BEE Partner, South Africa Economy Watch

Reserves

The deposits and currency created by the Federal Reserve are the reserves of the modern system. It would seem that if the Fed could control the amount of these reserves, it could thereby limit the ability of banks to lend, and thus control their ability to create deposits. By controlling reserves, the Fed could control the total quantity of money. As we saw earlier, real reserves did constrain banks. It has seemed plausible, and monetarists everywhere have believed, that modern, nominal reserves could provide a similar constraint. But central banks all around the world, including the Federal Reserve, have tried to exercise such control, most recently in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and, in virtually every case, their attempts have failed. Read the rest of this entry »

The government budget tends to move counter-cyclically. In a slump, incomes will be reduced and spending curtailed, so tax collections will fall, but welfare and related spending to support the unemployed will tend to rise. Other government budget items are likely to be unaffected. Hence, the overall effect will be to throw the budget into deficit. By contrast, in a boom, tax collections will rise and welfare spending will tend to decline, so a surplus will tend to emerge. In short, in an economy with demand-based cyclical fluctuations, the central government budget will tend to move in a counter-cyclical fashion.

Now consider the monetary implications of deficits and surpluses. A deficit arises when the government spends more than it receives in taxes; this means a net increase in money in the system. Such money will appear as excess reserves in the banking system. If allowed to remain, it will drive down interest rates. Looked at another way, it will drive up security prices. A surplus is just the opposite; it arises when the government spends less than it takes in, and it creates a reserve deficiency, tending to force interest rates up. Read the rest of this entry »