저자: JeremySiegel · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 시겔 교수는 스티븐 무어의 연준 이사 지명을 지지하며, 연준의 집단사고를 깨기 위해 이견이 필요하다고 주장한다. 연준 내 집단사고: 지난 15년간 100여 차례 표결에서 반대는 단 한 번뿐이었고, 이는 문제라고 지적한다. 2018년 12월 금리 인상: 시장 신호(상품지수·주가 하락)를 무시한 매파적 결정이었다고 비판하며, 이후 연준이 방향을 선회한 것을 언급한다. 주가가 20% 떨어질 필요는 없었다고 본다. 디플레이션 논쟁: 무어가 상품 가격을 디플레이션 지표로 들었던 것은 부정확했다는 지적에 대해, 시겔은 2018년 말 상품 하락과 디스인플레이션 환경은 인정하지만 디플레이션과는 구분해야 한다고 답한다. 금리 전망: 연준이 중립금리(r*)가 과거보다 낮아졌다고 보며, 장기적으로 과거 2~3%대 금리로 돌아가지 않는다는 견해를 밝힌다. 미 10년물 금리가 2.40% 아래로 떨어진 배경으로 저물가, 성장 둔화, 위험회피 심리, 국채 수요를 꼽는다. 무어 논란: 여성 관련 과거 발언에 대해서는 무어가 사과했다며 옹호를 피하고, 정책 역량에 집중하자고 말한다. 공화당 상원 표결 이탈 가능성을 언급하며 지명 가능성이 낮아 보인다고 평가한다. 시장 관련: 영상 말미에 연준이 지급준비금 이자를 5bp 인하할 수 있다는 언급이 나온다.
다듬은 글
you want the biggest selling point for me it's I helped put the economic agenda together we've got the best economy in 20 years we've got the best job mark in 50 years I mean that's a pretty good qualification that was Steve Moore yesterday the economists from the Heritage Foundation with us on set and what turned out to be now a controversial choice president Trump has said he wants to nominate more to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors Wall Street Journal's now reporting that raising that's raising concern among some Republicans in the Senate who say Moore's past writings about women and views about the Fed Whitmore's ideas about the central bank are finding support with one widely followed market voice wharton school finance professor jeremy siegel writes in the journal that he doesn't always agree with more but he thinks that he would help solve the Federal Reserve's groupthink problem joining us now is professor Jeremy Siegel and anyone that didn't read 1984 or hasn't googled group think recently should should really google it again Jeremy because it's a it's not a good way to operate it's where everyone and I'm not going to make an analogy analogy and anything that goes on and that we currently talk about but when everyone just defers to the 97% consensus and doesn't try to think of anything themselves they just defer to experts and it becomes almost more of a religion than anything else and you think the Fed suffers from that right now well to some extent as I pointed out in my article over the last 15 years over a hundred votes have been taken there's been one dissent one lone dissent by Fed governors against policy of the Chairman in 15 years now you know we took over 15 years I mean a lot of mistakes were made you would think there would be some more lively discussion and someone would have dissented what I was particularly you know surprised as many of us were how hawkish the December meeting was had more been on the board he would have descended if I were on the board I would have descended I I thought that they were not looking at the signals in the marketplace they should have said hey we're not gonna raise two or three times in 2019 by the way they admitted it they made a pivot just a couple weeks later but why did we need the market to fall 20 percent during that period so I think in that case more was right a dissent was needed and I would like a little bit more split votes you know the the Fed doesn't it's not like the Supreme Court where we get five to four decisions it's like 12 to nothing 12 to nothing 12 to nothing and my feeling is I would like to see a little bit more lively discussion there and not necessarily a permit of or a perma hawk or whatever there's just someone that that that might be willing to to go against the grain of the of the other members of the Fed when when you know without I guess falling in line with the group thing yeah and and you know it doesn't mean that the person that that is out of the box is right he or she has to present I mean there are smart people on the Fed you know they'll they'll shoot him down if they don't think he has the data to back it up but I think you sharpen your own mind when you have someone out there giving a different viewpoint you have to make your own arguments better professor critic critics of Moore would say that he hasn't that when it comes to the data he has been wrong in fact yesterday when he was on the program when we were talking about deflation he he referenced commodities as being this indicator of deflation and in fact if you look at when he was making those comments there still wasn't even deflation within the commodities market so the reason I ask this is there are there are economists out there that say look maybe nice guy interesting commentator but but on economics I'm not sure I didn't understand your question necessary you can't tell where it at if you can tell we're in a deflation area environment commands the second respect do you think distance a strike no I mean let's say the following there was commodity deflation in December when that meeting was held the CRB index of my research bureau index was going down financial markets were going down stock market there were a lot of signals out there honestly it looked like the Fed was tone deaf to those signals I mean I saw that the news conference the Powell had afterwards the Dow went down for 700 points during the news conference I said isn't he recognizing what's going on there we can't have two or three hikes for 2009 we're trying to figure out why dirt why there's negative interest rates still we were just talking about China exporting deflation you you really don't think we're in a dis inflation environment the environment right now and you don't think that's getting prices are going down I think we're in a disinflationary environment but that's different that's different than saying that it's deflate wow people they conflate the two terms but professor what I was going to ask you with you you've been a market watcher for a long time and for you to not want to go back to normalizing interest rates in December must have been a change in thinking for you too because I don't know anyone who didn't think that we needed to build up some dry powder for the next downturn in felt like we were well below normal on interest rates so if you were smart wise I don't think we're well below no I don't mean we're wells of really because like we're in a different world yeah right we're against the world of much lower great we're in the world of modern all over again said yeah had the Fed known that the 10-year bond was going to be below 240 in March would they have raised the funds rate which they did to 240 in December what account why the interest rates so low yes there's a lot of reasons there's a lot of reasons well first of all we have very low inflation growth is slowing and we've had faster growth this quarter looks like 2% we have a lot of risk aversion we have after the financial crisis a lot of desire for liquidity something I pointed out is that Treasuries are the go-to acent whenever there's a risk in the market which makes them good hedges in other words we are in a world that we got to get you to a much lower interest rate our star is 0 which is the after inflation short-term Federal Reserve rate we're not going back up to 2 or 3 percent that we had in the 1980s 1990s it's just a different world and I think we have to recognize that if I was my size more I would have criticized him for being way too hawkish two years ago that would have been I mean that was two years ago right well now the distance he's right about deflation he's right about dissing that was a that was a silly to the financial crisis that's right for one here it's things like let me point out that very well-known economists that circulated and published a full-page letter in Wall Street Journal New York Times blasting Bernanke for quantitative easing and that it was going to cause hyperinflation they were wrong he was wrong he admits he was wrong there so it's not just out of the you know oh my goodness how do you know how could he have done that a lot of economists were one they wanted me to sign I said no I didn't see any inflation out there I refused to sign that letter they came to me so but it was not just him and just change gears and now say hey December is not a time to raise it I don't think these are inconsistent positions but not a bit under estimating technology or global work you know the the movement of goods and services around the government under estimating that and in his effect on inflation is one of the biggest stories that we've that everybody's been wrong on I think over the past five years and it accounts for these crazy interest rates it seems so a negative rate still 10 years after the financial crisis and Europe how is that possible negative rates the Japan 20 years of ya know inflation although look I gotta say the reason that there's been so much controversy surrounding stephen moore is less about no no economic thought nobody but that's our things that he's right yeah but with it's not something we're gonna talk about you're necessarily for Jeremy Siegel he's a Wharton professor we're talking about whether it be good on the Fed or not if you want to talk you know I sure but women issues that's fun no but I think position I think the professor do you have a view of whether those should because well I'm not going to defend I'm not gonna defend Steve Moore he's certainly apologized for them you can you know I ever not buy them on those issues I'm concentrating on his he cannot you've got Susan Collins Jody you've got Lindsey Graham he can only lose three and then he need pence and it's already at three so it's very unlikely ya know it is looking very I know it is looking very if he what's the market don't stands there that you think there should be uh yeah my feeling is that you know let's have one person there that has that other point of view I think it'll sharpen everyone around the table and you know that's not a bad thing at all I mean he's an economist to resell all their stocks yet Jeremy or hold onö keep will make the trend your friend hey look what's going on yeah okay by the way the Fed might lower five basis points on on the interest on reserves today may lowered five basis points oh yeah it's been creeping up you
Comments 0