Carney's Job Gets Harder as Yellen Escapes Zero
Pity Mark Carney at the Bank of England. There goes the Fed's Janet Yellen, merrily raising interest rates for what feels like the first time since dinosaurs roamed the earth. Even Mario Draghi at the European Central Bank was allowed to tinker with his train set earlier this month, extending the tracks of quantitative easing by an extra six months.
Carney, though, is still stuck in neutral as the U.K. economy sends contradictory signals on whether monetary policy needs to be tighter. And the Fed's willingness to act even though inflation remains dormant makes the Bank of England chief seem like the "unreliable boyfriend" a member of parliament accused him of being.
Here's a timeline of Carney's comments this year:
The latest figures released Thursday show retail sales surged by 1.7 percent in November from a month earlier, outpacing the 0.6 percent gain anticipated by economists. While those figures were boosted by Black Friday sales (a relatively new phenomenon in Britain), retail sales have increased on a rolling three-month basis for the longest period since records began in 1996, according to Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Niraj Shah.
Unemployment, meanwhile, has dropped to 5.2 percent, its lowest level since May 2008. That's the kind of backdrop that makes policy makers nervous; if employers are chasing fewer available workers, wages typically rise and stoke faster inflation.
But Wednesday's wage figures suggest that's not happening. Pay excluding bonuses rose by an annual 2 percent between August and October, at the slowest pace since February and undershooting economists' forecasts for a gain of 2.3 percent. Between 2001 and 2008, pay increases averaged 4 percent; as recently as July they climbed by 2.7 percent. On Dec. 14, deputy Bank of England Governor Nemat Shafik had this to say about her monetary policy intentions:
I will wait until I am convinced that wage growth will be sustained at a level consistent with inflation returning to target before voting for an increase. In that sense, I will proceed with caution.
The Fed's decision to raise interest rates on Wednesday seems to offer proof that borrowing costs need not stay at zero forever. Looking just at what the forecasts for growth and inflation show for the U.S and the U.K. in the coming quarters, you'd probably say their monetary policy needs are similar:
A fascinating Twitter tussle between economists Andrew Sentance and Danny Blanchflower, both former Bank of England policy makers, sums up the should-they-shouldn't-they debate. Blanchflower, currently professor of Economics at Dartmouth College, highlights the lack of inflation and absence of a recovery in wages to pre-crisis levels as a reason to stay on hold:
Sentance, now the senior economic adviser at consultancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers, argues it would be a mistake to wait for the threat of inflation to emerge:
Two respected economists looking at an identical data set, but reaching wildly different conclusions? Nothing to see here folks. Still, much like Schrodinger's cat, it seems the U.K. economy is both dead and alive simultaneously. For the time being at least, the most sensible option is for the Bank of England to remain at rest -- and see whether the Fed's rate rise turns out to be a prudent preemptive move against inflationary pressures, or a policy mistake that will need to be reversed in the coming months.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
To contact the author of this story:
Mark Gilbert at firstname.lastname@example.org
To contact the editor responsible for this story:
Therese Raphael at email@example.com