The Federal Reserve has slashed a key interest rate by half a percentage point as it seeks to revive an economy hit by a long list of maladies stemming from the most severe financial crisis in decades.
The central bank on Wednesday reduced its target for the federal funds rate, the interest banks charge on overnight loans, to 1 percent, a low last seen in 2003-2004. The funds rate has not been lower since 1958, when Dwight Eisenhower was president.
The cut marked the second half-point reduction in the funds rate this month. The Fed slashed the rate by that amount in a coordinated move with foreign central banks on Oct. 8.
In a brief statement explaining Wednesday's action, the Fed said that the "intensification of financial market turmoil is likely to exert additional restraint on spending, partly by further reducing the ability of households and business to obtain credit."
The central bank said that "downside risks to growth remain" holding out the promise of further rate cuts if needed. The rate-cut decision was unanimous.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and his colleagues pledged that they would "monitor economic and financial developments carefully and will act as needed to promote sustainable economic growth and price stability."
Wall Street had staged its second biggest point surge ever on Tuesday with the Dow Jones industrial average climbing by 889 points in anticipation of the Fed's action. Trading was more subdued on Wednesday with the Dow actually slipping into negative territory immediately after the announcement, but surged up by about 200 points in late-afternoon trading.
Many analysts said they believe the Fed will not stop at 1 percent if officials see the need to cut rates further. Some are forecasting another half-point move at the Fed's last meeting of the year on Dec. 16.
But other economists said with rates already so low, the Fed may decide to hold at 1 percent, leaving some room for a further reduction if needed next year should the country's economic troubles intensify.
David Jones, chief economist at DMJ Advisors, said the Fed's rate cut will be followed over the next week by similar action in other major countries as they grow more concerned that the recession that began in the United States is spreading to their regions.
But he said a section of the Fed's statement where it listed all the efforts taken so far to battle the slowdown was a signal the central bank believes it has done enough for now.
Other economists disagreed, saying the Fed clearly lowered its worries about inflation while raising concerns about economic growth.
Sung Won Sohn, an economist at the Smith School of Business at California State University, said he believed the Fed will make the "momentous decision" to move the funds rate to zero if events in coming months show such an action is needed to battle the global credit crisis.
In its statement, the Fed indicated it had room to lower rates because the spreading economic weakness was lowering the risks that inflation would get out of control. Indeed, the weakness has caused dramatic declines in the price of oil and other commodities.
While many economists believe the country has already fallen into a recession, they think the aggressive efforts by the Fed to cut rates and take other actions to unfreeze credit markets will keep the country from plunging into a prolonged and deep downturn.
The Fed's action was expected to be quickly followed by a reduction by commercial banks in their prime lending rate, the benchmark for millions of consumer and business loans, by a similar half-point.
The central bank also announced that it was lowering its discount rate, the interest it charges to make direct loans to banks, by a half-point to 1.25 percent. This rate has become increasingly important as the central bank has dramatically increased direct loans to banks in an effort to break the grip of the credit crisis.
Bernanke pledged in a speech earlier this month that the Fed "will not stand down until we have achieved our goals of repairing and reforming our financial system and restoring prosperity."
In addition to the rate cuts, the Fed has been moving to pump billions of dollars into the banking system to help unfreeze markets that seized up in dramatic fashion last month. The ensuing meltdown of financial markets caused the Bush administration to successfully lobby Congress to pass on Oct. 3 a $700 billion rescue package to make direct purchases of bank stock and buy up bad assets as a way of getting financial institutions to start lending again.
That money started flowing earlier this week with $125 billion going to nine of the nation's biggest banks. Other industries, including automakers and insurance companies, are in talks with the administration to get a share of the bailout funds.
And there is pressure from lawmakers to deploy some of the bailout resources to provide mortgage guarantees to encourage more banks to rework home loans to stem a record tide of foreclosures.
Now a few economists are starting to worry about deflation — a widespread and dangerous bout of falling prices — if the U.S. and world economy get stuck in a long and painful recession.
Now wait a minute.... I've been hearing Glenn Beck (right-wing radio, but far more entertaining than Rush) warn of Weimar Republic HYPERinflation, if we keep printing dollars like they're going out of style.
So now we're talking DEFLATION instead? Or is it the old line about "put 10 economists in a room, emerge with 20 opinions"?
No economist I, so I'm just wondering if they really know WHAT's going to happen, and whether all the expert analysis of our recent mistakes is going to matter one whit going forward.
Not an economist, either, however I have taken several classes in college. The opinion of some of my Professor's seem to indicate that our economy will rebound. Two are of the opinion that the Fed's should increase the rate to stimulate the economy and one thinks that leaving it alone will stimulate it. The market always goes into panic mode when approacing an election, so every 4 years we go through this "not knowing" period and investor's try to sell, sell, sell and then moan and groan about, "how much money they lost, when the bottom fell-out of the market!" If the investor's didn't sell everything they own the market would stay sound. It's much more complicated, I know, but the simple jest is that. Confidence in the market is based on people and how they interpret the environment of the business. There is no force that dictates who or when the investor should buy or sell, they do this on their own. One sees another sell and they interpret it as either a good time to buy or sell, too. When one panics and sees another sell, they too will sell and another sees and sells and soon there is a panic in the market. I am of the opinion that when the stocks start to "bottom-out" the market should close for the day and force the investors to "calm-down" and strategize better.
I believe the market made a huge mistake staying open and allowing the DOW to drop 777 points and again down 440 points. They should have seen the downward swing and closed for the day. I believe the 'triggering percentage points' needs to be adjusted to trigger at the middle of these huge downward spirals.
That being said, I personally feel that the market is being 'manipulated' and used to further our disposition. Not necessarily a conspiracy, but I would be interested to see "who" is at the profit-end of this market. Some one or some people are making a 'killing' on this downward spiral in our market. Perhaps they are manipulating the market by selling-off huge shares from their own portfolio to cause the market to plunge, once down they could purchase larger amounts of shares, perhaps even controlling numbers of shares. This would have the economic effect of swinging the market back up and they would increase their portfolio and be even better off than before. Remember, buy low and sell high! But that is just my humble opinion!
Austrian Economics seem to be saying rates should be increased to spur people into putting money back into savings accounts and CD's and etc. Reducing rates on interest actually is the same thing as opening the door to free credit, the exact problem that put them here.
And no, they do not know what they are doing and they admit they do not know each time they speak.
Doesn't anyone think it's long past due to get these Crystal Ball Readers out of the Finance sector and stop them from continuing their VooDoo Economics theories?
I am Jeremiah Johnson and I approve this message
Well there are built-in 'stops' after a certain percentage of decline, imposed after the '87 crash, and we clearly didn't reach chose.
I sure hope your professors are right about a rebound, for all the purely (impurely?) selfish reasons you can imagine.
I just got done reading the newspaper, and from what I can gather now the government cannot bring charges to the people who may have given these loans to people who could not afford them. They are free and clear. And the banks are not responsible either. How do we know that these loan payments were not going right into the hands of those who created them? Well knowing they could not be prosecuted. They may have a fat bank account somewhere.
I believe the small guy will make it threw this. And everyone in the middle will suffer a total loss. From what the history of the market shows. This has happened before. And what was the cause then. Only know we know how the market came back up from 2004. Was it all these loans, that gave the market time to walk away with billions and billions.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |