From: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Money Supply (Re: WELLLLL! IT'S DAY ONE)
Date: 25 Jan 1993 00:33:56 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, kbanaian@bernard.pitzer.claremont.edu (King Banaian) says:

>In article <1jq2fgINNrep@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> an030@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Broward Horne) writes:
>>In a previous article, rja@mahogany126.cray.com (Russ Anderson) says:
>>
>>>
>>>"FIFTY percent"?  Where did you get that factoid?
>>>
>>>      Money Supply Growth Rates
>>>
>>>  M2 growth (4Q/4Q)  M3 growth (4Q/4Q)
>>>  -----------------  -----------------
>>>  1988  5.2%         1988  6.4%
>>>  1989  4.8%         1989  3.6%
>>>  1990  4.0%         1990  1.7%
>>>  1991  2.8%         1991  1.2%
>>>   *    1.1%          *   -0.5%
>>
>>      M1 growth was around 50 percent.  That tells me that, in
>>    spite of the "spirit of renewed hope" in the land, there's a 
>>    HUGE number of people who are stashing cash.
>>
>Sorry, but that's not true either.  I've pulled together the period Russ 
>covered from the Federal Reserve's H.6 releases (this is the latest one I 


      Sorry, Currency growth was 50%.

      Like it matters.  

      Everybody.  Come on!  GET ON THE PIECE TRAIINNNN!

      Ohhhh, aaaaahhhh,  ooowwhheee, oowwhhaaa.



      Piece TRAIN SOUNDING LOUDER!!!!!

      

      Christ, I can't believe myself.  Here I am, following my same 
      old programming, to do "what's right", rather than "what's right
      for me".


      Oh, GRAVY TRAIN SOUNDING LOUDER!!!

      Yes, yes.  Thank you, eternally, Ted.

      >found on the Commerce Department's EBB).  The data are December-to-December.
>
>Year	M1Level	Growth	M2Level	Growth	M3Level	Growth
>1987	 750.0		2910.8		3681.1
>1988	 786.9	 6.0%	3071.1	 5.4%	3923.1	 6.4%
>1989	 794.1	 0.9	3227.3	 5.0	4059.8	 3.4
>1990	 826.1	 4.0	3339.0	 3.4	4114.9	 1.3
>1991	 898.1	 8.4	3439.0	 3.0	4171.0	 1.4
>1992*	1025.6	14.2	3511.2	 2.1	4191.9	 0.5
>
>The 1992 figures are based on growth over the fifty-two weeks since 12/30/
>91.  The growth in M1 is nowhere near 50% last year.  The monetary base rose 
>from $321065 million in 12/91 to $354588 million in 12/92, adjusted for 
>reserve requirement changes.  (Source:  FRB, Release H.3)  That 10% jump is 
>fairly large, but the growth in the higher M's indicates that it wasn't out 
>of line with the slower growth in M2.
>
>The only figure I could find that might be what Mr. Horne was thinking about 
>is the growth in excess reserves (vault cash and banks' deposits at the Fed 
>that are in excess of what they are required to hold).  These have rise from
>$787 million at the end of 1991 to $1045 million at the end of 1992.  The bi-
>weekly figures for the two weeks ending 1/6/93 had reserves at $1437 
>million.  I put very little credence in the bi-weekly numbers, since they 
>bounce around greatly (the last five numbers for excess reserves were 728, 
>1361, 841, 1224, and 1437).  But a noticeable rise has appeared there, which 
>in the short-term suggests that the moeny stock will grow some in the next 
>few months.  Had ER stayed at the 1991 level, a back-of-the-envelope 
>calculation suggests that M2 would have reached the bottom of the target 
>band the Fed set in January, 1991, of 2.5-to-5.5%.
>

Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:21324 alt.politics.elections:25200 talk.politics.misc:70018