May 6, 2005
DEBT DEPENDENT (via Robert Schwartz):
Treasury Says 30-Year Bond May Be Revived (JONATHAN FUERBRINGER, May 5, 2005, NY Times)
The government has taken the first step toward a revival of the 30-year bond, an unexpected shift that could provide an important tool to grapple with the nation's troublesome budget deficit and its creaky pension system.And for Wall Street, which has been clamoring for a revival of the bond almost since it was abandoned in 2001, a new Treasury security with a longer maturity than the current market benchmark - the 10-year note - could help the boom in bond trading that has bolstered many firms' profits in recent years.
"It was a surprise," said Lundy Wright, who runs the Treasury desk at Nomura Securities International, after the 9 a.m. announcement by the Treasury Department prompted a sharp sell-off in the bond market that cost some traders and investors millions.
"But it was something the market had been calling for for a long time."
The return of the 30-year bond, once the benchmark of the world's biggest bond market, would give pension funds a longer-term investment to match their costs against at a time when the baby-boom population is approaching retirement.
"Very long time horizons are implicit in things like pensions," said Neil M. Soss, chief economist at Credit Suisse First Boston. "Very long time horizons are implicit in things like I.R.A.'s and 401(k)'s. And very long time horizons are implicit in the longer lives Americans are living."
Without considerable U.S. debt there would not be enough reliable securities for the global economy. Posted by Orrin Judd at May 6, 2005 9:27 AM
I have refinaced my 30 year mortgage twice in the past 4 years. Why is the Federal Government so late to the party?
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at May 6, 2005 9:58 AMSince we are in a low interest rate environment that will not go on forever, this was long overdue.
Posted by: bart at May 6, 2005 12:20 PMReal interest rates are at historic highs.
Posted by: oj at May 6, 2005 12:50 PMThat's because we have a lot of real debt.
Posted by: joe shropshire at May 6, 2005 4:57 PMNot in historical terms.
Posted by: oj at May 6, 2005 5:48 PMOJ,
Real interest rates are negligible today as inflation is running about 3% per annum and the 10 yr note is at 4.23%. Historically, there is about a 4 point spread between the two.
Debt as a percentage of GDP is about 75% which is high but far from unsustainable. If we have an expanding economy we should be cutting our deficit though, not increasing it. Also, when interest rates go up, because since the Clinton Administration so much of our debt is in short term securities, our debt service could get really ugly.
Posted by: bart at May 6, 2005 6:21 PM"It was a surprise," said Lundy Wright, who runs the Treasury desk at Nomura Securities International, after the 9 a.m. announcement by the Treasury Department prompted a sharp sell-off in the bond market that cost some traders and investors millions.
Boy, sucks to be them, huh?
Posted by: Matt Murphy at May 6, 2005 6:35 PMbart:
Inflation is nowhere near 3%. Even Greenspan has testified it's overstated by a full point. In reality it's more than that. We're in a deflationary climate with rising interest rates, which often leads to disaster.
Posted by: oj at May 6, 2005 6:37 PMSo it's two points and real interest rates are still low.
You are right about the effects of deflation as the imminent collapse, or at least long-term stagnation, of the real estate market is going to be a serious economic issue. If Congress were being more fiscally responsible, I'd feel better about sending Luca Brazzi to give Greenspan an offer he couldn't refuse concerning ending the Chinese water torture of rate increases.
Posted by: bart at May 6, 2005 7:23 PMNo, given deflation it's over 4.
Posted by: oj at May 6, 2005 7:26 PMThere is inflation in the marketplace, OJ. Don't you buy gasoline or meats?
Posted by: bart at May 6, 2005 8:08 PMI buy meat when it's expiring--it's dirt cheap--and don't drive much. Inflation measures don't account for normal consumer behavior.
Posted by: oj at May 6, 2005 8:12 PMOJ what would you know about normal consumer behavior?
The TIPS market says the real rate is about 1.6%. That is cheap. Very cheap.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at May 7, 2005 2:07 AMAccording to the Federal Reserve system, inflation is in the general vicinity of 2%, probably more. Even with OJ's statement that we should take 1% off that, that still means inflation is 1%. This is not deflation. Also, inflation's trend is upward, as I believe the FOMC mentioned in their announcement Tuesday.
Data: ww.ny.frb.org/research/national_economy/nationalindicators.html
Thus, Robert, the LT Treasuries should be at about 5-6% not the low 4s. IOW, it's time to start selling those 30 yr securities, refinancing the shorter term debt.
Posted by: bart at May 7, 2005 10:31 AMTom:
Greenspan has testified that they're mismeasuring and guessed by 1%. their numbers are a joke.
Posted by: oj at May 7, 2005 3:46 PMCome on, OJ. Is Greenspan The Guru or not?
Posted by: Tom at May 7, 2005 7:36 PMTom:
Not at all. Fed chairmen should be under the age of 30 or else they fight a "problem" that ended 40 years earlier.
Posted by: oj at May 7, 2005 8:40 PMOK, OJ.
We can't have someone running monetary policy who's been a major player over a few iterations of the business cycle can we? That was just embarassing.
Posted by: bart at May 8, 2005 8:08 AMbart:
Exactly. The guys who were young in the Depression gave us runaway inflation because they worried about jobs and Greenspan kills off jobs fighting an inflation that ended twenty five years ago. the Fed Chairman should be fresh out of college.
Posted by: oj at May 8, 2005 8:57 AM