Source stringclasses 1
value | Date int64 1.98k 2.01k | Text stringlengths 2 27.1k | Token_count int64 1 5.57k |
|---|---|---|---|
fomc | 1,980 | Well, the figures are supposed to be the same. I don't know how to-- | 17 |
fomc | 1,980 | Yes, but M-1B has the most potential for fluctuation. | 15 |
fomc | 1,980 | But M-1B has the most long-run potential. M-1A, if you read it as "MIA," is "missing in action." | 32 |
fomc | 1,980 | M-1B is "misinformed bunch." | 11 |
fomc | 1,980 | It seems to me that the logical thing, without getting into tiny fractions, is either to do the Balles approach or the reverse of the Balles approach, which is about as much of a compromise as one can get, retaining the wider ranges. Now, that avoids quarter percents on either the midpoints or the outside [limits of th... | 87 |
fomc | 1,980 | In the interest of simplicity, I am prepared to shift my vote to alternative III. | 17 |
fomc | 1,980 | The trouble with alternative III--frankly, I have no particular problem with it--is that it's going to make some people more unhappy than any of the other alternatives. | 35 |
fomc | 1,980 | But only 1/2 of 1 percent were unhappy! | 13 |
fomc | 1,980 | There's a multiplier here, Paul. | 7 |
fomc | 1,980 | Let me put it this way: It makes me unhappy but in the spirit of unanimity I would change my vote and go with alternative III. | 29 |
fomc | 1,980 | It's a full percentage point drop in the growth rates from last year. Doesn't it mean that we're going to have an increase of 2 percentage points in the unemployment rate and no change in interest rates? | 40 |
fomc | 1,980 | That's probably right. | 4 |
fomc | 1,980 | Where are interest rates in [that scenario]? | 9 |
fomc | 1,980 | Well, I surely share [that concern] with you. | 12 |
fomc | 1,980 | Even taking all the probabilities in the staff estimate, the likely rate of [GNP] growth is between .8 and -2.2 percent. That is just not a very good economy, gentlemen, to have 12 percent interest rates. | 49 |
fomc | 1,980 | But, Nancy, on the other hand, we'd get a rise in the rate of inflation. | 19 |
fomc | 1,980 | We're going to get that anyway, Henry, from OPEC over the first three months of this year. | 21 |
fomc | 1,980 | If we're going to get it anyway, you better be down where I am. | 16 |
fomc | 1,980 | Actually, alternative III, you have to remember, is much more lenient than where Governor Coldwell would like to be. So that-- | 28 |
fomc | 1,980 | Associate me with that, too. | 7 |
fomc | 1,980 | Of course, he won't be here to-- | 9 |
fomc | 1,980 | No, I am going to be out in the ranks of the unemployed with fixed incomes to pay the price-- | 22 |
fomc | 1,980 | Well, I would recommend to you the Balles position. But if you're bound and determined to go to alternative III, we'll go to alternative III. Let's try Balles once more. | 37 |
fomc | 1,980 | I'm not going to vote for it this time. | 10 |
fomc | 1,980 | Things are coming my way! | 6 |
fomc | 1,980 | How many did you get? What was the count? | 11 |
fomc | 1,980 | Five. MR. PARTEE & | 7 |
fomc | 1,980 | Five; we've lost one! | 6 |
fomc | 1,980 | Well, I tried, Mr. Chairman. | 9 |
fomc | 1,980 | That's the end of Balles, et al. | 10 |
fomc | 1,980 | The "et als" are still around. | 9 |
fomc | 1,980 | My next move would be to alternative III. | 9 |
fomc | 1,980 | With great reluctance, I will try "III." | 11 |
fomc | 1,980 | Nine, Mr. Chairman. | 6 |
fomc | 1,980 | It is a mistake. | 5 |
fomc | 1,980 | Why, Paul? What's your principal reservation about it? | 11 |
fomc | 1,980 | My reservation is not the substance of it, but that I don't think it correctly gets to the midpoint of the range of opinion. | 26 |
fomc | 1,980 | Well, go back and try the Schultz approach again. That looks to me as if it buys a good share of those of us who are concerned about-- | 31 |
fomc | 1,980 | By the Schultz approach you mean just reversing-- | 9 |
fomc | 1,980 | Reversing the Balles points. | 8 |
fomc | 1,980 | Oh, I am perfectly happy to do that. Let's try that one. | 15 |
fomc | 1,980 | Take M-1A and M-1B of "III" and M2 and M3 of "II." | 24 |
fomc | 1,980 | Let's see whether that captures-- | 6 |
fomc | 1,980 | Seven. | 2 |
fomc | 1,980 | Seven? Doesn't it make you two even a little happier? | 12 |
fomc | 1,980 | A 4-1/2 percent rate of growth for Ml? No. | 16 |
fomc | 1,980 | Well, if that's the case, we better stay with alternative III. | 14 |
fomc | 1,980 | I think everyone is stuck on III; that's okay. | 11 |
fomc | 1,980 | So, it's alternative III? | 6 |
fomc | 1,980 | How would the chair vote? | 6 |
fomc | 1,980 | Yes. | 2 |
fomc | 1,980 | You would vote for it? | 6 |
fomc | 1,980 | Well, I'll vote for alternative III if that's what everybody wants to vote for. I don't see the significance in the 1/2 percentage point difference that some other people apparently see. | 37 |
fomc | 1,980 | Well, I don't either, but it takes me a whole point [lower]. | 16 |
fomc | 1,980 | Oh, I understand. | 5 |
fomc | 1,980 | Mr. Chairman, is the staff to assume that in making its GNP projections, it should take the 4-1/2 percent rate of growth for M-1A as a center point? That is a lower rate of growth than we had. | 52 |
fomc | 1,980 | I presume that in some sense that must be the implication. | 12 |
fomc | 1,980 | You realize we're already in trouble in terms of being in conformity with the Administration's forecast. At least you have to do the testifying on Humphrey-Hawkins. We're already inconsistent; this is making it worse. | 44 |
fomc | 1,980 | The President has given up on Humphrey-Hawkins for this coming year anyway. He moved out [the time period in which to reach the objectives]. | 31 |
fomc | 1,980 | He may have moved it out but the Administration's forecast is markedly different. And we will have to go up to the Hill and say we're going to keep money so tight that there is no way that the Administration's forecast can be realized. That's about what it comes down to. | 56 |
fomc | 1,980 | I am really much more concerned about M2 and M3 than I am M-1A or M-1B because at these interest rates and these inflation rates I am very unsure of the connection between the two. And I think there is going to be a demand shift this year. The staff indicates that they can see no indication yet, but-- | 71 |
fomc | 1,980 | [It can] hardly be bigger than it was last year. We already had a great big demand shift in the recorded figures for last year. For M-1B, which I think a lot of people would support as the better redefined money, our midpoint will be 3 points below what we realized last year. Three points! | 68 |
fomc | 1,980 | Well, that figure is a little artificial because we had the shift into ATS and NOW accounts. | 19 |
fomc | 1,980 | This is a question of fact, Mr. Chairman. What impressions do you have as to whether the Congressional Committee considers the ranges as having a very strong implication that we'll move toward the midpoint? I haven't gathered that that was true in the past; we have ranges with the precise idea of being flexible. In-hou... | 99 |
fomc | 1,980 | I can't answer that question. It probably implies a degree of sophistication on the part of Congress that is beyond any generalization. | 25 |
fomc | 1,980 | There seems to be a feeling around the table here that if we adopt alternative III, we're struck with the midpoints. I don't think we are, frankly. | 32 |
fomc | 1,980 | What else is the Desk going to aim for? | 10 |
fomc | 1,980 | What's the purpose of having the range? | 8 |
fomc | 1,980 | We'd certainly have a tendency right now to aim for the midpoint, not knowing anything else. That's pending further information. | 24 |
fomc | 1,980 | That is true in the short run, Paul, but as the year moves on, we have that flexibility. We just finished using it the last time. | 31 |
fomc | 1,980 | Yes, in the short run. | 7 |
fomc | 1,980 | We sure did. | 4 |
fomc | 1,980 | Mr. Chairman, I don't know if this will be helpful, but one possibility--in the spirit of what has been discussed --is to take the 3-point ranges for M-1A and M-1B of alternative II and to lower the top ends of M2 and M3 by 1/2 point. | 66 |
fomc | 1,980 | Well, I was going to suggest the opposite. If there's more of a concern about M2 and M3, maybe we should take a 1/2 percentage point off the top of the M1 ranges. | 43 |
fomc | 1,980 | Then you have more substitutability among the deposits? | 11 |
fomc | 1,980 | And it leaves us a little more leeway on M2 and M3. | 16 |
fomc | 1,980 | I'd go for that. | 5 |
fomc | 1,980 | Presumably they are, theoretically, a little more volatile anyway. | 13 |
fomc | 1,980 | 2-1/2 to 5-1/2 percent on M-1A? | 19 |
fomc | 1,980 | No. | 2 |
fomc | 1,980 | [For M-1A] 3-1/2 to 6 percent--a compromise between alternatives II and III on both the Mls. | 31 |
fomc | 1,980 | All right. I'd go for that. | 8 |
fomc | 1,980 | And 4 to 6-1/2-- | 11 |
fomc | 1,980 | It's 4 to 6-1/2 percent on M-1B, which is probably going to have to be revised anyway. | 28 |
fomc | 1,980 | I'd be happy. | 4 |
fomc | 1,980 | And leave the 6 to 9 percent and 6-1/2 to 9-1/2 percent [for M2 and M3, respectively]. | 34 |
fomc | 1,980 | What was M-1A, please? | 9 |
fomc | 1,980 | 3-1/2 to 6 percent. And M-1B is 4 to 6-1/2. | 26 |
fomc | 1,980 | What about M2 and M3? | 8 |
fomc | 1,980 | They're the same as in alternative II. | 8 |
fomc | 1,980 | There's something wrong. | 4 |
fomc | 1,980 | There's a bit of logic in it, I think. | 11 |
fomc | 1,980 | That's logical, and I like that. | 8 |
fomc | 1,980 | Just a comment on that, Mr. Chairman: The reason I was turned off by alternative II for M2 and M3 is that if we went for the upper end of that range, which I presume we could, that would result in no decrease at all in the growth rates of those two magnitudes for 1980 from what we experienced in 1979. | 74 |
fomc | 1,980 | If we go right to the top. | 8 |
fomc | 1,980 | We also have to recognize that they're rather uncontrollable by us with money market funds and Eurodollars and Caribbean dollars and RPs in there. | 29 |
fomc | 1,980 | We lose that visual effect, but it's getting argued that the economics are a little against us in terms of the uncertainty and it gives wider ranges. I think there's a certain sense in doing that. It has the disadvantage that-- | 45 |
fomc | 1,980 | So the midpoint on M-1A would be 4-3/4 percent? | 18 |
fomc | 1,980 | That's right. [Unintelligible] mislead with that quarter percent. | 16 |
fomc | 1,980 | That's just raising it, on average, because the lower ends don't really mean anything. | 17 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.