Comment by throwaway42668 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwaway42668 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

That's not why ZIRP happened.

ZIRP happened as a long-term back-channel bailout to all the banks & funds holding the downside of the housing & derivatives market collapse. It allowed the financial sector to reinflate several asset classes that should have seen steeeeeeep declines & corrections, so that they didn't have to face insolvency.

Then on the back of that there were all these knock-on effects to cheap money, or more specifically net-negative yield on things that historically were supposed to be slow, safe value stores. One of which was epic amounts of money flooding into VC and VC making the attribution error of their access to money being correlated to their access to ability & insight, but in the prevailing environment there was no correcting feedback function for that either.

So, cheap-money became dumb-money, but sociologically we attribute lots-of-money to intelligence & capability, and from that a decade of Hundreds of Billions of Dollars of trite visionless total crap was born.

> ZIRP happened as a long-term back-channel bailout to all the banks & funds holding the downside of the housing & derivatives market collapse.

ZIRP happened because the US unemployment rate went to 10%, and when that happens central banks tend to drop rates to help the economy get going again:

* https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE

That was on the monetary side. On the fiscal side, the GOP refused to pass a large enough stimulus package—what was sent through had a large portion (40%) of tax cuts to win bipartisan support, and those, as predicted, didn't do much. So, as can see in the above graph, it was a long slog to get people employed again.

And since the fiscal side didn't do anything (thanks GOP), the Fed had to enact its mandate to fulfil employment, and since rates were already at zero, other measures were done. This is where QE came in, which many (right-leaning) folks said would cause disaster:

> We believe the Federal Reserve’s large-scale asset purchase plan (so-called “quantitative easing”) should be reconsidered and discontinued. We do not believe such a plan is necessary or advisable under current circumstances. The planned asset purchases risk currency debasement and inflation, and we do not think they will achieve the Fed’s objective of promoting employment.

* https://www.hoover.org/research/open-letter-ben-bernanke

The Keynesians said this was non-sense. The Keynesians were right (again).

And so the long grind to restore employment numbers (while watching inflation) continued for the entirety of the time Obama was in office because the GOP didn't want to help on the fiscal side. And so that left the monetary side and ZIRP and QE.

So if you don't want long-term ZIRP on the monetary side, perhaps the fiscal folks should do their jobs.

> in the prevailing environment there was no correcting feedback function for that either.

Right. The correcting function should have been everyone else noticing that they could borrow for essentially nothing and use that to fund their grand visions. The increase in demand would have necessitated an increase in interest rates to slow activity. Just as eventually happened when people finally felt they could do something with money (i.e. expansion in economic sectors where supply shocks suggested [no doubt incorrectly – but that will be another problem for another day] that increased production was needed).

It didn't happen because the vision was lacking. What was anyone going to do with it? Nobody knew what to do it. As such, nobody was borrowing in any meaningful way. At best they borrowed to buy houses, but certainly not for productive activities. Those with money didn't know what to do with it either. Lending it to those who had a vision wasn't an option. So, they simply plowed it into whatever was fashionable. And as a result, we didn't get much more than fashion in return.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com