Do Low Interest Rates Really Help The Economy?

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter John Creighto
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Economy Interest
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the impact of low interest rates on economic behavior, particularly consumption and investment. Participants reference David Cass and Menahem's paper, which argues that when interest rates fall below GDP growth rates, it creates a suboptimal economic environment. The conversation highlights that low interest rates can lead to increased borrowing and consumption but also result in excess inventory and housing vacancies. Ultimately, the consensus suggests that while low rates may stimulate short-term economic activity, they can lead to long-term detrimental effects on resource allocation and economic health.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of economic principles, specifically interest rates and GDP growth.
  • Familiarity with consumption theories, particularly the Pure Consumption Loans Model.
  • Knowledge of the relationship between interest rates and housing market dynamics.
  • Awareness of the implications of fiscal policy on economic stability.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of David Cass & Menahem's "A Re-Examination of The Pure Consumption Loans Model."
  • Explore the relationship between real interest rates and GDP growth rates.
  • Investigate the effects of low interest rates on housing market trends and consumer behavior.
  • Examine case studies on the long-term impacts of low interest rate policies on economic health.
USEFUL FOR

Economists, financial analysts, policymakers, and anyone interested in understanding the complex dynamics of interest rates and their effects on economic growth and stability.

  • #91
loseyourname said:
You can target interest rates by controlling the money supply or target a money supply. The Fed currently targets interest rates but it hasn't always chosen this path.
Is this true? I know the Fed used to try keep interest rates stable back in the 70s only to have its policies produce stagflation. I was under the impression that after that, the Fed, starting with Volcker, mainly focused on keeping inflation in check, which essentially meant not letting the money supply grow too quickly.
It can also make changes to the discount rate and reserve requirement to implement monetary policy, but it rarely does, almost never changing the reserve requirement and only using the discount rate for dire emergencies like 9/11.
An econ professor likened the difference between adjusting the discount rate or reserve requirement vs. open market operations to control the money supply to the difference between using a meat cleaver vs. a scalpel to cut meat.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
Here's an update on "QE - 2"
http://www.businessinsider.com/new-york-fed-quantitative-easing-2-2010-11

"The New York Fed plans to purchase securities worth $850 to $900 billion in the second round of quantitative easing.

It works like this: There will be an additional amount of purchases worth $600 billion (that's the headline number from the Fed today).

But there will also be a reinvestment of $250 to $300 billion from payments associated with other securities it already holds.

That makes QE2 feel a whole lot bigger, and closer to the top end $1 trillion number that was mentioned."
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 870 ·
30
Replies
870
Views
115K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
8K
Replies
5
Views
3K