNER MEDIA MIDDLE EAST MOODY'S NUNES NYC OIL RAND PAUL STOCK MARKET SUPREME COURT SUSAN RICE TAXES TAX REFORM TECHNOLOGY TED CRUZ TERROR TRUMP TURKEY WALL STREET WEATHER WELLESLEY
[themify_map address="233 78th Street New York, NY 10032" width=100% height=250px zoom=14]
  • Articles
  • Videos
  • Radio
  • About
  • Contact
©2017 LizPeek.org. All Rights Reserved.
Site by Steeplechase Strategies