Is the Bond Market About to Call the Fed"s Inflationary Bluff?

Perhaps the single biggest development this year, as far as the markets were concerned, was the Fed admitting on the record that it has no idea what is going on with inflation.

This represents a kind of endgame for the Fed. Since the early ‘80s, the Fed has been actively understating inflation via a variety of gimmicks.

It first removed home prices and replaced them with “owner’s equivalent rent.” Doing that removed any sharp rise in home prices from affecting inflation data, thereby downplaying the official inflation rate.

Then in 1998, the Fed started playing around with “hedonics” (think food and energy prices). The Fed claimed that the goal was to somehow balance the deflationary forces of technology vs. the inflationary forces of hedonics items… but the reality was that this was just another gimmick to understate inflation.

Then, finally in 1999, the Fed introduced the idea of “substitutions.” Here again the Fed claimed it was trying to get an accurate read on inflation (the Fed argues here that if a consumer cannot afford steak anymore, the fact he or she can substitute hamburger indicates his or her quality of life is roughly the same as before).

And once again the goal was to understate inflation.

I realize this is getting a bit complicated, so let’s put this in simple terms…

1)   Since the early ‘80s, the Fed has been employing various gimmicks to hide the real rate of inflation.

2)   Doing this allowed the Fed to overstate GDP growth while understating the true decline in incomes/ quality of life for most Americans.

This game worked for a while, but this year the whole scheme crashed into a wall when the various gimmicks resulted in data that made no sense what-so-ever.

At a time when the NY Fed’s UIG inflation measure and the Atlanta Fed’s “sticky inflation” measure, showed inflation at 2.8% and 2.1% respectively, the Fed’s official inflation measures (CPI and trimmed PCE) were clocking in at 1.7% and 1.4%,

The Fed’s Board of Governors had a choice here:

1)   Admit the official inflation numbers were garbage

Or…

2)   Act surprised by the official rate being so low and claim it’s an anomaly.

The Fed went with #2 in what was one of the most insane Fed statements ever. According to the Fed’s July FOMC statement…

• Most participants expect inflation to pick up over the next couple years.


• Many Fed participants think inflation will remain below 2% longer than expected.


• Many Fed participants believe that inflation measures dropped recently due to “idiosyncratic factors.”


• A few Fed participants believe the Fed’s framework for forecasting inflation is no longer valid.


• Some Fed participants noted their increase uncertainty about the outlook for inflation.

Put simply: the Fed admitted that it no longer had a clue what was going on with inflation. It has since maintained this “who knows!” shtick (I note that Fed Chair Janet Yellen, in last week’s conference stated that the Fed’s understanding of inflation is “imperfect.”)

Why does this matter?

As I explain in my bestselling book The Everything Bubble: the Endgame For Central Bank Policy, US sovereign bonds (also called Treasuries) trade based on inflation expectations.

Put simply, when inflation spikes higher, so do Treasury bond yields.

When bond yields rise, bond prices fall.

When bond prices fall, the Bond Bubble bursts.

When the Bond Bubble bursts, the EVERYTHING bubble follows.

Well, guess what? The yield on 10-Year US Treasuries is spiking, having broken above its 20-year trendline.

What"s coming will take time for this to unfold, but as I recently told clients, we"re currently in "late 2007" for the coming crisis. The time to prepare for this is NOW before the carnage hits.

On that note, we are putting together an Executive Summary outlining all of these issues as well as what’s to come when The Everything Bubble bursts.

It will be available exclusively to our clients. If you’d like to have a copy delivered to your inbox when it’s completed, you can join the wait-list here:

https://phoenixcapitalmarketing.com/TEB.html

Best Regards

Graham Summers

Chief Market Strategist

Phoenix Capital Research

The Fed is Arranging Deck Chairs on the Titanic (the Iceberg Comes in 2018).

The Fed concludes its final FOMC meeting of the year today.

The entire financial world expects the Fed to raise rates a final time. This will mark the fifth rate hike since December 2015, and the fourth of the last 12 months.

Throughout this time period, the Fed has routinely stated that it is confused as to why inflation is “too low.”

Inflation is not too low. The method the Fed uses to measure inflation is intentionally incorrect. As a result, the official inflation numbers reflect whatever the Fed wants, as opposed to reality.

Alan Greenspan devised this entire gimmick back in the 1990s. At that point, the amount of debt in the US financial had already become a systemic issue.

So Greenspan opted to “paper over” this fact via inflation… hoping that by aggressively devaluing the US Dollar he could keep this game going.

The only problem as far as the Fed was concerned was that the inflation numbers would reveal the Fed’s strategy. So Greenspan started tinkering with how the Fed measured inflation, removing various components (food and energy) and tweaking things so the Fed would no longer measure the cost of maintaining the same quality of life.

Greenspan hoped understating inflation publicly he would give him the cover he needed to pursue an aggressive devaluation of the US Dollar. The flip side of this was that the Fed would begin intentionally creating asset bubbles by maintaining loose monetary policy ad infinitum.

The late ‘90s was the Tech Bubble.

When that burst in the mid-‘00s, the Fed created a bubble in housing.

When that burst in ’08 the Fed created a bubble in US sovereign bonds or Treasuries.

And because these bonds are the bedrock of the US financial system, the “risk-free rate” of return against which ALL risk assets are valued, when the Fed did this it created a bubble in EVERYTHING.

That bubble is now beginning to burst. And ironically it is inflation (which the Fed claims is too low) that will do it.

It will take time for this to unfold, but as I recently told clients, we"re currently in "late 2007" for the coming crisis.

The time to prepare for this is NOW before the carnage hits.

On that note, we are putting together an Executive Summary outlining all of these issues as well as what’s to come when The Everything Bubble bursts.

It will be available exclusively to our clients. If you’d like to have a copy delivered to your inbox when it’s completed, you can join the wait-list here:

https://phoenixcapitalmarketing.com/TEB.html

Best Regards

Graham Summers

Chief Market Strategist

Phoenix Capital Research

"The Fed Is Afraid..."

Janet Yellen this week cast doubt on the Fed"s announced plan to continue Fed rate hikes and reverse its years of "unconventional" monetary policy. 

“My colleagues and I may have misjudged the strength of the labor market,” Yellen announced on Tuesday, adding that they"d also misjudged "the degree to which longer-run inflation expectations are consistent with our inflation objective, or even the fundamental forces driving inflation."

Yellen also "noted that the labor market, which historically has been closely linked to inflation, may not be as tight as the low unemployment rate suggests."

In other words, Fed economists are concerned by the fact they"ve been unable to achieve their arbitrary 2% price-inflation objective, which they believe indicates a healthy level of economic activity.

Moreover, they"re concerned the low unemployment rate — which can be deceptive since it can show a "tight" market even in the presence of unemployed discouraged workers and involuntary part-timers — is not telling the whole story. 

The end result is that the Fed is not at all sure that it can continue with its promised path of raising the target interest rate as has been the "plan" for the past several years. 

As we"ve noted here at mises.org before, the Fed has a habit of announcing big plans to scale back quantitative easing, and increasing the target rate — only to later backtrack or downplay the extent to which it will "normalize" monetary policy. 

Since 2009, the target rate has been at rock-bottom rates. Over the past year, the Fed has raised the target rate from 0.5 percent to 1.25 percent, but this has only gotten the rate back up to where it was when it was attempting to stimulate the economy in the wake of the dot-come bust in 2001. On other words, the Fed is still deep into "stimulative monetary policy" territory. 

And now we"re being told that the Fed may have overestimated the rate to which it can scale back monetary policy. 

Nine Years of Stagnant Incomes 

Looming over the latest admission of "miscalculating" the economy"s success is the ongoing myth that the Fed and its economists are wisely and carefully steering the economic ship to a safe port. 

Actual experience — given that the target rate was kept near zero for eight years — more suggests panic and dismay, rather than the presence of a steady hand. 

If we look at the Federal government"s own data on incomes through 2016, we find an unimpressive record indeed. 

Real median personal income, for example, peaked during the last cycle at $30,821 in 2007. This total was not exceeded again until 2016 when it reached $31,099. That"s 0.9 percent growth over a period of nine years. 

We see a similar picture with both median family income and median household income. 

Median family income grew 2.3 percent from 2007 to 2016. It grew 2.7 percent from 2000 to 2016. Growth was nearly zero from 2000 to 2015, and only began to really surpass old peaks in 2016. 

 Median household income grew 1.5 percent from 2007 to 2016. It grew 0.6 percent from 2000 to 2016. 

(See here and here for more discussion on how demographic changes can affect income growth levels.)

These number by themselves don"t prove that real incomes are flat for everyone of course. But, lackluster numbers in employment, and in GDP over the last 20 years — compared to the post-war economy overall — hardly point to a period of economic gain for many ordinary Americans. 

The Fed Is Afraid 

For years, the Fed has been telling us repeatedly that the economy is moving forward, that growth is "moderately" robust, and that they"ll return to more "normal" interest rates and more normal monetary policy. The reality has been eight yeears of no action followed by about 18 months of extremely mild and cautious increases in the target rate. 

So the question is this: if we"re seeing moderate growth month after month, and year after year, why has the Fed been too afraid to do anything except make only the smallest changes?

The answer, most likely, is that the Fed knows the economy is extremely fragile. This latest admission from Yellen serves to — yet again — manage expectations and tell us to not expect much of anything from the Fed in terms of normalization. Perhaps we"ll need another seven or eight years to get the targe rate up to 2 percent.

The Two Things To Look For In Today's FOMC Minutes

There are two, also known as non-GAAP four, things to look forward to in today"s FOMC Minutes: inflation, and balance sheet, balance sheet, balance sheet.

At 2pm, the FOMC will release the minutes of the July 25-26 meeting when, as expected, the Fed left its rate unchanged and gave few surprises in its characterization of the outlook. It did surprise many, however, by noting that it expects to begin implementing balance sheet normalization "relatively soon", language which most had not expected to be introduced until September; this, as UBS notes, is the condition the FOMC set for unwinding its balance sheet, so we now see the Fed announcing its balance sheet normalization policy in September. While there will be no earthshattering revelations, look to the Minutes to shed additional light on the Committee"s debate on this timing and views on the outlook for inflation, which will determine future rate hikes.

Going back to the July 26 statement, the FOMC"s characterization of inflation was uninformative, merely reflecting the softness in the last several prints. In the minutes, some hope to find if the language reflects strongly held views that the softness is transitory, or if there were participants that wanted to raise more alarm about the inflationary outlook, but were outnumbered. Chair Yellen has been explicit that the outlook for inflation will determine the timing of future rate hikes.

Leading up to the meeting, Fed officials were explicit that they believe that inflation weakness is transitory but that they need to see evidence that inflation is rising before hiking again. Further complicating matters, the July CPI print - the fifth miss in a row - did not provide sufficient evidence. As a result, the breadth of inflation views within the Committee should inform the sellside"s calls on the next hike.

As for the Fed"s balance sheet "normalization", the Fed has made a distinction between announcing and implementing the balance sheet runoff. The new "relatively soon" language represents a marker that the announcement is forthcoming, according to UBS. As a result, the FOMC will likely make that announcement at the September meeting, with runoff commencing in October. The Minutes need to clarify the Committee"s communication plans and the gap between announcement and implementation.

There is more ambiguity regarding whether the Fed will again raise rates: while many still hold out hope for a third hike in December, inflation has to accelerate. Still, the Committee likely desires some time between the announcement of balance sheet runoff and its next hike. Three months should be sufficient for the Committee to assess the market reaction, but the Minutes may indicate otherwise so this too will be closely parsed for any indication of a longer pause.

Finally, two areas demand more information.

• First, how will the Fed time the unwind? The MBS market has a different cycle than the Treasury market. The Fed needs to clarify operational details around their monthly caps.


• Second, there is little information from the Fed on its long-term framework for the balance sheet, which will determine the terminal size of the balance sheet. We expect the minutes to address the operational details, but not the terminal size of the balance sheet. We expect a terminal balance sheet of $3.3 trillion reached in 2¾ years.

Not enough? Here is RanSquawk"s detailed preview of what to expect in today"s Minutes:

FOMC’s July 2017 Meeting Minutes Preview, Due For Release At 19:00 London, 14:00 New York On Wednesday 16th August 2017

The July meeting saw the Federal Reserve leave it Federal Funds target range unchanged at 1.00-1.25%, with a 9-0 vote. Heading into the decision focus was on the rhetoric surrounding the normalisation of the FOMC’s balance sheet, and the policy statement (full version available here) noted that the Committee expects to begin shrinking its balance sheet "relatively soon." The statement also saw the Fed highlight that it expected inflation on a “12-month basis” to remain below 2% in the near-term (which was deemed dovish), although the statement did go on to highlight that the FOMC expects inflation to stabilise around 2% over the medium term.

The language surrounding these two areas will once again garner the most attention in the upcoming release. Barclays expect the minutes of the July FOMC meeting to “provide further information regarding the timing of balance sheet normalisation and the degree of consensus within the committee.”

While HSBC believe that “the July minutes are likely to show extensive discussion about the slowdown in inflation over the past several months. Some of the policymakers likely held to the view that diminishing labour market slack should eventually put upward pressure on inflation. Others may have argued the FOMC should be cautious with respect to additional policy rate hikes unless the inflation data start to pick up.”

Since the statement various FOMC voters, namely Dudley, Kashkari, Evans and Kaplan, have indicated that they would be comfortable with an announcement regarding balance sheet normalisation being made at the September meeting, while non-voters (including Bullard) have also backed such a move.

In terms of broader policy issues, the most recent US CPI release (for July) was soft and saw CME Fed Fund futures pricing in a sub 35% chance of one further 25bps hike in 2017, with Kashkari (a noted dove)  arguing that the release gave the FOMC more scope to “wait and see” before hiking rates again. This was before permanent Fed voter, Bill Dudley, suggested that “if the economy evolves in line with expectations, I would expect to be in favour of doing another rate hike later this year.” This was followed by a strong retail sales dataset (with upwards revisions), which has led to CME Fed Fund futures pricing a circa 50% chance of a 25bps hike by year end (at the time of writing).

Barclays believe that “balance sheet normalization will likely start in September and the hurdle is quite high for the FOMC to deviate from what it has been signalling so far. We will also look for more detail on how concerned the FOMC is with the incoming data on inflation. Although we think concern has risen, we do not believe there is sufficient worry yet to derail a likely December rate hike.

Source: UBS, RanSquawk

Lacy Hunt: The Fed Has Undermined The Economy's Ability To Grow

Authored by Stephen McBride via MauldinEconomics.com,

The Fed’s hope was that quantitative easing would stimulate economic growth. But a former senior economist for the Fed believes it has done the exact opposite.

Speaking at the Mauldin Economics Strategic Investment Conference, Dr. Lacy Hunt, the executive vice president of Hosington Investment Management and former senior economist for the Dallas Fed, said that quantitative easing has created “significant unintended consequences.”

The Worst Expansion in US History

“What the Fed did was, they said to the world we are undertaking quantitative easing so we can boost the stock market… and the stock market will then produce a wealth effect and invigorate the economy.”

While the Fed has increased its balance sheet by $3.57 trillion since 2008, and the S&P 500 is up 255% since 2009, Hunt says, “this is the worst expansion in US history.”

Source: BCA Research

As just half of Americans own stocks, it’s no wonder the wealth effect hasn’t percolated through the economy.

The Fed’s massive experiment has also created huge distortions in the private sector, which has severe consequences.

Business Leverage at Record Highs

“Quantitative easing has created a lot of negatives, one of the most glaring is this liquidity which has fueled record leverage of the business balance sheet.”

Total business debt is now up 71% since 2008—twice the long-term growth rate. Worse yet, Hunt says much of this debt has been used unproductively:

“Quantitative easing encouraged a shift from real investment to financial investment. The Fed’s backing your play, engage in financial engineering… buyback shares, raise dividends. The business managers think they can reverse [these actions].’’

Although total business debt is at a record high, real investment—expenditures on property, plant, and equipment—is falling.

Hunt goes on to say,

“It’s the investment, the real investment which grows the economy. The Fed has created very significant unintended consequences, which have undermined the US [economy’s] ability to grow and lift the standard of living.”

An Ominous Sign for the US Economy

Speaking in an exclusive interview with Mauldin Economics, Hunt also addressed the Federal Reserve’s current monetary tightening cycle: “Whether they [raise rates] is immaterial because already they have engineered a contraction in [credit]… all major categories of bank lending are slowing.”

“Since 1915, of the 18 recessions, all of them, bar one, were preceded by monetary tightening… the Fed is on very thin ice.”

Where Do Bond Yields Go from Here?

For Dr. Lacy Hunt’s thoughts on the future of the US economy, where bond yields are headed, the Fed’s next move, and more—watch the full interview below.

Goldman: The Fed Will Hike This Week, But Here Are "The Two Most Interesting Questions"

On Wedensday the FOMC will hike rates by another 25 bps - an event which the Fed Funds market prices in with near virtual certainty, while Goldman calls the rate increase "extremely likely" - and only a "tail" event like an extremely weak CPI report on Wednesday morning, hours ahead of the Fed announcement, has any chance of preventing  this outcome. So with the next rate hike virtually inevitable, questions are focused on not only the Fed"s exit strategy for balance sheet normalization and what the "dots" or funds rate path will look like, but how the Fed squares rising rates with the recent string of inflation misses.

As Goldman"s Jan Hatzius writes, data since the March meeting has sharpened the dilemma that both sides of the mandate are sending increasingly different signals about the urgency of further tightening. "The unemployment rate has fallen 0.4pp since the March meeting and our current activity indicator and real GDP estimates signal that above-trend output growth will produce further labor market improvement. But the year-over-year core PCE inflation is now 0.2pp lower than at the March meeting."

While conceding that a hike is guaranteed, Goldman notes that two issues should make this meeting particularly interesting.

• First, will Fed officials alter their policy views in response to the increasingly different signals that both sides of the mandate are sending about the urgency of further tightening?


• Second, will the press conference provide some clarity on what the next tightening step following the June hike will be?

As a result of the weaker than expected inflationary prints, Goldman believes the recent data do not call for a major change in the Fed’s policy outlook. While Hatzius expects the FOMC to lower its estimate of the structural unemployment rate by a tenth next week, even with that assumption, the new data have broadly offsetting implications for the policy outlook in standard Taylor rules. Highlighting recent Fed communications, Goldman believes the Fed will follow "a balanced approach in dealing with the dilemma."

It also means that the statement will likely characterize economic activity as "picking up but recognize that inflation slowed since earlier this year." On the other side, Goldman sees a signal of heightened inflation concern as the main dovish risk and an upgrade of the balance of risks as the main hawkish risk.

Previewing the Fed"s Summary of Economic Projections (SEP), expect a modest downgrade to GDP growth for this year, coupled with declines in the unemployment rate to 4.3% this year and 4.2% next year. At the same time, projections for core PCE inflation are likely to fall to 1.8% this year and probably 1.9% in 2018. Reflecting the offsetting data news, expect the “dot plot” to show relatively stable funds rate projections.

On to Yellen"s press conference, which should provide some clarity on whether the next tightening step after June will be balance sheet normalization or a third funds rate hike. Goldman, as well as much of the street, expects balance sheet adjustment to start in September and the Fed hiking cycle to resume in December. With respect to the balance sheet, the Fed will initially cap the amounts of securities that can run off in any given month of $10bn for UST and $5 billion for MBS, that rise over four quarters to caps of $40 billion and $20 billion, respectively.

* * *

Some more details. Here is Goldman on the current economic situation, and how it will be (mis)read by the Fed.

Another rate increase from the FOMC next week is now extremely likely. Only an extremely weak CPI report on Wednesday morning or another tail event would prevent the committee from hiking. The committee probably also still expects a total of three hikes and the start of balance sheet adjustment in 2017.  

But two issues should make this meeting particularly interesting.

• First, will Fed officials alter their policy views in response to the increasingly different signals that both sides of the mandate are sending about the urgency of further tightening? We expect both lower unemployment and inflation paths in the Summary of Economic Projections (SEP) but relatively stable funds rate projections as the labor market and inflation data surprises, in the words of San Francisco Fed President John Williams, roughly “wash out”.


• Second, will the press conference provide some clarity on what the next tightening step following the June hike will be? We expect a detailed balance sheet announcement in September and a third rate hike in December but the reverse order is also plausible.

We believe both labor market and growth data in hand make a strong case for a rate increase next week and to remain upbeat about the outlook. Both our current activity indicator —down from 4.0% in February to 3.0% in May— and real GDP estimates—up from 1.2% in Q1 to our 2.3% Q2 tracking estimate—signal above-trend output growth (Exhibit 1, left panel). The medium-term growth outlook is also decent despite the lower odds of significant fiscal easing. The more important reason why growth should stay firm is the easing in financial conditions. Our FCI is at the easiest level since early 2015 and has  eased by 50bp since the March FOMC meeting. As the right panel of Exhibit 1 shows, the expected effect on GDP growth from changes in financial conditions for 2018H1 is now more than 0.3pp higher than at the March meeting.

Spare capacity continues to diminish, and the unemployment rate has fallen 0.4pp since the March meeting to a 16-year low of 4.3% (Exhibit 2, left panel). While nonfarm payroll growth has recently softened a bit, the average monthly gain of 162k year-to-date is still double our 85k estimate of the “breakeven” rate needed to keep the unemployment rate unchanged. While slack measures have declined more than expected, weak inflation data in April and especially March pushed the year-over-year pace of core PCE inflation 0.2pp lower than at the March Meeting (Exhibit 2, right panel). Both a Taylor rule framework and recent Fed communications suggest that the new data have broadly offsetting implications for the policy outlook.

Exhibit 3 translates the labor market and inflation surprises into changes in the appropriate funds rate via a standard Taylor rule framework. The original Taylor rule implies that a 0.2pp decline in inflation lowers the appropriate funds rate by 30bp while a 0.4pp reduction in the unemployment rate raises the appropriate funds rate by 40bp. In a modified “Taylor 1999” rule, the impact of employment is doubled  relative to the original version. This means that the impact of a 0.4pp reduction in unemployment rises from 40bp to 80bp. The left panel of Exhibit 3 thus suggests a 10-50bps higher appropriate funds rate.

But the decline in the unemployment rate may overstate the surprise if some decline was expected. Similarly, the decline in inflation can understate the surprise if some firming was expected. The middle panel of Exhibit 3 therefore compares actual unemployment and inflation moves to our expectations as of the March meeting and has less hawkish implications than the left panel. Finally, a lower estimate of the structural unemployment rate also reduces the decline in the unemployment rate gap. On net, we estimate the new data—combined with a 0.1pp downgrade of the structural rate—would have an exactly neutral effect in the Taylor 1999 rule that Chair Yellen has discussed repeatedly.

What has the Fed communicated in recent week.

Recent Fed communication suggests that the committee will also consider surprises on both sides of the mandate as roughly offsetting. As Exhibit 4 shows, several Fed officials have emphasized that there is now little labor market slack left. The inflation language in the May minutes was quite balanced as ”most participants viewed the recent softer inflation data as primarily reflecting transitory factors, but a few expressed concern that progress toward the Committee’s objective may have slowed.”

Since the May meeting, inflation for April has been weak for core CPI (0.9% annualized) but roughly in line for core PCE (1.8% annualized). The April inflation reports and recent comments by some Fed officials including Chicago Fed President Evans suggest that additional signs of heightened inflation vigilance are a dovish risk relative to our expectations. Governor Powell said that “there are good reasons to expect that inflation will resume its gradual rise but it is important to demonstrate a strong commitment to achieving our symmetric 2 percent objective” while Philadelphia Fed president Harker said that “we’re still on track for inflation” and that he is “looking at the trend.”

In light of these developments we expect to the committee to make three key changes to its post-meeting statement next week. First, we expect the committee to replace “consumer prices declined in March” by “inflation slowed since earlier this year” reflecting the core CPI miss in April. Second, we expect the statement to upgrade the growth assessment with verbiage along the lines of economic activity “appears  to have picked up” and to note that household spending “appears to be accelerating”. Third, we expect the committee to tacitly signal balance sheet run-off later this year by adding the qualifier “for the time being” to the description of its existing reinvestment policy.

A signal of heightened inflation concerns is the key dovish risk. The committee may, for instance, drop the “somewhat” from “inflation continued to run somewhat below 2 percent”. In terms of hawkish risks, an upgrade of the balance of risks is possible through the removal of “roughly”, reflecting improved domestic and international growth. We also expect Minneapolis Fed President Neel Kaskhkari to dissent as he recently described the move of inflation in “the wrong direction” as “concerning”.

What about the revised Summary of Economic Projections

The June FOMC meeting will include the quarterly update to the SEP. We expect significant changes to the unemployment and inflation projections but relatively stable funds rate forecasts, reflecting offsetting job market and inflation news.

1. Slightly lower GDP growth: Assuming our Q2 GDP tracking 1. estimate of 2.3%, GDP growth will average 1.7% annualized over the first half of 2017, so it would take a 2.4% growth rate in H2 to meet the policymakers March SEP estimate of 2.1%. We expect the 2017 median to fall to 2.0%, with risk tilted to the upside. We forecast that the median estimates for GDP growth in 2018-2019 and in the longer-run will remain unchanged.

2. Lower unemployment rate. The unemployment rate fell 0.4pp since the March meeting when the median unemployment rate projection was 4.5% for the forecasting horizon. We expect the median to fall to 4.3% in 2017, 4.2% in 2018 (with risks of 4.3%) and 4.3% in 2019. The estimate of the structural unemployment rate is quite likely to fall further from 4.7% to 4.6% in response to large declines in the actual rate and recent news on prices and wages. The decline in NAIRU would limit somewhat the projected employment overshoot but is a close call.

3. Lower core PCE inflation. We expect the 2017 median core PCE projection to fall to 1.8% and perhaps 1.7%. To reach 1.8% by year-end, monthly core PCE inflation would need to accelerate to an annualized rate of at least 1.9%. We believe the 2018 forecast also drops a tenth to 1.9% as some members now likely feel a bit less confident about the inflation outlook.

 

4. Relatively stable median dots. We expect most participants, especially those in the center of the committee, to stick to their March dots reflecting offsetting inflation and unemployment moves. We also believe that the committee probably still expects a total of three hikes in 2017. The retirement of Tarullo lowers the numbers of participants to 16 from 17 in March and is likely to move up the median 2018 dot from to 3 to 3-1/2 hikes next year. As the FOMC is extremely likely to hike for the second time this year next week, we expect that the 2017 one-hikers will shift to projecting 2 hikes in total for this year. We also assume that the new Atlanta Fed President Bostic votes like his predecessor Lockhart and that the new Richmond Fed President Mullinix lowers the Richmond Fed dots a bit.

Finally, how will the Fed "renornalize" its Balance Sheet.

We expect to get some more clarity next week on balance sheet runoff at the press conference and possibly also with an augmented Policy Normalization Principles and Plan. We continue to look for normalization to be announced in September. Here we update our projections for balance sheet runoff:

1. Start Date: We expect a detailed announcement in September  but would not be surprised if it came in December as guidance has been mixed. The May minutes suggest a start in September as an announcement at the December meeting would leave little time to “begin reducing the Federal Reserve’s Securities this year”. But guidance on the start of runoff by Governor Brainard after the funds rate gets midway to its long-run value of 3.0% and by New York Fed President Dudley “sometime later this year or next year” supports December. We think that announcing the start of balance sheet adjustment in September and keeping open the option of foregoing the third 2017 hike is the more prudent course of action given the mixed recent data and the potential for fiscal turmoil in Washington in Q3 related to the need for a debt ceiling hike and an extension of spending authority. We think the detailed announcement in September will be followed by the actual start of runoff of assets in October.

2. Process for phasing out reinvestment: The May minutes signaled that the committee will preannounce a schedule of gradually increasing caps to limit the amounts of securities that can run off in any given month. Our assumption is that that the initial caps are $10 billion a month for UST and $5 billion a month for MBS. The caps would rise each quarter by $10 billion and $5 billion to $40 billion and $20 billion respectively. Exhibit 7 shows that caps allow for a gradual runoff and deal with the variability associated with MBS prepayment and the irregular monthly schedule of maturing assets. The caps will remain in place after the phase-in but then only bind in roughly a third of the months for Treasuries until mid-2020 when the balance sheet reaches its projected terminal size.

3. Terminal size: We expect the Fed to maintain a balance sheet that 3. is relatively large by historical standards given several advantages of a large balance sheet related to monetary policy implementation and regulatory needs. Our calculations suggest that a monetary policy implementation through a floor system implies a terminal size of roughly 15.5% of GDP. While support from the New York Fed for the large balance scenario makes this outcome quite likely, there is no urgency yet in deciding on the size and on the composition of the terminal balance sheet.

Goldman"s conclusion:

A third consecutive quarterly rate increase next week is now extremely likely, in our view. Only an extremely weak CPI report on Wednesday morning or another tail event would prevent the committee from hiking. The data news since March has sharpened the dual mandate dilemma policymakers are facing. Our own view is that the inflation and unemployment surprises have been roughly offsetting but that the range of outcomes has widened somewhat. While the inflation outlook is uncertain, the dilemma will most likely resolve itself as inflation gradually accelerates. We therefore expect policymakers to remain focused on tightening mostly with the funds rate but also soon with the balance sheet tool.

And while we agree with Goldman in theory, one thing the bank has omitted in principle is that according to the Fed"s own commercial loan data, the US economy may be just 4-6 weeks away from posting its first negative C&I loan print since the financial crisis: a virtually failsafe indication of an imminent (or concurrent) recession.

Which means that, as we explained yesterday, the Fed is about to hike in not only a disinflationary phase of the economic cycle (which is largely a function of the slowdown in the Chinese commoity bubble, and the collapse in the Chinese credit impulse), but also into what may be an outright recession in the US. If so, look for the yield curve to do what it has always done in the past after the Fed hikes rates: flatten, then flatten some more, than go horizontal, and eventually invert.

FOMC Preview: Here Are The Possible Surprises In Today's Statement

Today"s FOMC announcement at 2:00pm is expected to be mostly a non-event, and the only incremental information will be what is contained in the updated statement, which comes one month ahead of the Fed"s next expected rate hike in June. There will be no press conference and no update to the summary of economic projections. The statement is expected to incorporate modest changes to reflect recent (mixed) data but see the risks around the meeting are low.

Here is what Wall Street consensus looks like ahead of 2pm:

• The market expect no rate hike at the May meeting; Fed Fund futures are currently pricing in a 65% probability of a June rate hike.


• There is a risk of a small hawkish surprise if the committee indicates they are "looking through" Q1 weakness in growth and inflation.


• A less likely dovish surprise could come from the FOMC emphasizing the decline in inflation.


• It is likely too soon for the committee to update language related to reinvesting balance sheet securities.


• Subsequent Fed speeches by Yellen, Fischer, Williams and Rosengren on Friday will likely provide additional color

Continuing the trend from recent weeks, most Wall Street firms expect the Fed to hike twice more this year despite the recent slowdown in US economic indicators and the near record collapse in the Citi eco surprise index, in June and September and announce balance sheet reduction in December.

With that in mind, below are some observations from Citigroup on the few surprises in the "wording" contained in today"s statement:

FOMC “looking through” weak Q1 may read slightly hawkish

The statement will need to update language regarding inflation, consumption, and job growth – all of which have slowed since the March meeting. The relative hawkishness depends on the extent to which Fed officials attribute the softness to transitory factors.

Consumer spending – Spending slowed significantly in January and February. The consensus view (reflected in March FOMC minutes) is that much of the weakness is transitory owing to (1) less utilities usage due to warm weather and (2) delayed tax refunds.

March: "Household spending has continued to rise moderately"

• Dovish: Household spending moderated.


• Neutral: Household spending moderated but consumer sentiment remains high and real income growth has been robust.


• Hawkish: Household spending moderated largely due to transitory factors

* * *

Inflation – A surprise decline in core prices in March led core PCE to print 1.6% year-on-year undoing most of the progress since 2016. Some update of the inflation language is in order.

March: "Inflation has increased in recent quarters, moving close to the Committee’s 2 percent longer-run objective; excluding energy and food prices, inflation was little changed and continued to run somewhat below 2 percent."

• Dovish: Inflation is running below the committee’s longer term objective


• Neutral: Inflation has edged lower


• Hawkish: Inflation edged lower in part due to large declines in certain categories.

* * *

Labor market – Going into the March FOMC meeting the economy had added over 200k jobs in each of the previous two months. The last job print of 98K was widely attributed to payback from previously warm weather.

March: "Job gains remained solid and the unemployment rate was little changed in recent months."

• Neutral: Job gains slowed but the unemployment rate fell further.


• Hawkish: Job gains were solid over the last quarter and the unemployment rate fell further.

* * *

Balance Sheet – Discussion of the timing and details of tapering of reinvestments will likely continue at the May meeting. Assuming tapering is announced in December, the committee may wait until at least June and more likely September before adjusting language in the statement regarding the balance sheet. The minutes to be released on May 24 will likely be more informative on this point.

* * *

And here is Goldman"s full list of exepctations for today"s statement:

1. Constructive comments on full-year growth. Despite the 0.7% increase reported in this morning’s Q1 GDP report, we expect the FOMC statement will continue to sound constructive on growth trends, repeating that “economic activity has been expanding at a moderate pace”, or simply saying that activity “continued to expand.” Underlying growth in the first quarter appears firmer than headline GDP would suggest, and Fed officials including Vice Chair Fischer have argued that growth is likely to be stronger during the remainder of the year. Exhibit 1 summarizes this mixed but generally positive message from growth indicators, which featured some sequential slowing in payrolls growth and our Current Activity Indicator (CAI) but also a drop in the U3 and U6 unemployment rates as well as positive data surprises on net. Relatedly, we expect an adjustment to the statement’s labor market characterization that acknowledges the pronounced drop in the unemployment rate, yet also softens the language around “solid” recent job gains (reflecting the slowdown in March headline payroll growth). We also expect the committee to downgrade its assessment of household spending (from “rise moderately” to “rise modestly”) and for the committee to remove the word “somewhat” in its characterization of firming business investment (i.e. “business investment appears to have firmed.”)

2. Few changes to description of inflation-related data. The previous statement distinguished between headline- and core inflation, a distinction we expect the committee will retain. However, given the pronounced softness in the March core inflation report, the previous statement’s “little changed” characterization of core inflation would seem out of place. Indeed, this morning"s GDP report was consistent with core PCE inflation at 1.6% in March (yoy), down from 1.7% in February. Accordingly, we expect a brief acknowledgement of this softness (i.e. “core inflation slowed somewhat in March”). However, we expect the statement will retain the “continued to run somewhat below 2 percent” wording. Also, the mid-April drop in market-based measures of inflation expectations largely reversed in the final week of the month, with 5Y/5Y breakeven inflation now back at the March levels (2.1%). As a result, we expect no changes to the inflation expectations wording.

3. And unchanged inflation outlook. Despite the March setback, the drop in the March unemployment rate coupled with the committee’s apparent growth optimism suggest little need to modify the inflation outlook. We currently forecast core PCE inflation to reach 2.0% in early 2018, which seems broadly consistent with the March statement’s expectation that “inflation will stabilize around 2 percent over the medium term.” Accordingly, we expect no changes to the inflation outlook paragraph.

4. Unchanged balance of risks and “accommodative” policy description. At its June 2016 meeting, after concerns about the spillovers from Brexit had faded, the FOMC said in its statement: “Near-term risks to the economic outlook have diminished.” The committee upgraded this language again at the September meeting, saying: “Near-term risks to the economic outlook appear roughly balanced.” The qualifiers “near-term” and “roughly” suggest Fed officials are less than fully confident about the outlook. However, we do not expect any changes to this section of the statement, as improving international growth trends are likely weighed against continued geopolitical risks and today’s softer 1Q GDP data. A meaningful upgrade to the balance of risks should be taken as a hawkish signal for the near-term policy outlook, in our view. In terms of the assessment of the stance of current policy, committee members appear to use “accommodative” interchangeably with “modestly” or “moderately accommodative,” and we see little reason to qualify the “accommodative” characterization in next week’s statement – particularly because doing so would likely be interpreted as a dovish shift. 

5. Subtle reference to eventual balance sheet adjustment. We expect a minor change to the balance sheet paragraph, with some sort of allusion to possible eventual reductions. Given the extent of the discussion in the minutes to the March FOMC meeting – as well as several comments by Fed officials over the last month about the Fed’s plans for ending reinvestment – it would seem odd for the statement to omit any reference to the topic. At the same time, committee members will likely want to avoid signaling an imminent policy change. If the committee does edit this section, we expect the wording to be fairly vague and noncommittal. One possibility is that the committee adopts the “gradual and predictable” language from the March minutes as a description of its overarching balance sheet policy. 

6. No explicit mention of fiscal policy. Notwithstanding the Wednesday tax announcement, the committee has gained little incremental clarity on the legislative outlook since the March meeting. Furthermore, the FOMC does not explicitly include the issue in the list of factors it will use to assess appropriate monetary policy (even though fiscal stimulus may be the single most important source of uncertainty for the economic outlook this year and next year.) The committee has mentioned fiscal policy in past statements, but only after-the-fact in recent years. For example, statements in 2009 referred to “fiscal and monetary stimulus”, while those in 2013 said that “fiscal policy is restraining economic growth”. A similar approach seems likely this time around, with fiscal policy only discussed in the statement after legislation begins to affect the economy. 

7. No dissents. Minneapolis Fed President Neel Kashkari dissented against the March hike, but dovish dissents seem very unlikely given our expectation that rates will be left unchanged. We also do not expect any hawkish dissents, in part because a pause at this meeting would still be consistent with as many as four hikes over the course of 2017 that could be achieved in the three remaining press conference meetings.

Central Banks Are Now Printing $200 Billion Per Month... Without a Crisis

A tidal wave of inflation is rapidly moving through the financial system.

Most investors only pay attention to the Federal Reserve. And they are missing the BIG PICTURE for Central Bank monetary policy.

The Fed is tightening policy by hiking rates. But the rest of the world’s Central Banks are printing a combined $200 BILLION in QE every single month.

Yes, $200 billion. At a time when the financial system is out of crisis and the Fed’s put its own “print” button on “pause.”

This is an all-time record… greater even that the global money printing that occurred at the depth of the 2008 Crisis when Central banks were desperate to prop the system up.

Indeed, at $200 billion per month, we’re talking about an annualized pace of over $2 TRILLION in money printing every year.

If you don’t believe this will unleash inflation, consider that already in the US, inflation has exceeded the Fed’s targets on ALL FOUR of its measures.

Bear in mind, these are the “official” measures of inflation… the ones that don’t include things like food, or energy. When you account for the rise in the REAL cost of living in the US, REAL inflation in the US is closer to 6%.

And this is happening at a time when the Fed is hiking rates and NOT printing money.

If you don’t take my word for it, take a look at Gold priced in the $USD, Japanese Yen, Euro, and British Pound.  The precious metal has begun to break of to the upside in all major world currencies.

Gold “smells” what’s coming. It’s inflation. And smart investors are preparing for it now.

We offer a FREE Special Investment Report featuring a unique investment opportunity through which you can buy Gold at the absurdly cheap valuation of just $273 per ounce.

Less than 1 in 100,000 investors know about this opportunity. But the early birds have already seen double-digit returns in 2017 thus far.

To pick up a copy of our FREE Special Report, swing by:

http://www.phoenixcapitalmarketing.com/goldmountain.html

Best Regards

Graham Summers

Chief Market Strategist

Phoenix Capital Research

Fed's Rosengren: "Quite Likely" The Fed's Balance Sheet Will Be Used In The Next Recession

The Fed has not even announced the framework of what its balance sheet "normalization" would look like, and already Boston Fed president Rosengren is talking about the next Fed QE program. 

In a speech titled “The Federal Reserve Balance Sheet and Monetary Policy” delivered to Bard College on Wednesday afternoon, Rosengren said that structural changes in the macroeconomy "may necessitate more frequent use of large-scale asset purchases during recessions" and he said it is "quite likely" that the use of central bank balance sheets will be necessary in future economic downturns.

The reason?  A combination of low inflation, low rates of productivity growth, and slow population growth may imply an economy "where equilibrium short-term interest rates remain relatively low" by historical standards. In other words, the natural rate, or r-star, is so low, the Fed will only be able to hike rates a handful of times before it tip the economy over into contraction, requiring a new easing regime.

As a result, reductions in short-term rates to combat recessions will encounter the zero boundary and "will not be sufficient," Rosengren said – so "it is likely to be more common for central banks to engage in asset purchases to stimulate the economy by reducing longer-term rates."

"So balance-sheet expansions – and exits – are likely to become more standard monetary policy tools around the world."

As a quick reminder, for all the talk of tightening, central banks are currently creating just under $200 billion in new money every month...

... and the total size of the big 6 central banks is now over $18 trillion.

Still, to avoid spooking the market too much - after all the Fed"s balance sheet should shrink before it expands again - Rosengren noted that the Federal Reserve should adopt balance sheet exit strategies "that reinforce the primacy of interest rate policy." The Boston Fed president said that while the FOMC is still carefully considering its balance sheet exit strategy, his ideal policy "would take a very gradual approach to balance sheet reduction."

"In my view that process could begin relatively soon, and should not significantly alter the FOMC"s continuing gradual normalization of short-term interest rates," he said.

Rosengren added that by initially retiring only a small percentage of maturing securities, and then very gradually shrinking the volume of the securities being reinvested, "the tightening of short-term interest rates should not need to be much different than it would be in the absence of shrinking the balance sheet."

"Starting to shrink the balance sheet earlier – and doing so in a very gradual fashion – implies very little reduction in the degree of monetary stimulus coming from the U.S. central bank"s balance sheet," Rosengren said.

"This, in turn, will allow policymakers to focus on gradual increases in the federal funds rate target as the primary mechanism for normalizing monetary policy and calibrating the economy."

But while Fed presidents warning about balance sheet reduction has been the norm in recent months, Rosengren"s unexpected suggestion that a new QE is only a matter of time appears to have spooked stocks, which moments after he spoke, slumped to new intraday lows despite what was an otherwise cheerful speech.

Full speech can be found here.

Did The Fed Just Hint At Monster Inflation?

We won’t bore you with yet another article about the recent rate hike by the Federal Reserve. This move was widely expected, as the Fed members had been hinting this would happen for several months now. Additionally, the new ‘hints’ about an additional two rate hikes later this year also didn’t surprise the market as we believe this was already priced in. The slight hike in the Federal Funds Rate estimate for 2019 to 3% (from 2.9%) didn’t see to worry the markets as the indices were all sent higher on the back of the FOMC meeting.

The ‘dot plot’ also caught our attention. Even though Yellen specifically announced the Fed was aiming for at least three rate hikes, the dot plot chart shows there are three members who are still expecting a maximum of two rate hikes. Surprising, considering the most recent interest rate decision was almost unanimous.

Source: Bloomberg

It made us scratch our heads as there didn’t seem to be any logical explanation at all, but then the Royal Bank of Canada came up with a theory which makes a lot of sense. Fed member Lockhart (Fed Atlanta- resigned at the end of February and could not possibly have submitted a new rate hike expectation. According to RBC, this could mean his (temporary?) replacement just submitted the same position as the previous time the Fed Atlanta was indicating, before Bostic was appointed as the new President and CEO of Fed Atlanta.

A logical explanation, but this wasn’t the only ‘interesting’ thing after the FOMC meeting. In the very first paragraph after officially announcing the rate hike, we could read this:

“ The Committee will carefully monitor actual and expected inflation developments relative to its symmetric inflation goal.”

The logical explanation here would be the interpretation the Fed wouldn’t allow the inflation rate to run at a higher percentage than 2% for a prolonged period of time, but the statement could also be read as the Fed explicity warning of a much higher inflation rate than originally anticipated. We know the market has always been prone to overshooting, either on the positive or negative side of the equation. We don’t think we have ever heard the Fed talk about ‘symmetric’ inflation, but as the FOMC members are leaking more intel than the Exson Valdez spilled oil, this position will undoubtedly be clarified in a ‘coincidental’ interview or public speech.

Source: Federal Reserve

Looking at the expectations of the Fed board members, they are practically still confirming ‘money’ is losing its value pretty fast. Whilst the median expected inflation rate is pretty close to 2%, an additional two-step rate hike would still put the ‘real’ interest rate below zero. And that’s what counts; your money is worth less day after day.

>>> Read our Guide to Gold and protect yourself against inflation!

Secular Investor offers a fresh look at investing. We analyze long lasting cycles, coupled with a collection of strategic investments and concrete tips for different types of assets. The methods and strategies are transformed into the Gold & Silver Report and the Commodity Report.

Follow us on Facebook @SecularInvestor [NEW] and Twitter @SecularInvest

The 5 Key Things To Watch For In Today's Fed Minutes

Despite desperate attempts to jawbone March rate-hike-odds higher, because as Master said last night "we don"t want to surprise the markets", Fed Funds Futures imply just a 36% chance (down from a week ago).

That suggests, if The Fed is serious about March, that today"s minutes must be spun towards that narrative. Here are the five key areas that The Wall Street Journal thinks are most critical...

A March Signal

Since the meeting, Fed officials have sounded increasingly comfortable about raising rates, perhaps as soon as the next gathering, on March 14-15. Philadelphia Fed President Patrick Harker said a move in March is possible, and Dallas Fed chief Robert Kaplan said rates should rise “sooner rather than later.” Chairwoman Janet Yellen said last week the Fed would consider raising rates “at our upcoming meetings,” a phrase that left open the possibility of a March move without committing to one. The minutes could offer a better sense about policy makers’ readiness to raise rates next month.

Balance Sheet Blues
What to do about the Fed’s roughly $4.5 trillion portfolio of assets, or balance sheet, has become one of the year’s biggest questions. Some officials have hinted at a willingness to begin shrinking the balance sheet in the near future, but the February meeting statement didn’t address the topic. Speaking before Congress last week, Ms. Yellen said she was unwilling to use the balance sheet as a monetary policy tool, a contrast with some ideas floated by some of her colleagues. The minutes could shed light on the internal debate among officials about the future of the Fed’s portfolio.

Fiscal Policy
The meeting statement made no mention of the economic and monetary consequences of the Trump administration other than a nod to improving consumer and business sentiment readings. Minutes from the Fed’s December meeting indicated officials were split over how to incorporate possible fiscal policy changes into their forecasts. The minutes to be released Wednesday could show whether officials have come to some sort of consensus over how to factor possible tax and spending changes into their monetary policy decision-making.

Is Inflation for Real?
Inflation, measured by the Fed’s preferred personal-consumption expenditures price index, has been rising, moving up by 1.6% on the year in December. But it is unclear how much of that increase reflects a short-lived bump from the uptick in oil prices and how much of it is due to underlying strength in the economy. The minutes could help us understand how Fed officials are interpreting recent inflation numbers.

Lurking Dangers
The economy’s recent strong patch and talk about the Trump administration’s fiscal priorities—such as tax cuts and spending boosts—have bred speculation that the economy could perform better than expected this year. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t threats still abroad. Although the Chinese economy seems more stable than it did this time last year, it still is grappling with a credit boom. And the eurozone could see new waves of volatility as Greece launches another round of debt negotiations. Do Fed officials see any lurking dangers on the international scene? The latest statement didn’t say, but the minutes might.

While we are every nuance will be scoured for insight, we leave readers with the following chart to show just how crucial a decision on the Fed"s balance sheet is becoming - almost $1 trillion matures in the next two years...

As Bloomberg notes, policy-makers have expressed a preference for passive unwinding over outright asset sales, but details remain sparse. Analysts will look to the minutes for clarity regarding whether officials intend to simply cease reinvestment for all asset classes or whether they will try to modulate the liquidation in a more controlled fashion. Additionally, analysts will attempt to decipher how much interest-rate buffer policy makers want to have in place before initiating the passive liquidation.

Taken together, Goldman notes that recent remarks suggest that officials may be starting to fine-tune their views now that the committee has gotten a couple rate hikes under its belt. They may also be getting ahead of potential criticism from the incoming administration, as some of the economic advisers to President-elect Trump appear to favor a smaller Fed balance sheet with a shorter duration.

Officials Addressing Balance Sheet in Public Comments

And as FX strategist (who writes for Bloomberg) Vincent Cignarella, warned "unwinding the Fed"s balance sheet could get messy."

The Federal Reserve should watch what it says about its $4.5t balance sheet. With so much uncertainty in the market about how it will be reduced, a few mistimed words could roil markets faster than you can mouth “taper tantrum.”

The topic is hot. The Fed’s Bullard and Rosengren have recently said the central bank could use the balance sheet to help tighten policy and other bank presidents have also talked about tapering.  Ex-Chairman Bernanke just blogged about it, arguing there’s no need to rush.

Hopefully they’re trying to avoid the past. Bernanke surprised the markets in mid-2013 when he said the Fed might cut back on monthly bond and mortgage-backed securities purchases by $10b. The result, traders panicked and pushed the 10-year yield to nearly 3% from below 2% in four months, sparking a crisis in emerging markets.

If they mess it up this time, it could be worse. The Fed may announce a taper while they are increasing rates and in a bearish bond market, which could exacerbate any move because there are fewer buyers to absorb supply. Tapering a balance sheet of this size has never been done.

The Fed will also be tightening for the first time in more than a decade -- raising the Fed Funds rate without draining reserves is repricing the curve, it isn’t tightening. Increasing rates changes the price of money in circulation, tapering reduces it.

The Fed’s Williams said last week the central bank “won’t be disruptive at all” when it starts to let the balance sheet roll off because it will cause rates to go up, which is “desirable.” How much is desirable?

But if markets don’t get the message or a gradual message isn’t gradual enough, traders won’t wait. They will want to get ahead of the curve and that could lead to a surge in yields.

Some analysts predict yields will rise 15 to 20 basis points, but a fixed-income trader I spoke with said that may just be the reaction on the first day.

As traders will tell you, getting into a long position is easier than getting out.

* * *

We hope that this time the Fed invites the opinions of more actual traders in advance of what could be the most momentuous decision in Fed history, instead of just relying on academics and economists, especially since this could be the one event that leads to immense rewards for those bears who managed to survive the past 8 years of activist central banks pushing the stock market higher at all costs.