Re:FDIC Takes over Silicon Valley Bank
by danielmarkbruce on Friday March 10, 2023 @04:31PM
(#35101381)
It was surprisingly accurate.... mom inflation has been reasonable for several months now
[ Parent
| on HN ]
That's.. Delusional. It's barely budged.
Re:FDIC Takes over Silicon Valley Bank
by danielmarkbruce on Friday March 10, 2023 @05:15PM
(#35101955)
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cpi.pdf
Note all the months since July 2022. It's good to read the source material rather than hyperventilating news articles.
Re:FDIC Takes over Silicon Valley Bank
by anon20230311 on Saturday March 11, 2023 @11:37AM
(#35109908)
I was skeptical that month-over-month CPI had come down to reasonable levels, but it indeed seems meaningfully lower and close to recent historical averages.
Mean MoM % change in CPI-U from January to preceding July, 2016-2023:
* 2016: 0.01
* 2017: 0.27
* 2018: 0.27
* 2019: 0.10
* 2020: 0.21
* 2021: 0.30
* 2022: 0.61
* 2023: 0.27
Raw monthly data: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0&output_view=pct_...
I am eager to see Tuesday's numbers for February inflation.
By that metric, and it took quite a bit longer to get there than ideal. It's also still elevated historically and compared to FFR, all of which is a roundabout way of saying that inflation has and continues to destabilize the outlook. Stability historically comes after an n-month lag of the FFR and core inflation meeting, right? Well, banks are failing now, and 4Q24 is a ways off.
I just don't know if I'd call it a "pretty good job," is all. They were caught-off guard and didn't move quickly enough.
Re:FDIC Takes over Silicon Valley Bank
by danielmarkbruce on Friday March 10, 2023 @05:17PM
(#35101978)
They are always caught off guard. Try predicting anything macro and see how well it goes to plan. Then try not moving too fast or too slow.
The idea that they aren't doing a good job because they aren't perfectly precise with their timing is silly.
The difficulty is somewhat artificial. Their statements give away the game, namely their obsession with a "soft landing." Translation: an undue focus on securities markets and saving entities who'd made bad investments, i.e., picking winners. They were late because they were trying to balance a factor that isn't part of their quasi-mandate (but that is important to politicians, and to the institutions that Fed officers revolving doored from). Without that factor, you see radical hikes in 2021 and QT not being undermined by waves hands vaguely. It hurts, but less than what's coming now.
Re:FDIC Takes over Silicon Valley Bank
by danielmarkbruce on Friday March 10, 2023 @06:57PM
(#35103106)
The only entities they seem to worry about is banks. And banks going under is bad news for everyone, always has been. Being a lender of last resort to banks is explicitly part of their mandate.
They worry about banks because they are a bank. If it weren't for government oversight they'd be a private bank.