WEBVTT - Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers Talks Monetary Policy

0:00:00.320 --> 0:00:03.160
<v Speaker 1>We start with Chairman Powell's remarks in Jackson Hole and

0:00:03.200 --> 0:00:06.520
<v Speaker 1>welcome back our very special contributor Larry Summers of Harvard. So, Larry,

0:00:06.680 --> 0:00:09.119
<v Speaker 1>we heard this week from share Powell. What did you

0:00:09.200 --> 0:00:10.160
<v Speaker 1>make of what he had to say?

0:00:11.680 --> 0:00:15.080
<v Speaker 2>Look, I think he's in the right broad place.

0:00:15.240 --> 0:00:20.200
<v Speaker 3>Inflation is coming down, the economy is slowing.

0:00:20.520 --> 0:00:21.720
<v Speaker 2>On current facts.

0:00:21.840 --> 0:00:26.920
<v Speaker 3>Absolutely, the next move should be towards monetary policy easing.

0:00:27.640 --> 0:00:32.400
<v Speaker 3>And that's what he said, and I'm glad he said that.

0:00:33.400 --> 0:00:38.360
<v Speaker 3>I think there were a number of really important issues

0:00:38.400 --> 0:00:43.720
<v Speaker 3>that are likely to be shaping of the policies for

0:00:44.000 --> 0:00:48.200
<v Speaker 3>the FED and for the economy more broadly that he

0:00:48.240 --> 0:00:55.720
<v Speaker 3>didn't address. He didn't say anything about epic budget deficit

0:00:56.240 --> 0:01:00.280
<v Speaker 3>challenges in the years ahead. At the same time, we've

0:01:00.320 --> 0:01:04.319
<v Speaker 3>got a huge investment demand for the green economy and

0:01:04.400 --> 0:01:09.520
<v Speaker 3>a huge investment demand for data centers and the like.

0:01:10.200 --> 0:01:12.920
<v Speaker 3>And so the question of what the neutral interest rate

0:01:13.080 --> 0:01:17.360
<v Speaker 3>is was one he talked pat He didn't really engage

0:01:17.400 --> 0:01:21.880
<v Speaker 3>with the FED is saying that the neutral interest rate

0:01:22.240 --> 0:01:24.240
<v Speaker 3>is somewhere in the twos.

0:01:25.080 --> 0:01:27.319
<v Speaker 2>I think that's extremely unlikely.

0:01:28.120 --> 0:01:31.319
<v Speaker 3>And if you don't have the right north star, you

0:01:31.400 --> 0:01:35.319
<v Speaker 3>don't navigate very accurately, and so I think the FEDS

0:01:35.880 --> 0:01:41.399
<v Speaker 3>making a serious mistake by believing that the neutral interest

0:01:41.400 --> 0:01:48.200
<v Speaker 3>strate is so low, and therefore is misjudging how restrictive

0:01:48.680 --> 0:01:54.040
<v Speaker 3>any given level of policy is. So I'd be surprised,

0:01:54.360 --> 0:02:00.560
<v Speaker 3>quite surprised if it actually proves possible with sustainable ability

0:02:01.400 --> 0:02:05.280
<v Speaker 3>to bring inflation down by nearly as much as the

0:02:05.320 --> 0:02:08.760
<v Speaker 3>market is expecting, or bring interest rates down by nearly

0:02:08.840 --> 0:02:12.359
<v Speaker 3>as much as the market is expecting over the next

0:02:12.840 --> 0:02:13.480
<v Speaker 3>two years.

0:02:14.440 --> 0:02:17.480
<v Speaker 2>The other thing that the FED must.

0:02:17.160 --> 0:02:22.960
<v Speaker 3>Be aware of, and I understand why the Chair didn't

0:02:23.000 --> 0:02:26.160
<v Speaker 3>address it, but it seems to me it's something they

0:02:26.240 --> 0:02:30.040
<v Speaker 3>have to be keeping in mind. Is we've got what

0:02:30.560 --> 0:02:34.360
<v Speaker 3>people regard as a fifty to fifty presidential election coming,

0:02:35.200 --> 0:02:38.600
<v Speaker 3>and one of the candidates says that the FED shouldn't

0:02:38.639 --> 0:02:43.280
<v Speaker 3>be independent anymore. That same candidate, Donald Trump, says that

0:02:43.600 --> 0:02:48.440
<v Speaker 3>we need a much weaker dollar. That same candidate says

0:02:48.560 --> 0:02:54.519
<v Speaker 3>we need to push tariffs way up, meaning higher prices

0:02:54.600 --> 0:03:00.800
<v Speaker 3>of consumer goods and more of an inflation a threat.

0:03:01.320 --> 0:03:05.560
<v Speaker 3>That same candidate talks about sending millions of workers home,

0:03:06.040 --> 0:03:12.720
<v Speaker 3>which would create epically tight labor markets in our country

0:03:12.800 --> 0:03:18.280
<v Speaker 3>and would surely go back to labor shortages and wage inflation.

0:03:18.840 --> 0:03:21.160
<v Speaker 1>Larry turning back for a minute to Jay Powell's remarks

0:03:21.200 --> 0:03:24.440
<v Speaker 1>this week, he had sort of an initial explanation of

0:03:24.480 --> 0:03:27.720
<v Speaker 1>what happened with inflation, where it came from what the

0:03:27.760 --> 0:03:30.240
<v Speaker 1>FED did in response, and at least my take on

0:03:30.320 --> 0:03:33.839
<v Speaker 1>it was we had really supply shocks that were really unprecedented.

0:03:33.840 --> 0:03:35.960
<v Speaker 1>It took a longer sort of out, and we had

0:03:36.000 --> 0:03:38.600
<v Speaker 1>this big demand push, particularly in goods, that spilled over

0:03:38.640 --> 0:03:41.680
<v Speaker 1>into services. So it was sort of understandable why we

0:03:41.840 --> 0:03:43.760
<v Speaker 1>sort of made a mistake on team transitory.

0:03:44.280 --> 0:03:48.920
<v Speaker 3>What's your reaction, Look, I guess it's under I guess

0:03:49.000 --> 0:03:53.240
<v Speaker 3>it's understandable. I think I was reasonably clear in the

0:03:53.280 --> 0:03:57.240
<v Speaker 3>spring of twenty and twenty one that it seemed to

0:03:57.320 --> 0:03:58.000
<v Speaker 3>me that.

0:03:57.880 --> 0:04:02.520
<v Speaker 2>There were enormous inflation risks.

0:04:03.360 --> 0:04:06.880
<v Speaker 3>I think, looking back, it's kind of incredible that the

0:04:06.920 --> 0:04:10.400
<v Speaker 3>Fed could have said in May of twenty twenty one

0:04:11.160 --> 0:04:15.720
<v Speaker 3>that it expected to hold interest rates at zero until

0:04:15.760 --> 0:04:21.120
<v Speaker 3>the summer of twenty twenty four, and so the misjudgment

0:04:22.040 --> 0:04:26.360
<v Speaker 3>was a pretty egregious one. They're trying to leave the

0:04:26.400 --> 0:04:32.760
<v Speaker 3>impression that it was all surprising supply shocks, and I

0:04:32.760 --> 0:04:36.040
<v Speaker 3>think there are two problems with that view. One is

0:04:36.760 --> 0:04:40.120
<v Speaker 3>there shouldn't have been anything very surprising about it. It's

0:04:40.160 --> 0:04:44.560
<v Speaker 3>not like everybody didn't know that COVID was affecting the

0:04:44.560 --> 0:04:52.000
<v Speaker 3>supply capacity of the economy. So when the supply capacities down,

0:04:52.080 --> 0:04:55.200
<v Speaker 3>that means you have to adjust the demand.

0:04:55.960 --> 0:04:56.719
<v Speaker 2>And the other.

0:04:56.880 --> 0:05:01.520
<v Speaker 3>Is that if you look at nominal GDP growth, so that's.

0:05:01.640 --> 0:05:04.120
<v Speaker 2>Dollar GEDP, it's the money.

0:05:03.760 --> 0:05:11.039
<v Speaker 3>Stock adjusted for the velocity, it averaged ten percent in

0:05:11.160 --> 0:05:15.520
<v Speaker 3>twenty twenty one, in twenty twenty two, and above eight

0:05:15.600 --> 0:05:19.640
<v Speaker 3>percent for the three years twenty twenty one to twenty

0:05:19.680 --> 0:05:24.320
<v Speaker 3>twenty three. So how can you think with eight to

0:05:24.400 --> 0:05:28.280
<v Speaker 3>ten percent nominal GDP growth that you're going to have

0:05:29.000 --> 0:05:35.560
<v Speaker 3>anything like target inflation? And that nominal GDP is just

0:05:35.640 --> 0:05:40.680
<v Speaker 3>a measure of demand, which is what monetary policy is

0:05:40.720 --> 0:05:45.360
<v Speaker 3>supposed to be all about. So I think the FED

0:05:46.160 --> 0:05:49.839
<v Speaker 3>got it wrong, and in all honesty, I don't think

0:05:49.880 --> 0:05:54.240
<v Speaker 3>it was I goes a low point in terms of

0:05:54.960 --> 0:05:59.240
<v Speaker 3>monetary policy judgment. But you know, we all make lots

0:05:59.240 --> 0:06:04.000
<v Speaker 3>of mistakes, and the important thing is when you make

0:06:04.040 --> 0:06:09.599
<v Speaker 3>a mistake, to recognize it and fix it. And I've

0:06:09.600 --> 0:06:12.800
<v Speaker 3>got to give the FED credit for the fact that

0:06:12.920 --> 0:06:16.000
<v Speaker 3>while it wasn't always obvious that this would be the case,

0:06:16.760 --> 0:06:24.680
<v Speaker 3>they moved strongly enough and vigorously enough to keep expectations anchored.

0:06:25.440 --> 0:06:29.520
<v Speaker 2>And that's why it now looks more.

0:06:29.360 --> 0:06:32.560
<v Speaker 3>Frankly than I would have expected, like we're going to

0:06:32.640 --> 0:06:38.560
<v Speaker 3>get out of this very costly inflation episode without a

0:06:38.640 --> 0:06:39.640
<v Speaker 3>major recession.

0:06:40.279 --> 0:06:42.919
<v Speaker 1>Larry, you mentioned the possibility of Donald Trump being elected

0:06:42.920 --> 0:06:45.279
<v Speaker 1>in November. There is another candidate. You also said, it's

0:06:45.360 --> 0:06:47.480
<v Speaker 1>at this point it looks like a virtual toss up

0:06:47.920 --> 0:06:50.760
<v Speaker 1>between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. We now are beginning

0:06:50.800 --> 0:06:53.400
<v Speaker 1>to get some indications from Kamala Harris about what she

0:06:53.560 --> 0:06:56.600
<v Speaker 1>might do for and to the economy. What do you

0:06:56.680 --> 0:06:58.520
<v Speaker 1>make of her positions you've heard so far.

0:06:59.279 --> 0:07:00.240
<v Speaker 2>I have been in.

0:07:02.279 --> 0:07:07.680
<v Speaker 3>Active in these policy debates on the Democratic side for

0:07:08.240 --> 0:07:13.760
<v Speaker 3>a long time, and I've always tended to be part

0:07:13.840 --> 0:07:21.600
<v Speaker 3>of the group that favors policies that are more growth oriented,

0:07:22.280 --> 0:07:31.360
<v Speaker 3>that worry more about financial responsibility, that stress letting markets

0:07:32.560 --> 0:07:42.960
<v Speaker 3>operate strongly and vigorously. I've liked universalist themes rather than

0:07:43.080 --> 0:07:48.960
<v Speaker 3>themes that pit business against labor, or one class or

0:07:49.000 --> 0:07:54.160
<v Speaker 3>one identity group against another, And so I was very

0:07:54.240 --> 0:07:55.960
<v Speaker 3>encouraged by.

0:07:55.600 --> 0:07:57.200
<v Speaker 2>The speech last night.

0:07:58.240 --> 0:08:02.400
<v Speaker 3>There was one word that came through so strongly when

0:08:03.680 --> 0:08:09.240
<v Speaker 3>the Vice President talked about the economy, and that was opportunity.

0:08:09.840 --> 0:08:10.720
<v Speaker 2>And I think that's.

0:08:10.720 --> 0:08:18.320
<v Speaker 3>Exactly the right word, because it's a word that embraces everybody.

0:08:18.920 --> 0:08:21.360
<v Speaker 2>It's a word that embraces the need to.

0:08:21.320 --> 0:08:24.760
<v Speaker 3>Make sure that poor children get the help they need

0:08:24.800 --> 0:08:29.080
<v Speaker 3>from head start. It's a word that embraces making sure

0:08:29.120 --> 0:08:33.440
<v Speaker 3>that families have the resources they need to support their

0:08:34.800 --> 0:08:39.600
<v Speaker 3>newborn and then their children as they go on. It's

0:08:39.640 --> 0:08:45.880
<v Speaker 3>a word that embraces the need for affordability of higher education.

0:08:46.679 --> 0:08:49.200
<v Speaker 3>It's a word that embraces and I think this is

0:08:49.360 --> 0:08:52.680
<v Speaker 3>critical and I hope that Vice President Harris will talk

0:08:52.800 --> 0:08:58.360
<v Speaker 3>much more about this, not just celebrating public education, but

0:08:58.520 --> 0:09:04.559
<v Speaker 3>recognizing that public actions case needs to be made much better. Because,

0:09:04.760 --> 0:09:09.920
<v Speaker 3>you know, David, in an earlier and much more elitist age,

0:09:10.440 --> 0:09:14.720
<v Speaker 3>the Duke of Wellington said in Britain in the nineteenth

0:09:14.840 --> 0:09:18.880
<v Speaker 3>century that the Battle of Waterloo had been won on

0:09:18.960 --> 0:09:22.320
<v Speaker 3>the playing fields of Eton. I'm here to tell you

0:09:22.360 --> 0:09:26.160
<v Speaker 3>that the battle for America's future will be won or

0:09:26.320 --> 0:09:30.640
<v Speaker 3>lost in our nation's public schools. And I heard all

0:09:30.760 --> 0:09:37.040
<v Speaker 3>that when I heard the Vice President talking about opportunity,

0:09:37.160 --> 0:09:42.560
<v Speaker 3>and I hope that those themes, rather than some of

0:09:42.600 --> 0:09:48.240
<v Speaker 3>the themes that I think are harder to justify, about

0:09:49.240 --> 0:09:51.959
<v Speaker 3>gouging and the like, even if they do have their

0:09:52.000 --> 0:09:56.720
<v Speaker 3>political appeal, I hope those will be a larger fraction

0:09:56.840 --> 0:10:00.720
<v Speaker 3>of the campaign going forward, and much much more important.

0:10:01.440 --> 0:10:06.240
<v Speaker 3>I hope that, if, as I expect, Vice President Harris

0:10:06.360 --> 0:10:12.600
<v Speaker 3>is elected a president, that the broad economic strategy is

0:10:12.679 --> 0:10:15.040
<v Speaker 3>going to be one that's all about opportunity.

0:10:15.720 --> 0:10:17.360
<v Speaker 1>Well, Larry, thank you so much. It's always a treat

0:10:17.400 --> 0:10:19.360
<v Speaker 1>to have you with us that as our special contributor

0:10:19.360 --> 0:10:21.680
<v Speaker 1>here on Wall Street Week. He's Larry Summers of Harvard