Source stringclasses 1
value | Date int64 1.98k 2.01k | Text stringlengths 2 27.1k | Token_count int64 1 5.57k |
|---|---|---|---|
fomc | 1,977 | Well, I think sometimes, I think they are symbolic. Much of life is based on symbolism. It serves a function. Much of history is based on symbolism. I wouldn't want to ignore it. Well, I don't see any way of compromising readily here, and I think we have to take a straight vote. And I hope we will not be too far apart ... | 77 |
fomc | 1,977 | Could we vote to include the bank credit or not to include it? | 14 |
fomc | 1,977 | Oh no, I don't think we ought to vote on the bank credit. Leave that to our staff. But to vote on the-- | 27 |
fomc | 1,977 | But the implicit vote is to state an objective for bank credit. | 13 |
fomc | 1,977 | Well, let me repeat what I think we'll be voting on. | 13 |
fomc | 1,977 | Because I don't think there is any indication [in] Governor Coldwell's suggestion as to whether we exclude it completely or include it and have the staff insert the figure. | 34 |
fomc | 1,977 | Well, let me indicate what I think we ought to vote on, and then we'll discuss that to the extent that there is a difference of opinion. What I'm putting to the Committee for a vote is as follows: an M1 growth range for the year ahead of 4 to 6-1/2 percent; the growth range of M2 of 7 to 9-1/2 percent; a growth range f... | 130 |
fomc | 1,977 | Mr. Chairman, you stated there were no grounds on which to compromise, and I see one. I don't think you probably want to consider it, but 4-1/4 to 6-1/4. | 45 |
fomc | 1,977 | What's that? | 3 |
fomc | 1,977 | 4-1/4 to 6-1/4. | 13 |
fomc | 1,977 | Well, I thought of that, but we have avoided fourths, and I'm a little afraid that we may get to--actually, the difference between 4 to 6 and 4 to 6-1/2 is a small difference. | 50 |
fomc | 1,977 | Same midpoint, but-- | 5 |
fomc | 1,977 | It's a meaningful one. | 5 |
fomc | 1,977 | What's that? | 3 |
fomc | 1,977 | It's a meaningful one. | 5 |
fomc | 1,977 | But I think in this case it really is to knock a little off the top... | 17 |
fomc | 1,977 | Meaningful one, in the sense that a good deal of meaning may be read into that. | 19 |
fomc | 1,977 | It also lowers the midpoint. | 6 |
fomc | 1,977 | I believe it would give the same, wouldn't it? 4 to 6. | 17 |
fomc | 1,977 | Bob's figure gives the same midpoint-- | 8 |
fomc | 1,977 | Your midpoint. | 3 |
fomc | 1,977 | Yours [Mr. Coldwell's] would be lower. | 13 |
fomc | 1,977 | Yes, yours would, but 4-1/4 to 6-1/4 would give the same midpoint, I believe, as 4 to 6-1/2. | 39 |
fomc | 1,977 | Well, we could do that. But I think that--you know, it'd be an exercise in fine tuning that I don't fancy, but if this is what the Committee wanted to do-- | 38 |
fomc | 1,977 | There's only one reason I would even suggest it, and that is that the upper limit has not really been cut down. | 24 |
fomc | 1,977 | I beg your pardon? | 5 |
fomc | 1,977 | The only reason I would even suggest anything that approximates fine tuning to that point is that there has been no adjustment in the upper limit. | 28 |
fomc | 1,977 | I think the compromise more practically ought to be along another line, namely, let's bear in mind that several members of the Committee think that the upper limit of 6-1/2 is too high, and, in looking at our short-term ranges, let's keep that in mind as policy unfolds in the months ahead. Mr. Roos, please. | 71 |
fomc | 1,977 | Mr. Chairman, just for clarification. I'm just speaking of M1. I am led to believe that if we maintain the upper the limit where it has been--6-1/2 percent--and if we operate from a new base as a result of this base drift, then, even with a reduction of 1/2 percent in the lower limit, this would accelerate M1 growth by... | 220 |
fomc | 1,977 | It's all a matter of interpretation. You see, the actual growth rates have diverged from the targeted growth rates significantly. And I think that the objective that you seek can be better attained by watching the short-run policy objectives and trying to prevent further upward drifting and try to get, you see, some do... | 209 |
fomc | 1,977 | Is it possible, Mr. Chairman, to really convince the world--which I think looks to you, sir, as perhaps the only effective obstacle to continued acceleration of inflation--is it possible to convince them that, [while] we really aren't doing anything with our long-range targets to materially affect this situation--havin... | 108 |
fomc | 1,977 | I don't know. Well, you know, I look upon the upper limit as an insurance policy. I look upon it also as something that can help us through a difficult legislative period. I can assure you that the statement before the [congressional] committee will stress, even more than preceding statements have, the need to bring th... | 177 |
fomc | 1,977 | I might just say, Mr. Chairman--Larry [Roos], the first quarter was an undershoot. It could very well be that the third quarter would be an undershoot. If it is, a quarter from now we'll be meeting, and we'd be looking at how to evaluate an undershoot. I mean, you're basing everything on the second quarter as if that w... | 90 |
fomc | 1,977 | I'm really not. I'm taking a five-quarter period, first quarter of '76 to the second quarter of '77, where M1 has grown at 6-1/2 percent--the last three quarters at 6.6 percent, and the last quarter at 8.8. If that doesn't reflect a trend of acceleration, an upward trend, I can't--I'm misreading the figures. | 81 |
fomc | 1,977 | Gentlemen, I wish we were closer together. Unless there is a further comment or a further suggestion-- | 22 |
fomc | 1,977 | Just to add, I think your reasoning is right on this, Mr. Chairman. I don't think we should put the emphasis on lowering an upper limit and not be serious about it, because it's going to get us in all sorts of trouble publicly. I'd put an upper limit that we mean and put our emphasis on the short-range implementation s... | 172 |
fomc | 1,977 | What better way would there be to convey to the public our determination to operate closer to the midpoint than to reduce our maximum upper end? | 27 |
fomc | 1,977 | Well, I'm not sure we're willing to do that. It's depending on how these numbers come in. I'd be satisfied if we make sure we don't exceed that upper limit. And I think that will be the credibility. We're in danger of losing the credibility by these overshoots. | 56 |
fomc | 1,977 | Well, you know, as far as the range is concerned, let's not forget the original reason for wanting a range rather than a single figure--namely, our inability to hit the targets, number one; also, the uncertainty of our knowledge as to the relationship between the given magnitude on the monetary side and an economic act... | 119 |
fomc | 1,977 | I don't want to prolong this, but I would like to give strong support to the comment you made about looking at the short-run policy in light of the longer-run policy. I think that's very important, and we haven't always done that as well as we might have. But that's something to strive for as we go. | 64 |
fomc | 1,977 | Well, that's something that Mr. Balles in particular has reminded us of repeatedly. Well, gentlemen, I think that we are probably ready for a vote now. | 33 |
fomc | 1,977 | Chairman Burns Yes Vice Chairman Volcker Yes Governor Coldwell No Governor Gardner Yes President Guffey Yes Governor Jackson No Governor Lilly Yes President Mayo Yes President Morris Yes Governor Partee Yes President Roos No Governor Wallich Yes Nine to three, Mr. Chairman. | 53 |
fomc | 1,977 | All right now, we want to turn--but I wonder about the hour, how much we can--how do you feel, would you like to continue, or take a break and go to lunch? I'll tell you, let's do this. We'll have Mr. Sternlight's report and perhaps also Mr. Axilrod's, and then we'll break for lunch. Mr. Sternlight, we're ready for you... | 84 |
fomc | 1,977 | [Statement--see Appendix.] | 6 |
fomc | 1,977 | Thank you for your report, Mr. Sternlight. Any questions to Mr. Sternlight? | 19 |
fomc | 1,977 | Most everybody made payment the next day, didn't they? | 11 |
fomc | 1,977 | Payments went through the next day; there's the question of what interest rate adjustments to make, if any, because of the nonday--we skipped a day. | 32 |
fomc | 1,977 | Mr. Black, please. | 6 |
fomc | 1,977 | I think Mr. Sternlight pretty well took care of my question, Mr. Chairman. | 18 |
fomc | 1,977 | Mr. Wallich. | 5 |
fomc | 1,977 | Last time we had a money market directive, do you feel that this made any difference in why things went--for instance, would the funds rate be significantly different from now had we had a corresponding aggregates directive? | 42 |
fomc | 1,977 | I think there was sufficient strength in the aggregates toward the latter part of this interval so that, if you'd been operating on an aggregates directive, there might very well have been a need to firm slightly. I think we just barely avoided such a need, and one of the factors working in that direction was the fact ... | 70 |
fomc | 1,977 | My guess would be that the federal funds rate would be a little higher now. | 16 |
fomc | 1,977 | I would have thought so, too. | 8 |
fomc | 1,977 | Any other question? Mr. Axilrod, how many hours do you need for your report? | 20 |
fomc | 1,977 | Approximately 3-1/2 minutes, Mr. Chairman. | 13 |
fomc | 1,977 | All right. You'll be timed precisely; please proceed. | 11 |
fomc | 1,977 | [Secretary's note: This statement was not found in Committee records.] | 14 |
fomc | 1,977 | Well, thank you, Mr. Axilrod. I think it's a very helpful statement. Mr. Wallich. | 24 |
fomc | 1,977 | You say that there's much less relation between velocity and interest rates; is that the case also if you try to allow for the clear upward trend of velocity that we have as a result of technological changes, such as you have specified before? | 47 |
fomc | 1,977 | This is the velocity of M1, and I think you'd have to allow for more than the technological changes, and we're working on that. The next thing I'm going to say, I think you might have to allow for a large increase in corporate and state and local government holdings of very short term assets, like the federal funds and... | 104 |
fomc | 1,977 | Any other questions to Mr. Axilrod? Yes, Mr. Jackson. | 16 |
fomc | 1,977 | Just one question. To what extent do these short-term projections include the possibility that, for brief periods, the wild-card maturing deposits will be deposited in the M1 demand deposit figure before they're rolled over? | 42 |
fomc | 1,977 | We did not make any specific allowance for that, Governor Jackson. | 13 |
fomc | 1,977 | Do you think that would be a material factor? | 10 |
fomc | 1,977 | I think there would be some possibility. But I would believe that most of the holders, knowing the time of maturity, would probably arrange their transaction to minimize the amount going through demand deposits. I think there could be some effect if you go out of the wild card into a market security in the transaction ... | 110 |
fomc | 1,977 | You don't think that [any] of [the] alternatives here would pose the likelihood of substantial disintermediation then? | 25 |
fomc | 1,977 | Well, I think alternative C might put banks a little bit closer to the margin than [it] would thrifts, so, a little more room. I don't think alternative B would pose any problem; alternative C would begin to, a little bit, for banks, but not significantly over the next four weeks. | 63 |
fomc | 1,977 | Did you allow for any shift from M2 to M3 on account of the wild card? | 19 |
fomc | 1,977 | No, we did not make any specific allowance for that, Governor Partee, but as rates got higher, it would become more of a possibility. | 30 |
fomc | 1,977 | You did not make any allowance. Well, I'm not [unintelligible] that these people were great buyers, that they were shopping for the best way, if they can get a better way than this. | 43 |
fomc | 1,977 | If you got up to the ceiling rate at banks, then there would be much more of a possibility of shifting. | 23 |
fomc | 1,977 | How much do you have outstanding in the wild card? | 11 |
fomc | 1,977 | I believe it's $18 billion in thrifts and $8 billion in banks between about now and October. | 21 |
fomc | 1,977 | Yes, Mr. Balles. | 7 |
fomc | 1,977 | One quick question for Steve. Laying aside the possibility of nationwide NOW accounts--which, of course, is quite uncertain as we sit here--but just considering NOW accounts in the states where they are presently permitted and possible further shifts of business deposits into savings--and alluding to my earlier complim... | 110 |
fomc | 1,977 | Well, President Balles, I would really--we have not investigated that in any detail. And I would propose that we do that and report back through a memo. | 34 |
fomc | 1,977 | Fine, thank you. | 5 |
fomc | 1,977 | Well, you better get started on that because my own guess is that if we get nationwide NOW accounts, we would want either to shift entirely to M2 or give it a significantly larger weight. That's my guess. | 43 |
fomc | 1,977 | Do I interpret you right, President Balles--you are asking for our estimates of shifts to NOWs, to savings, as well as [to] these other instruments--telephone transfers-- | 38 |
fomc | 1,977 | Right. The whole package. | 6 |
fomc | 1,977 | And also its implications for our monetary procedures. Because, you know, we've been able to live with our present definition; well, we've made an adjustment, giving as much weight to M2 as we do, or approximately the same way as we do, to M1. But with nationwide NOW accounts, I doubt if we could retain the present pro... | 119 |
fomc | 1,977 | Gentlemen, we are late in gathering once again, but there were some legislative problems that a number of us had to talk over at lunch. And we want to turn our [attention] to the directive to the Desk and our decision with regard to monetary policy in the weeks immediately ahead. I think no matter what we do today, und... | 160 |
fomc | 1,977 | I was with you through the M1 and M2, Mr. Chairman. I think that is the right course to go. I would expand the federal funds range, however, to 5-1/4 to 6 percent on the grounds that I think we need a little bit more freedom. I think it is in line with what we have just talked about on our targets on the longer term, a... | 198 |
fomc | 1,977 | Well, I thank you, Mr. Mayo. Who would like to speak next? Mr. Coldwell. | 22 |
fomc | 1,977 | Mr. Chairman, [we're] not too far apart; actually I have gone a little step further, with M1 of 3 to 7 and M2 of 6 to 10. But the federal funds rate--if we are going the monetary aggregates route, I think we ought to return to the full 1 point, and I'd take 5 to 6 percent. | 79 |
fomc | 1,977 | All right. Thank you. Mr. Black, please. | 12 |
fomc | 1,977 | Mr. Chairman, Mr. Mayo has made all the points I'd wanted to make. I would be right with him. | 24 |
fomc | 1,977 | Thank you, Mr. Black. Mr. Eastburn. | 12 |
fomc | 1,977 | I would agree with that position too. | 8 |
fomc | 1,977 | Thank you. Mr.-- | 5 |
fomc | 1,977 | And so will I. | 5 |
fomc | 1,977 | Thank you. Mr. Guffey. | 9 |
fomc | 1,977 | Contrary to what Bob Mayo said, I would rather support your proposal in the fact that, so long as the aggregates [are] performing and appear at the midpoint, we stay right where we are in terms of the fed funds rate. And only if they push up [to] the upper range do we move it. I believe this other contemplates that we ... | 90 |
fomc | 1,977 | My proposal was that you didn't move the fed funds rate until you get very close to the end of your M1 range. | 25 |
fomc | 1,977 | I guess I would prefer that if we are going to have an aggregates target, if you do, we use-- | 23 |
fomc | 1,977 | Gentlemen, I don't think we want to change our rule, you see. We are changing the rules of operation, Mr. Mayo. And I think we will work ourselves into trouble if we change our rules from meeting to meeting. We ought to stay with a given rule until we decide that some other rule is better. Stay with that for a while. | 73 |
fomc | 1,977 | Can I just qualify this, Mr. Chairman? Is [it] your implication that we should go above where we are now, right away, if we were at the midpoint in the aggregates? We're below the midpoint in the range you propose. | 49 |
fomc | 1,977 | Well, you know, our rule is that, when we have a monetary aggregates directive, we use the full range. The full range first. That's rule one--full range is available for use. Rule two is that there is a zone of indifference. And that zone of indifference, instead of being equal to 4 percentage points, is equal to somet... | 130 |
fomc | 1,977 | But we're not at the midpoint of the federal funds range you now propose. | 15 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.