WEBVTT - Cleveland Fed President Beth Hammack Talks Interest Rates, Jobs Report

0:00:02.520 --> 0:00:07.000
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.

0:00:07.760 --> 0:00:10.159
<v Speaker 2>We'd like to welcome Beth Havock to Bloomberg Television and

0:00:10.240 --> 0:00:14.800
<v Speaker 2>Radio worldwide. You just finished a panel. You made an

0:00:14.800 --> 0:00:20.239
<v Speaker 2>address basically suggesting that risks are two sided. Now you've

0:00:20.239 --> 0:00:23.520
<v Speaker 2>been on the side of inflation being the biggest concern,

0:00:23.720 --> 0:00:26.480
<v Speaker 2>But then we got this jobs report today that sort

0:00:26.520 --> 0:00:29.000
<v Speaker 2>of makes the case for some of the doves on

0:00:29.040 --> 0:00:31.120
<v Speaker 2>the committee. What did you make of it?

0:00:31.320 --> 0:00:33.040
<v Speaker 3>Well, I try not to make too much of anyone

0:00:33.120 --> 0:00:36.720
<v Speaker 3>individual number, and certainly this number was a disappointment, mostly

0:00:36.720 --> 0:00:38.800
<v Speaker 3>because it means that there are more Americans who aren't working.

0:00:38.840 --> 0:00:41.519
<v Speaker 3>That's what disappointed me in this report. We've seen the

0:00:41.520 --> 0:00:43.280
<v Speaker 3>economy overall has been pretty healthy.

0:00:43.320 --> 0:00:45.360
<v Speaker 1>It's been brightening. The outlook has been positive.

0:00:45.600 --> 0:00:47.600
<v Speaker 3>When I'm out in the district talking with businesses, I

0:00:47.600 --> 0:00:50.840
<v Speaker 3>hear them talking about their optimism and that they're looking

0:00:50.840 --> 0:00:52.919
<v Speaker 3>to make more investments in their businesses, and they think

0:00:52.920 --> 0:00:56.279
<v Speaker 3>demand is going to be reasonably robust. But we've had

0:00:56.320 --> 0:01:00.160
<v Speaker 3>a labor market that I would characterize as stabilizing. It's

0:01:00.200 --> 0:01:02.880
<v Speaker 3>been in that four four point four range from an

0:01:02.920 --> 0:01:06.560
<v Speaker 3>unemployment rate perspective. Obviously, the headline job's number has been

0:01:06.959 --> 0:01:08.600
<v Speaker 3>the piece that's been a little bit weaker. When I

0:01:08.600 --> 0:01:10.320
<v Speaker 3>talked to you last it was August, which.

0:01:10.160 --> 0:01:12.040
<v Speaker 1>Was the first of those reports where.

0:01:11.840 --> 0:01:16.280
<v Speaker 3>We saw more softening in the labor market. But it

0:01:16.280 --> 0:01:18.119
<v Speaker 3>does look like it's been stabilizing, and I think part

0:01:18.160 --> 0:01:20.200
<v Speaker 3>of that is due to the accommodation that we put

0:01:20.240 --> 0:01:22.720
<v Speaker 3>into the economy towards the end of last year, and

0:01:22.760 --> 0:01:24.399
<v Speaker 3>now we have a lot of tailwinds I think looking

0:01:24.440 --> 0:01:27.240
<v Speaker 3>ahead in terms of the economy, in terms of growth.

0:01:27.480 --> 0:01:29.800
<v Speaker 3>On the other side of our mandate, inflation has been

0:01:29.800 --> 0:01:32.959
<v Speaker 3>above our target for five years. We've made virtually no

0:01:33.080 --> 0:01:35.839
<v Speaker 3>progress over the past two years. We're still right around

0:01:35.880 --> 0:01:38.280
<v Speaker 3>three percent on inflation, and so we need to make

0:01:38.319 --> 0:01:40.760
<v Speaker 3>sure that we're maintaining a balance of policy that's going

0:01:40.760 --> 0:01:43.200
<v Speaker 3>to help bring inflation back down to target while still

0:01:43.240 --> 0:01:46.520
<v Speaker 3>supporting the labor market. So when I look at things broadly,

0:01:46.600 --> 0:01:48.760
<v Speaker 3>to me, it seems like there are two sided risks

0:01:48.760 --> 0:01:49.240
<v Speaker 3>to rates.

0:01:49.600 --> 0:01:51.400
<v Speaker 2>Well, there's a question on Wall Street that came out

0:01:51.440 --> 0:01:53.680
<v Speaker 2>of the last minutes where it was suggested that some

0:01:53.760 --> 0:01:56.800
<v Speaker 2>members of the Open Market Committee wanted to put the

0:01:56.880 --> 0:02:02.160
<v Speaker 2>two sided risks into the statement. At this point, is

0:02:02.240 --> 0:02:06.920
<v Speaker 2>monetary policy tight enough to address the inflation side.

0:02:07.480 --> 0:02:10.160
<v Speaker 1>That's a great question. I think we're right around neutral.

0:02:11.120 --> 0:02:12.880
<v Speaker 3>You know, there are a lot of different estimates of

0:02:12.880 --> 0:02:14.880
<v Speaker 3>what that neutral rate is. To me, when I see

0:02:14.880 --> 0:02:18.400
<v Speaker 3>the economy continuing to perform reasonably well, I take confidence

0:02:18.639 --> 0:02:20.840
<v Speaker 3>that we're probably not being overly restrictive. When I talk

0:02:20.880 --> 0:02:23.880
<v Speaker 3>to business leaders, they're still willing to make investments, they're

0:02:23.880 --> 0:02:25.760
<v Speaker 3>taking out loans. The banks that I've talked to in

0:02:25.760 --> 0:02:29.360
<v Speaker 3>the district see that their loan growth is improving, and

0:02:29.400 --> 0:02:31.280
<v Speaker 3>so all of that says to me that we are

0:02:31.400 --> 0:02:34.480
<v Speaker 3>around that neutral level, and that we should stay at

0:02:34.560 --> 0:02:36.760
<v Speaker 3>least around neutral to help make sure we're putting the

0:02:36.840 --> 0:02:39.519
<v Speaker 3>right amount of pressure and bring inflation back down to target.

0:02:40.240 --> 0:02:43.640
<v Speaker 2>So we basically can look at the next meeting as

0:02:43.760 --> 0:02:46.359
<v Speaker 2>kind of a wash. It's too early to make any

0:02:46.440 --> 0:02:49.000
<v Speaker 2>decisions based on what's going on with the war, and

0:02:49.320 --> 0:02:51.840
<v Speaker 2>as far as you're concerned, you don't need any more

0:02:51.840 --> 0:02:53.040
<v Speaker 2>accommodation right now.

0:02:53.840 --> 0:02:54.040
<v Speaker 1>Yeah.

0:02:54.080 --> 0:02:56.480
<v Speaker 3>I'm just one person, but as I see it, I

0:02:56.480 --> 0:02:58.040
<v Speaker 3>think we could be on whole for quite some time.

0:02:58.480 --> 0:03:00.520
<v Speaker 2>As a voter, an important person, we're not going to

0:03:00.520 --> 0:03:05.239
<v Speaker 2>do I think all nineteen of us, so one of

0:03:05.280 --> 0:03:06.840
<v Speaker 2>the things that's going to happen over the next few

0:03:06.840 --> 0:03:09.079
<v Speaker 2>months is a new chair is going to come in.

0:03:09.880 --> 0:03:11.840
<v Speaker 2>A lot of people talking about Kevin worsh he's got

0:03:11.880 --> 0:03:14.600
<v Speaker 2>a lower interest rates, but one guy can't do it himself. It's,

0:03:14.680 --> 0:03:17.600
<v Speaker 2>as you say, nineteen people on the committee. So how

0:03:17.600 --> 0:03:21.080
<v Speaker 2>do you think that plays out with a new chair

0:03:21.360 --> 0:03:23.880
<v Speaker 2>you know, who's not Jay Powell anymore.

0:03:24.360 --> 0:03:26.880
<v Speaker 3>Well, I mean there's been transitions in the chair of

0:03:26.880 --> 0:03:30.920
<v Speaker 3>the Committee since the since the body was founded in

0:03:30.960 --> 0:03:33.480
<v Speaker 3>nineteen thirteen, and so there have been a number of evolutions,

0:03:33.480 --> 0:03:36.480
<v Speaker 3>and I think you saw the transition from Greenspan to Bernaki,

0:03:36.760 --> 0:03:39.360
<v Speaker 3>to Yellen to Powell, and I think this will be

0:03:39.440 --> 0:03:42.600
<v Speaker 3>another transition and the Committee will adapt, and I'm excited

0:03:42.640 --> 0:03:46.040
<v Speaker 3>to work with the new chair. I think that whoever

0:03:46.240 --> 0:03:48.880
<v Speaker 3>walks into that role, the chair seat is a particularly

0:03:49.000 --> 0:03:52.400
<v Speaker 3>influential seat. They historically have tried to bring the committee

0:03:52.400 --> 0:03:54.840
<v Speaker 3>together and get a perspective on where people are. And

0:03:54.880 --> 0:03:57.680
<v Speaker 3>I have every confidence that Kevin, if he assumes the job,

0:03:58.080 --> 0:04:00.000
<v Speaker 3>is going to do his absolute best for the American public,

0:04:00.280 --> 0:04:01.560
<v Speaker 3>like all the rest of the eighteen of us do

0:04:01.640 --> 0:04:02.240
<v Speaker 3>around that table.

0:04:02.560 --> 0:04:04.640
<v Speaker 2>Well, he's wanted to make some changes, and one of

0:04:04.680 --> 0:04:07.120
<v Speaker 2>them is a smaller balance sheet. This is kind of

0:04:07.160 --> 0:04:10.080
<v Speaker 2>your area of going back to your days at Golden Sacks.

0:04:10.360 --> 0:04:11.520
<v Speaker 2>What do you think of that idea.

0:04:12.080 --> 0:04:14.120
<v Speaker 1>I think it's a discussion that we should have.

0:04:14.920 --> 0:04:18.280
<v Speaker 3>I think there are lots of things that we've done

0:04:18.279 --> 0:04:20.240
<v Speaker 3>for a long time, and one of the things I

0:04:20.240 --> 0:04:22.120
<v Speaker 3>love about being on the committee and being part of

0:04:22.120 --> 0:04:25.839
<v Speaker 3>the system is that we have really rigorous, really deep

0:04:25.920 --> 0:04:28.000
<v Speaker 3>debates about what is the right thing to do, what's

0:04:28.040 --> 0:04:29.920
<v Speaker 3>the best thing that we can do to support the economy,

0:04:30.200 --> 0:04:32.479
<v Speaker 3>And so I think it's a fair conversation to say,

0:04:32.560 --> 0:04:34.440
<v Speaker 3>should we have a balance sheet as large as as

0:04:34.440 --> 0:04:36.719
<v Speaker 3>it's been, or should we look at reducing it? What

0:04:36.800 --> 0:04:40.200
<v Speaker 3>are the pros and cons? What are the ramifications. Typically,

0:04:40.200 --> 0:04:42.839
<v Speaker 3>we don't do things very rapidly. We take our time

0:04:42.960 --> 0:04:46.360
<v Speaker 3>and we make sure that we're thoughtful. The magnitude of

0:04:46.400 --> 0:04:49.680
<v Speaker 3>the decisions that we're making are significantly greater than what

0:04:49.760 --> 0:04:51.400
<v Speaker 3>I did in my previous life, So it's appropriate that

0:04:51.400 --> 0:04:53.919
<v Speaker 3>we move a lot more slowly. But I'm excited to

0:04:53.920 --> 0:04:54.839
<v Speaker 3>have these conversations.

0:04:54.839 --> 0:04:55.000
<v Speaker 1>You know.

0:04:55.040 --> 0:04:56.400
<v Speaker 3>One of the other things he's talked about is our

0:04:56.440 --> 0:04:59.599
<v Speaker 3>communication strategy. Do we have the right communication strategy. Should

0:04:59.600 --> 0:05:00.960
<v Speaker 3>we be using words in our statements?

0:05:01.000 --> 0:05:03.560
<v Speaker 1>Are fewer? Words are? The press conference is something.

0:05:03.600 --> 0:05:05.880
<v Speaker 3>So I think there'll be a new leader coming in,

0:05:06.279 --> 0:05:08.240
<v Speaker 3>Like in any organization that has a new leader, I'm

0:05:08.279 --> 0:05:12.120
<v Speaker 3>sure we'll bring fresh ideas, fresh perspectives, and it'll spark

0:05:12.160 --> 0:05:13.560
<v Speaker 3>a bunch of really good discussions.

0:05:13.760 --> 0:05:17.280
<v Speaker 2>Well from your old job perspective of looking at this

0:05:17.360 --> 0:05:21.320
<v Speaker 2>whole system of the balance sheet and everything that's developed

0:05:21.360 --> 0:05:24.240
<v Speaker 2>over the years since you went to interest on reserves,

0:05:25.040 --> 0:05:29.119
<v Speaker 2>would it be very very hard to change again given

0:05:29.160 --> 0:05:31.520
<v Speaker 2>the infrastructure that's arisen around this.

0:05:32.839 --> 0:05:35.839
<v Speaker 3>So I think when we talk about reducing the balance sheet,

0:05:36.000 --> 0:05:37.640
<v Speaker 3>it's really about are we going to be in an

0:05:37.640 --> 0:05:40.240
<v Speaker 3>ample reserves regime or a scarce reserve regime? I think

0:05:40.279 --> 0:05:42.479
<v Speaker 3>is really what the question is around. And obviously the

0:05:42.480 --> 0:05:45.080
<v Speaker 3>details are going to matter on any particular proposal. But

0:05:45.160 --> 0:05:48.360
<v Speaker 3>in order to maintain good rate control, if the banks

0:05:48.360 --> 0:05:50.640
<v Speaker 3>demand a certain amount of reserves, we have to supply

0:05:50.680 --> 0:05:54.040
<v Speaker 3>those reserves. Right now, we're doing that by holding treasuries

0:05:54.040 --> 0:05:56.120
<v Speaker 3>on our balance sheet. If we move to a scarce

0:05:56.160 --> 0:05:58.360
<v Speaker 3>reserve regime, we would do that by engaging in open

0:05:58.400 --> 0:06:02.640
<v Speaker 3>market operations, and so there'd be rep rather than treasuries. Net,

0:06:02.680 --> 0:06:04.280
<v Speaker 3>the size of the balance sheet is still the same,

0:06:04.320 --> 0:06:05.840
<v Speaker 3>it's just the form of.

0:06:05.800 --> 0:06:07.040
<v Speaker 1>Those assets that's different.

0:06:07.120 --> 0:06:11.120
<v Speaker 3>The duration profile, the risk profile is slightly different depending

0:06:11.160 --> 0:06:13.760
<v Speaker 3>on which format you have, And so I think it's

0:06:13.760 --> 0:06:15.760
<v Speaker 3>a reasonable question to say, is it better to be

0:06:15.800 --> 0:06:19.440
<v Speaker 3>in treasuries? Would we rather be in repos that's a

0:06:19.440 --> 0:06:22.440
<v Speaker 3>discussion that we can have. Away from that, the banks

0:06:22.440 --> 0:06:24.600
<v Speaker 3>are going to demand what they want from a reserve perspective.

0:06:24.640 --> 0:06:29.200
<v Speaker 3>A lot of that is driven by our liquidity regulations,

0:06:29.440 --> 0:06:33.719
<v Speaker 3>by their payment flows, and by just their willingness and

0:06:33.760 --> 0:06:35.840
<v Speaker 3>their desire to have safe assets on their balance sheet.

0:06:36.000 --> 0:06:37.440
<v Speaker 3>And so there are a number of factors at play

0:06:37.440 --> 0:06:39.360
<v Speaker 3>that are going to drive that size of what they

0:06:39.400 --> 0:06:42.000
<v Speaker 3>want those reserves to be. But the form in which

0:06:42.520 --> 0:06:44.480
<v Speaker 3>we're supplying them could change.

0:06:44.920 --> 0:06:47.440
<v Speaker 2>Let me go back to the making of monetary policy

0:06:47.440 --> 0:06:50.520
<v Speaker 2>and ask you about when you go around the Cleveland district,

0:06:51.040 --> 0:06:54.360
<v Speaker 2>what are you hearing from companies about their plans. We

0:06:54.360 --> 0:06:56.000
<v Speaker 2>were told for a long time by all kinds of

0:06:56.040 --> 0:06:58.280
<v Speaker 2>feed officials and companies are saying, we're sitting on our

0:06:58.279 --> 0:07:01.120
<v Speaker 2>hands because we're waiting to see what's going to happen.

0:07:01.560 --> 0:07:02.320
<v Speaker 2>Has that changed?

0:07:02.320 --> 0:07:03.440
<v Speaker 1>At all. That's changed.

0:07:03.520 --> 0:07:05.360
<v Speaker 3>Companies are no longer sitting on their hands. I think

0:07:05.400 --> 0:07:08.640
<v Speaker 3>they recognized somewhere around last fall that we were living

0:07:08.640 --> 0:07:10.480
<v Speaker 3>in a world of uncertainty and that was not going

0:07:10.520 --> 0:07:12.680
<v Speaker 3>to change and they had to keep operating their businesses.

0:07:12.960 --> 0:07:15.040
<v Speaker 3>So when I was out in Akron a few weeks ago,

0:07:15.080 --> 0:07:17.440
<v Speaker 3>we were talking with some business leaders and they were

0:07:17.480 --> 0:07:19.920
<v Speaker 3>talking about trying to go out and hire, you know,

0:07:19.960 --> 0:07:21.920
<v Speaker 3>saying if they could find ten workers, it hire ten

0:07:21.960 --> 0:07:23.920
<v Speaker 3>workers because they're seeing the demand and they want to

0:07:23.920 --> 0:07:26.160
<v Speaker 3>be able to meet that. What I hear most often

0:07:26.200 --> 0:07:28.360
<v Speaker 3>in the district is that it's hard to find skilled

0:07:28.440 --> 0:07:31.920
<v Speaker 3>labors and tradesmen and that's been a real barrier to

0:07:32.000 --> 0:07:34.239
<v Speaker 3>growth for a number of the companies in the fourth district.

0:07:34.800 --> 0:07:39.480
<v Speaker 2>If they are considering raising prices, are we going to

0:07:39.480 --> 0:07:41.400
<v Speaker 2>see more of that? We did see a big jump

0:07:41.400 --> 0:07:44.080
<v Speaker 2>in goods prices in the last PPI.

0:07:45.080 --> 0:07:49.200
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, it's you know, the pricing pressures have been reasonably consistent.

0:07:49.240 --> 0:07:51.200
<v Speaker 3>Because we talked about we've been closer to three percent

0:07:51.240 --> 0:07:52.920
<v Speaker 3>than our objective of two percent.

0:07:53.200 --> 0:07:54.800
<v Speaker 1>It's coming from a variety of sectors.

0:07:55.600 --> 0:07:57.920
<v Speaker 3>You know. Some of it is driven by energy costs,

0:07:57.960 --> 0:08:00.520
<v Speaker 3>some of it is driven by insurance costs.

0:08:00.560 --> 0:08:02.160
<v Speaker 1>I hear that very regularly when I'm out.

0:08:02.040 --> 0:08:04.720
<v Speaker 3>In the district with businesses, that those two pricing pressures

0:08:04.720 --> 0:08:09.000
<v Speaker 3>are really significant. You know, talking to a grocery a grocer,

0:08:09.920 --> 0:08:12.240
<v Speaker 3>they were talking about how their energy costs have been

0:08:12.280 --> 0:08:14.560
<v Speaker 3>really elevated and they have to factor in how much

0:08:14.560 --> 0:08:15.840
<v Speaker 3>of that do they want to put into the food

0:08:15.840 --> 0:08:18.360
<v Speaker 3>costs that they're selling things for. And so businesses are

0:08:18.360 --> 0:08:20.840
<v Speaker 3>continuing to really deal with these pricing pressures. One of

0:08:20.920 --> 0:08:22.280
<v Speaker 3>the things if you look at the data is you

0:08:22.320 --> 0:08:26.080
<v Speaker 3>do see PPI significantly higher than CPI, right, so the

0:08:26.080 --> 0:08:28.440
<v Speaker 3>producer prices are going up a lot more than the

0:08:28.480 --> 0:08:31.400
<v Speaker 3>prices to consumers, which means that businesses are buffering that

0:08:31.400 --> 0:08:33.640
<v Speaker 3>that's eating into their margins. And one of the questions

0:08:33.679 --> 0:08:35.800
<v Speaker 3>that we continue to ask businesses is how long can

0:08:35.840 --> 0:08:37.960
<v Speaker 3>that persist? At what point will you need to pass

0:08:38.000 --> 0:08:40.960
<v Speaker 3>on those pricing pressures. Right now, they've been nervous to

0:08:41.320 --> 0:08:43.960
<v Speaker 3>price on more because they're worried about the demand outlook

0:08:44.000 --> 0:08:46.080
<v Speaker 3>and they don't feel that they necessarily have all the

0:08:46.120 --> 0:08:50.199
<v Speaker 3>ability to price it on without impacting demand. But that's

0:08:50.240 --> 0:08:52.200
<v Speaker 3>something that we'll be giving a close eye on what.

0:08:52.520 --> 0:08:56.160
<v Speaker 2>Are you discerning from people in your district, both in

0:08:56.240 --> 0:09:00.200
<v Speaker 2>the executive suite and then regular people about the war

0:09:00.400 --> 0:09:04.040
<v Speaker 2>and the price rises which is going to be gasoline

0:09:04.320 --> 0:09:08.880
<v Speaker 2>for most people in the short run, because it could

0:09:08.920 --> 0:09:11.560
<v Speaker 2>have an effect on consumer sentiment. Now we know they're

0:09:11.559 --> 0:09:14.040
<v Speaker 2>not as related as they used to be. Consumer sentiment

0:09:14.040 --> 0:09:16.439
<v Speaker 2>and consume we're spending. But do you worry that this

0:09:16.480 --> 0:09:18.439
<v Speaker 2>could lead us to something like stagflation?

0:09:19.960 --> 0:09:22.400
<v Speaker 3>You know, we run in Cleveland, the Center for Inflation Research,

0:09:22.440 --> 0:09:24.079
<v Speaker 3>and our team has done a lot of work around

0:09:24.120 --> 0:09:27.640
<v Speaker 3>what the impact of higher energy prices is on consumers,

0:09:28.080 --> 0:09:29.800
<v Speaker 3>and there is evidence to show that it can impact

0:09:29.840 --> 0:09:33.680
<v Speaker 3>consumer's outlook, their spending, and their willingness to invest. I

0:09:33.679 --> 0:09:36.960
<v Speaker 3>think the economy right now is in a reasonably good place,

0:09:37.000 --> 0:09:40.400
<v Speaker 3>but obviously all these developments, the macro developments, bear watching.

0:09:41.120 --> 0:09:43.120
<v Speaker 3>You know, the impact of oil prices, it's too soon

0:09:43.160 --> 0:09:47.679
<v Speaker 3>to say. What I'm going to be looking for is how.

0:09:46.600 --> 0:09:47.680
<v Speaker 1>Big and for how long?

0:09:47.720 --> 0:09:51.000
<v Speaker 3>So the magnitude and persistence of any potential increase in

0:09:51.040 --> 0:09:52.760
<v Speaker 3>oil prices, what's that going to mean? How long is

0:09:52.760 --> 0:09:54.680
<v Speaker 3>that going to persist? And how will that flow through?

0:09:54.920 --> 0:09:57.600
<v Speaker 3>It could be that it puts more persistent inflationary pressure there,

0:09:57.679 --> 0:09:59.600
<v Speaker 3>but it also could mean that there's a drop off

0:09:59.600 --> 0:10:01.600
<v Speaker 3>in demand because of it as well, and so there

0:10:01.640 --> 0:10:03.480
<v Speaker 3>really are two sided risks that are worth watching.

0:10:03.840 --> 0:10:05.880
<v Speaker 2>Beth Hammick, thank you very much for joining us. The

0:10:05.880 --> 0:10:08.480
<v Speaker 2>President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland,