speeches · January 30, 1970
Speech
Darryl R. Francis · President
AN ECONOMIC OUTLOOK
Speech by Darryl R. Francis
to the
Fourth Annual Conference on Wall Street and the Economy
Sponsored by the New School for Social Research
New York, New York
January 31, 1970
It is good to have this opportunity to discuss with
you my views regarding the economic outlook for the next
few quarters. At the turn of each year, economic forecasters
come forth like the proverbial groundhog and present their
shadowy prognostications for the economy. Although such
exercises are of greater importance than those of this
harbinger of weather, recent experience causes me to
wonder which has been the more accurate. Nonetheless,
if we are to have good public policy and sound business
operations, we must continuously evaluate the future.
Two important questions concerning the future
course of the economy are currently being asked of economic
forecasters. What progress is being made in reducing the
rate of inflation? And, will efforts to curb inflation result
in a recession? Many forecasters have come forth with
fairly exact answers to these questions, but there is considerable
difference among their answers. Some have forecast no
slowdown in economic activity and a continued high rate of
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 2-
Inflation; others, a severe recession with or without a
marked slowing in price increases; and some, the most
optimistic, a marked slowing in the rate of inflation without
a recession, or If a recession, a very mild one.
Before proceeding further, let me make my position
clear regarding the form of analysis I will present. As a
participant in the meetings of the Federal Open Market
Committee which formulates national monetary policy, it
is not appropriate for me to present to you what might be
considered an exact forecast. To do so, would require a
precise assessment of the current stance of monetary policy
and a forecast of its most probable course over the next
several months. Instead, I will limit my remarks to the
views of my colleagues at the Federal Reserve Bank of St.
Louis and myself regarding our approach to economic
forecasting and then present some forecasts which are based
on alternative assumptions of the future course of monetary
policy.
Our approach to these matters has been labeled
by some the "Monetarist view" inasmuch as we emphasize
monetary policy, and more specifically, changes in the money
stock as the most important guide for implementing national
economic stabilization policy. Moreover, our theoretical
foundation is that of the modern quantity theory of money.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 3-
Increases in the money stock relative to the demand for
money balances induces changes in the rate of spending on
goods and services and on financial assets.
In contrast, most economic forecasters appear to
work within the Keynesian income-expenditure framework.
According to this view, income generates expenditures on
goods and services, and these outlays, in turn, generate
income receipts. This approach stresses fiscal actions, that is,
Federal government spending and taxing programs, and other
so-called autonomous forces as the major factors which
determine the course of production and employment. Before
attempting to evaluate present prospects for inflation and for
recession, I will contrast in some detail our view of what is
important in assessing forthcoming developments in spending,
output, and prices with our understanding of the views of
the main body of forecasters.
The monetarist view holds that changes in the
nation's money stock, customarily defined as the general
public's holdings of demand deposits and currency, are the
major determinant of total spending. Total spending is
measured by the gross national product at current prices.
This view of how total spending is determined, unlike the
Keynesian approach, de-emphasizes the influence of so-called
autonomous changes in the components of over-all spending
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 4-
such as outlays for new plants, houses, or Federal government
expenditures. For example, according to our view, a sudden
burst of business optimism which results in added spending
for new plant and equipment at a time when there is no
change in the money stock, operating through the market
mechanism, tends to crowd-out an approximately equal amount
of spending by other parts of the economy.
Changes in the price level, according to our view,
are determined mainly by changes in total spending relative
to the economy's ability to expand real output of goods and
services. When total spending increases greatly relative to
the nation's productive capabilities, as it did in 1968, output
increases only insofar as additional resources come into
existence, and prices rise rapidly. This is a demand theory
of inflation. Past price movements, including wages, may
also affect current prices, out such an influence is considered
to reflect past demand pressures. Since changes in the
money stock are considered to have a great influence on total
spending, this view is a monetary theory of inflation.
The position I have just outlined carries several
implications for economic stabilization actions. First, we
believe that the economy is basically stable; that is, there are
no fundamental tendencies for economic conditions to alternate
between major recessions and inflations. Second, there is
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 5-
persuasive evidence that movements in the money stock
have been the major source of instability in the past. Therefore,
we believe that monetary expansion must be controlled in
such a manner as not to cause instability.
Finally, we believe that Federal government spending
and taxing actions have been over-emphasized in explaining
past economic fluctuations and in planned economic stabilization
programs. The influence of these actions, according to the
monetarist position, depends on the method of financing a
deficit or disposing of a surplus. For example, without
money expansion the impact on total spending of an increase in
government expenditures is little different than the impact
of an increase in outlays on plant and equipment by business
firms or an increase in expenditures for color TV sets by
consumers. Increased government spending, in the absence
of accommodative monetary expansion, must be financed
by taxes or borrowing from the public, and as a result, the
market mechanism operates to reallocate funds and resources
and there will be a corresponding crowding-out of private
spending.
Let us now focus our attention on the Keynesian
income-expenditure view of the economy and how this view is
incorporated in forecasting procedures. Most of the large-scale
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 6-
forecasting models such as the Wharton, Michigan, and
Commerce Department models have been developed on income-
expenditure principles. The large-scale econometric model
of the American economy developed jointly by the Federal
Reserve Board and M. I.T. also incorporates the income-
expenditure framework. Most present day forecasters in
business and finance usually use this approach to analyze
economic developments and to predict the course of economic
activity.
The income-expenditure approach to forecasting,
in contrast with the monetarist position, places little
emphasis on the determination of the dollar volume of total
spending as represented by nominal GNP. Instead, it generally
focuses directly on determinants of real demand for output,
and somewhat independently, on the determinants of the price
level. Money GNP is considered merely an interesting but
not a too important by-product in most forecasts.
According to the income-expenditure approach, total
real output, measured by GNP adjusted for price level changes,
consists of individual sector acquisitions of goods and services.
Consequently, forecasters using this approach concentrate on
forecasting acquisitions of goods and services by households,
businesses, and government units. These projected acquisitions
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 7-
are, in turn, added together to produce an estimate of real output,
commonly referred to as real GNP.
This approach holds that changes in the rate of
acquisition of goods and services by the various economic
sectors are initiated mainly by autonomous forces other than
changes in the money stock. Frequently, changes in these
autonomous sources of demand are measured by surveys of
consumer buying intentions, anticipations of spending on
plant and equipment by business firms, and stock market
sentiment. Other important autonomous forces, according to
the income-expenditure view, are government spending and
taxing programs. An increase in government expenditures
is considered a direct addition to total demand for real product.
A change in tax rates changes disposable income, which,
in turn, exercises a direct influence on total real product.
This view, in its usual application to forecasting,
does not take into consideration the possibility that there are
important interrelations among real and financial markets. An
expansion in the rate of purchasing goods and services by
one sector may be offset by a like reduction in the purchases
of another sector. For instance, an increase in household
demand for durable goods may be offset by a decline in business
acquisitions of plant and equipment, or housing construction.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 8-
One frequently hears the statement today that if business
purchases were to decline, total outout would also decline,
thereby reducing inflationary pressures. But, in fact, if business
purchases decline, purchases of goods and services by another
part of the economy may take up the slack, resulting in little
net effect on the rate of inflation.
Price level changes are held by the income-
expenditure approach to be causes rather than results of
changes in total spending. Cost-push, wage markups, the
unemployment rate, and monopoly oower are considered the main
causes of changes in the price level. An example of this view
is provided in a paper explaining the main characteristics
of the FRB-MIT econometric model presented at the 1967
annual meeting of the American Economic Association. I
quote:
".. .the actual specification of the
model reflects the judgment that there have
been few if any periods of demand inflation ...
in the United States since the Korean War.
The basic hypothesis on price formation
during the 1953-65 period considers 'desired'
prices as a markup of unit labors costs and costs
of raw material inputs, with the markup itself
a function of the rate of capacity utilization."
The view I have just cited frequently leads to the conclusion
that monetary actions have little direct bearing on price
level changes.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 9-
With regard to economic stabilization, the income-
expenditure approach views the economy as highly unstable,
with frequent shifts in the autonomous forces causing
alternating periods of recession and inflation. It is held
that activist government policies are necessary to avoid
these undesirable events. Monetary actions are considered
to be relatively impotent, while fiscal actions are considered
a powerful tool for stabilizing the economy. This view,
however, pays little attention to the importance of how a
deficit is financed — either by borrowing from the public
or through monetary expansion.
I believe it is worthwhile to examine briefly the
general record of forecasting in recent years. To the extent
that there is criticism implied in my remarks, I want to
emphasize that it is directed toward the model builders following
the Keynesian approach and not necessarily toward the Keynesian
theory itself.
Forecasting the course of the economy has proven
to be a frustrating undertaking in the inflationary environment
of the past five years. Most forecasts for 1967 did not indicate
the mini-recession of the first half of that year.
Many forecasts for late 1968 and 1969 greatly
underestimated the continued strength of total spending
on goods and services and the accelerating inflation. These
forecasts were based on the assumption the fiscal package
of mid-1968 would have an immediate and significant effect
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-10-
on total spending. Moreover, the usual forecast for 1969
was that real output growth would slow during the first
two quarters and be followed by a resumption of rather strong
expansion in the last half of the year.
With the benefit of hindsight, we now observe that
the actual pattern of real output growth was opposite the
one generally projected by income-expenditure models.
Output continued to grow at a moderate rate to mid-1969,
but then slowed and virtually ceased by the end of the year.
These errors in forecasting I attribute, in the main,
to a prevalent failure to give adequate recognition to the
influence on economic activity of monetary actions, as
measured by changes in the money stock. The mini-
recession of 1967 was preceded by no growth in money during
the last eight months of 1966. Continued rapid growth in
total spending, following the imposition of the income surtax
in 1968, occurred against a background of very rapid
expansion in the money stock. These are not isolated cases.
Our studies of the United States economy since 1919, and
of the post-World War II experience in eight other industrial
countries, support the proposition that changes in the
money stock have been the major cause of business cycle
movements.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- I I-
I turn now to the current economic outlook.
First, I will outline our view regarding the response of
total spending, real output, and price movements to monetary
restraint. Then, I will discuss the events of last year
as they are expected to influence the outlook. Finally, I
will present our outlook for the next several quarters under
alternative rates of growth in the money stock.
At the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, our staff is
conducting further investigation into the response of
total spending, real output, and the price level to changes
in the rate of monetary expansion. The findings of this
research will appear in a forthcoming issue of our Review.
Results thus far indicate that a marked change in the
growth rate of money is followed about two quarters later
by a noticeable change in nominal GNP growth in the same
direction. When total spending growth finally slows in
response to reduced monetary expansion, growth of output
of goods and services slows simultaneously, while
at least an additional three quarters are generally required
for a marked reduction in the rate of inflation. We estimate
that the entire process of curbing inflation normally
requires about three years. The process of fully curbing
inflation is delayed still longer following a period of prolonged
and accelerating price advances.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-12-
Our research further indicates that economic conditions
prior to a change in monetary actions have an important
bearing on the responses of outout and the orice level to a
change in the rate of growth of the money stock. Among
such conditions are the level of resource utilization and the
rate of increase in prices in the immediate past. In our
opinion, the frequently observed variable lag in the economy's
response to a marked change in the rate of monetary expansion
can be attributed in considerable measure to varying economic
circumstances prior to the monetary change. We believe
we now have some knowledge of the forces shaping the lag in
the response of total spending, real output, and the price
level to monetary restraint, and this knowledge is incorporated
into our present outlook.
Before moving to our projections, a few comments
on the current situation are necessary. First, there has
been substantial monetary restraint only since early last
summer when the money stock ceased to expand. Second,
total spending, or GNP, rose at a much reduced rate from
the third to the fourth quarter of 1969. Next, growth in
real output has apparently come to a halt. Evidence of
recent cessation in real product growth is provided by an
apparent slight decrease in real GNP for the fourth quarter
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-13-
of last year and a six per cent annual rate of decrease in the
industrial production index since mid-1969. Finally,
despite cessation of real growth in the economy, there has been
little, if any, abatement in the rate of inflation. Our research
indicates that the accelerating inflation of the past four
years will continue to exert great upward pressure on the
price level for some time.
These economic developments of late last year conform
quite closely to the pattern to be expected on the basis of
our recent research. A marked reduction in the rate of
monetary expansion has been followed, with a short lag,
by slower growth in total spending and real output. Although
the rate of increase in the price level has been little changed,
I am confident that an effective basis has been laid for an
ultimate deceleration of price increases.
Let us now proceed to examine the implications
for the near future which, according to our model, follow
from three alternative rates of growth in the money stock
from last December to December 1970. The first assumed
growth rate of money is zero per cent, the same as in the
credit crunch period of 1966 and the rate which prevailed
during the last seven months of 1969. The second assumed
rate of monetary expansion is three per cent, a moderate
rate by historical comparison and about the rate from 1961
to 1964 when the economy was in the noninflationary
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-14-
recovery period from the last recession. The final
alternative rate of growth in money considered is six per
cent. This approaches the excessive rate of 1967 and 1963.
With each of these three alternative rates of monetary
expansion, Federal government expenditures are assumed
to increase at a six per cent rate during this year.
If the money stock is held constant throughout
1970, a very restrictive monetary policy, there would be
a substantial recession, of at least the magnitude of the
one we had in 1960-61. Real output would decrease at
about a three per cent annual rate during the year and
the unemployment rate would rise to around six per cent
by the year's end. Moderate progress would be made in
the fight against inflation; overall prices would be rising
at an annual rate about a percentage point less than in
the first three quarters of 1969.
A three per cent rate of increase in money would
result in a mild recession with about a one per cent rate
of decrease in real output during the year. At the end
of 1970 the unemployment rate would be above 5 per cent.
The price level would be rising only a little more slowly
than in recent quarters, but the stage would be set for
substantial price improvement in 1971 and 1972.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-15-
Finally, with a rapid six per cent rate of monetary
expansion the economy would nevertheless border on a
recession early this year due to the substantial monetary
restraint we had in the last half of 1969. Real product
growth would jump to a 3 per cent rate by the end of the
year but no significant headway would be made in our fight
against inflation.
It should be clear from my remarks that I favor
an intermediate position, that is, a rate of monetary expansion
in the neighborhood of 3 per cent. A 3 per cent rate is,
in my opinion, optimal among the set of alternatives here
examined.
In conclusion, my outlook for 1970 does not
present a very optimistic view of short-run prospects
for curbing inflation. As a result of the economic heritage
of 1964-68, moderation of upward price trends will be slow.
Despite slower growth in real output, recent accelerations
in prices have provided added momentum to further price
movements, thereby making it more difficult to reduce
the rate of inflation significantly this year. It is our
estimate that more than two years will be required to reduce
the rate of price increase to below its trend rate of 2.3 per
cent of the last twenty years.
A recession has been defined as two successive
quarters of zero or negative growth in real product. On the
Digitized for FRASER
basis of that definition we are unlikely to avoid a recession
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-16-
this year. Moreover, an attempt to avoid a recession
completely by shifting to a rapid rate of monetary expansion
would mean the fight against inflation would be lost.
When total spending and prices are permitted to
get so far out of hand as they were in 1965-68, it is a
long slow road to price stabilization. The longer inflation
has gone on, the longer will moderate restraint of total
spending result in real product and employment restriction
and delayed inflation cure. This was one of the lessons
after the Korean inflation. But while that period benefited
from necessary monetary restraint, it also suffered from
erratic monetary actions; the money stock growth alternated
between periods of rapid increases and declines. We may
hope that this time we can avoid extremes and benefit from
moderate steady restraint.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Cite this document
APA
Darryl R. Francis (1970, January 30). Speech. Speeches, Federal Reserve. https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/speech_19700131_francis
BibTeX
@misc{wtfs_speech_19700131_francis,
author = {Darryl R. Francis},
title = {Speech},
year = {1970},
month = {Jan},
howpublished = {Speeches, Federal Reserve},
url = {https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/speech_19700131_francis},
note = {Retrieved via When the Fed Speaks corpus}
}