Skip to main content

The banking system and its "reserves"

Image result for bank reserves

I came upon a fascinating discussion of the ambiguities in the word "reserve" as commonly used in discussions of banking. Okay, the word "fascinating" is subjective, perhaps especially in that context. Still, this is from a fellow calling himself Dwain Dibley, about whom I know nothing else, commenting in a thread to a post about US monetary policy in Mises.com, a blog on Austrian economics.

---------------

Reserves' is one of those ambiguous Fed doublespeek terms that has different meanings and or functions, dependant upon the context in which it is being used. So let's cover some of what the Fed considers 'reserves'.
1) Reserves are: Cash held in bank vaults.
2) Reserves are: Bank assets held on deposit at the Fed.
3) Reserves are: Assets purchased by the Fed in its open market operations.
4) Reserves are: The liquidity provided by #2 and #3 in the interbank settlements system.
When the Fed talks about adjusting bank reserves, it's talking about using #3 to effect changes in #4 and because the interbank system is a closed system, under normal conditions, the Fed could affect the overnight interest rates by buying and selling its reserve assets, which affected available liquidity in the interbank system.
That's not the case anymore. With the banks holding excess reserves providing liquidity to the interbank system, the Fed's ability to affect interbank interest rates in the traditional manner has been effectively naturalized. This is because the Fed's share of the liquidity is proportionally insignificant to the liquidity provided via the banks' reserve assets parked at the Fed. The only thing the Fed can do is arbitrarily set interbank interest rates, as it has been doing, and hopefully temper the pavlovian responsiveness of the markets and Wall Street by dazzling them with bullshit.
One of the primary reasons the Fed is reluctant to reduce it's balance sheet is because they know full well that the banks that buy those assets will turn right around and park them in their reserve accounts, effectively increasing their interbank liquidity while decreasing the Fed's.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak