kakeith406/op-fed huggingface dataset:
Prior discussion:
speaker: MR. LACKER.
text: We can try to keep it secret, but there's a broad ability in the market to infer when somebody goes to the window by their behavior before that. I'm saying that I don't think we should get our hopes up about ever eliminating stigma. 
speaker: CHAIRMAN BERNANKE.
text: Okay. Let's take positions and comments, keeping in mind that lunch is being held hostage. [Laughter] President Rosengren. 

MR. ROSENGREN. "I think we could be a little more innovative--I agree with President Lacker's point--but I think that the H.4.1 does seem to have an effect; and if we will be doing all these other things, taking another look at the H.4.1 and making sure that we don't have more untapped flexibilities probably makes a lot of sense."

Full utterance: Okay. Just a quick question, which doesn't have to be answered now--given all of the financial turmoil, it would be interesting to see whether in other countries that have these different arrangements there was a decrease in either overnight or term lending with counterparties. Given the extent to which you can just work with a central bank rather than counterparties, is there any evidence in these other regimes that interbank lending transaction volume disappeared in some of these countries? I would be interested in seeing that. Regarding Governor Kroszner's comment on the H.4.1 release, it does seem that we could probably have a materiality requirement in our balance sheet. Under most circumstances, what we are doing at the discount window would seem not to hit that materiality criterion. I think we could be a little more innovative--I agree with President Lacker's point--but I think that the H.4.1 does seem to have an effect; and if we will be doing all these other things, taking another look at the H.4.1 and making sure that we don't have more untapped flexibilities probably makes a lot of sense. I would like a little more discussion of "promote efficient and resilient money markets and government securities markets" as a criterion. I'm not sure I would weight those criteria equally. It seems that all these criteria, for the most part, take care of most of the dead weight loss; and given that the banks still have to administrate for daylight credit, I am not sure that the burden is all that different across these various regimes. But I can imagine that that one might be different, and given we just had financial turmoil--I know this is a bit different from what President Lacker said--I would put a little more attention to that. Overall, I like option 2 and option 5. I'm comfortable with those two. I'm attracted to the voluntary balance program. On net, I would probably prefer a longer maintenance period to a one-day maintenance period, but I don't have a strong preference and could easily be convinced otherwise.

Opinion: yes
About monetary policy: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: MR. GARDNER.
text: I just want to say that I'm going to withhold any such determination. It is in effect a loan. Until I talk to, if necessary, to experts whether this is a loan or a purchase of foreign currencies that the Treasury-- 
speaker: MR. LILLY.
text: I use "repurchase agreement," you don't criticize that. 
speaker: MR. PARTEE.
text: For 15 years we've been trying to-- 

CHAIRMAN BURNS. "The only way I've ever understood the whole swap network is in the language of loans."

Full utterance: The only way I've ever understood the whole swap network is in the language of loans.

Opinion: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: CHAIRMAN BURNS.
text: [Lunch break] 
speaker: CHAIRMAN BURNS.
text: Now we are ready for item 4. Let me give you the housing figure. Here is the way they have been running, to give you a frame of reference: August--1,537,000; September--1,840,000; October--1,814,000; November--1,716,000; December--1,940,000. 
speaker: MR. PARTEE.
text: Single or multifamily? 

CHAIRMAN BURNS. "I would say that, for the coming month, it would be an unacceptable increase."

Full utterance: Increase in both. Let me give you the multifamily: August--366; September--560; remember there was a sudden increase associated with special activity by HUD; October--477; November--479; December--617. On the other hand, building permits figures show somewhat different results: July 1,215; August 1,296; September 1,504; November 1,590; December 1,513. So there is a small decline in permits, a large increase in housing starts with a trend in both-- a favorable one, a rather strong one. Gentlemen, we now have to turn to the decision on the domestic policy directive for the coming months. What I find particularly difficult is the specification for the federal funds rate this coming month. Now, in alternative B, I find myself really wrestling [with a choice between] the federal funds rate specified under alternative B, and a still-smaller range that is 4-1/2 to 5 percent. Now, you know, these ranges have to be realistic. I thought for a time of a range of 4-1/4 to 5-1/4, and I asked myself a question: What would happen to the world we live in if the federal funds rate were to rise from 4-5/8 to 5-1/4? I would say that, for the coming month, it would be an unacceptable increase. So I brought it down to 5, and then I asked myself a question: What about the rate going down to 4-1/4? Well that's possible; 4-1/2 is perhaps better. I could live with one or the other. I think I would like 4-1/2 to 5 a little better. As for the growth rates, those under alternative B look all right to me; perhaps it might be shaded by a 1/2 point.

Opinion: yes
About monetary policy: yes
Prior discussion:
speaker: CHAIRMAN BURNS.
text: Give it to them. Sell it to them at a market price. 
speaker: VICE CHAIRMAN VOLCKER.
text: On the substance of your concern, Mr. Chairman, I don't think the [sub]committee was of one view that there is a concern [but] I would have the concern that it's hard for this Committee to distinguish among issues that are fully guaranteed by the federal government. That, in effect, the decision about support of a local instrumentality is made by the Congress in providing the 100 percent guarantee in the first place, and it's a little hard for us to second-guess that one if we are buying guaranteed agency issues. And that's of course why we slid into this other approach, where that kind of consideration is absent from our recommendation. 

MR. PARTEE. "Unfortunately, the people who comment on this don't recognize this--it stirs up concerns."


Opinion: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: MR. ZEISEL.
text: And they are making that assumption. 
speaker: MR. PARTEE.
text: At higher prices. 
speaker: MR. ZEISEL.
text: At higher prices. 
speaker: CHAIRMAN BURNS.
text: All right, thank you, Mr. Lilly. Mr. Winn now, please. 

MR. WINN. "Normally, you would think that would occur rather rapidly."


Opinion: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: CHAIRMAN BURNS.
text: Well, now wait, are you projecting significantly higher mortgage interest rates? 
speaker: MR. KICHLINE.
text: Well, we have mortgage rates, for what they're worth, sort of middle of the next year in the 9-1/4 percent area, so up a quarter or half, depending on where you are in the country. But more importantly than just the rate constraint, we have implicit in our forecast what we believe to be some constraint on funds availability and that nonprice terms will probably be tightening, and that will tend to squeeze some potential borrowers out of the market. 
speaker: CHAIRMAN BURNS.
text: I'm a little puzzled. I would have said that, in view of the liquidity of the thrift institutions and their enormous borrowing potential from the Home Loan Banks, etcetera, I would not expect a shortage of funds, say, over the next 12 months, even if you have a significant reduction in the inflow of funds to thrift institutions. 

MR. KICHLINE. "In our flow of funds forecast, we have the thrift institutions actually liquidating liquid assets to fund their outstanding commitments in the shorter run and relying quite a bit more heavily on Home Loan Bank borrowing."


Opinion: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: MR. TRUMAN.
text: The six big, the big six countries, Germany and-- 
speaker: MR. BLACK.
text: That's what I assumed. 
speaker: MR. TRUMAN.
text: We've used this trade weighted. 
speaker: CHAIRMAN BURNS.
text: All right. Mr. Winn. 

MR. WINN. "Now does this represent a shift in consumer preference towards lower prices, or [a decision that] a [used] car that only goes 20,000 more miles doesn't really need a 50,000-mile tire?"


Opinion: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: MR. KICHLINE.
text: That's right in terms of our projection. These are quarterly numbers, as you know, in the real personal consumption expenditures chart; the other numbers are plotted monthly. But indeed, on average in the third quarter, we anticipate that they will be higher. But I might note that the recent retail sales data for September, as Jerry mentioned, and the downward revisions for August were not available when we made the forecast, so that if we were to do it today with the information now available, we would have a lower third quarter. 
speaker: CHAIRMAN BURNS.
text: Yes, that's what I would think. 

MR. ZEISEL. "I certainly hope so."

Full utterance: The second quarter was extremely weak, Mr. Chairman, and in real terms, personal consumption expenditures rose by less than 2 percent at an annual rate, and even with a reduced estimate for the third quarter, we probably may see a gain. I certainly hope so.

Opinion: yes
About monetary policy: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: Thank you, Roger. Bones. 
speaker: MR. KIMBREL.
text: Mr. Chairman, I would like very much to see us continue to lean against the price trends. And I would like alternative C with the federal funds rate shown there, M1 at 4 to 8, M2 at 5 to 9, and an aggregates directive. 
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: Bob Mayo. 

MR. MAYO. "Alternative C is acceptable to me, Mr. Chairman."

Full utterance: Alternative C is acceptable to me, Mr. Chairman. I would not be in any hurry to get to 8 percent but if it comes naturally in the Desk's operations, I would just let the funds rate go to 8. I wouldn't want to see it go over 8; I would be a little uncomfortable about that without a meeting, but I think "C" is still my preference. And I would accept [the specifications in] "C" on the M1 and M2 ranges as well.

Opinion: yes
About monetary policy: yes
Stance toward easing (NLI): entailment
Prior discussion:
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: And I would merely say to you that to find that soft landing, I don't know how much more we have to do. But I know that since we have seven years to do it, we'd do better to gently come at the problem rather than whack it too hard on the head and be sorry. Because once you trigger the point where the public gets scared and stops buying, you can't reverse it; [economic activity] will go [down]. 
speaker: MR. ROOS.
text: But even the most ardent monetarists, Mr. Chairman, have spoken up consistently for a very gradual reduction. But I think we are interpreted by people who disagree with us as suggesting some precipitous reduction in the aggregates growth-- 

CHAIRMAN MILLER. "I'm just expressing my personal opinion."

Full utterance: I understand you don't. I only look at the nominal interest rates and I know that we are getting very near the point where we will have results in the economy from interest rates. That's the way people behave. We can have a theory all we want. We can do it as gradually as we want but if we have to get 12 percent interest rates to do it, look at the chart over there. When we get that, that's when the recession comes because people get scared; rightly or wrongly, they do. And they did very quickly in that time period. That spike, that Mount Everest, stands out there as a warning to us. It has nothing to do with how gradually you try to [reduce the growth of the] money supply. It's how much you affect these other things. I'm just expressing my personal opinion. I think if we try to continue to accomplish this slowing in the rate of growth in money supply by driving up interest rates, we are going to trigger a reduction of consumption and buying and spending that will send us into a recession. And I think we will be back with $100 million federal deficits. And we won't have accomplished very much following that exercise before we have the highest federal deficits we have ever had, taking away all the monetary restraint that possibly could have been put into the system.

Opinion: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: We did take the money market and we did-- 
speaker: VICE CHAIRMAN VOLCKER.
text: I have a proposal but I don't [know] whether it's-- 
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: On page 15? 
speaker: VICE CHAIRMAN VOLCKER.
text: Well, on page 14 it refers to [the international situation]. 
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: All right, let's look at page 14. 

VICE CHAIRMAN VOLCKER. "In the short run, the Committee seeks to achieve bank reserve and money market conditions that are broadly consistent with the longer-run ranges for the money aggregates cited above, while supporting the objective of stabilizing the foreign exchange value of the dollar."


Opinion: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: If we lose the Merrill case, that will be our directive for the future. Go forth and do well and we'll be in touch. 
speaker: MR. MORRIS.
text: I think that's more of a description of how the Committee feels about all of these ranges because it seems to me that if we have a telephone meeting it will take something really tremendous to trigger us off the 10 percent [funds rate] in the next few weeks. 
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: That's not a bad point. Maybe we ought to have a directive that says we will even keel it and if there are any significant changes, we'll consult. 

MR. WALLICH. "Well, if Steve is right, we should have a month of very large increases [in monetary growth]."

Full utterance: Well, if Steve is right, we should have a month of very large increases [in monetary growth]. And it seems to me that that might very well trigger either a telephone conversation or--

Opinion: yes
About monetary policy: yes
Prior discussion:
speaker: M R . AXILROD.
text: So in that sense we could always have more money [growth] if the System were to provide reserves more aggressively and let interest rates go down in the short run. That's the way I would answer. [As for] whether it's a demand or a supply phenomenon, it's very difficult to disassociate the two. 
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: I have John Balles next [on my list] and then Larry Roos. 

MR. BALLES. "Even if we look at the latest monthly growth numbers on MI, which includes all these money market funds, RPs, commercial paper, and so forth, the percentage growth now is less than half--or at least it's no bigger than half--what it was last fall."


Opinion: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: John, you said 9-1/2 percent on the bottom side? 
speaker: MR. BALLES.
text: Yes sir. 
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: Could we get you up to 9-3/4 percent? Then we'll have six. 
speaker: MR. BALLES.
text: Well, I'm a reasonable guy. 

CHAIRMAN MILLER. "We're going to have very little room for dissent when we're through here!"

Full utterance: On the top side we have three at 10-1/4 percent and everybody else is at 10-1/2 save Henry, who is at 10-3/4 percent. Have I misstated anyone's views? I think Henry is the only one at 10-3/4. As modified, John, you're 9-3/4 to 10-1/4; Bob [Black] had the same, 9-3/4 to 10-1/4. Phil and Bones had 10 to 10-1/2. Bob Mayo had the " B " range, which is the [current one of] 9-3/4 to 10-1/2 percent. Chuck had 9-3/4 to 10-1/4; Nancy, 9-3/4 to 10-1/2; Paul, 10 to 10-1/2; and Henry 10-1/4 to 10-3/4. That would indicate that something like 9-3/4 to 10-1/2 percent might fly. Let's put that down tentatively. There are lots of 10-1/2s on the up side; we're bracketing everybody, you see. We have nobody below [lo-1/2 percent] and only one over it. We're going to have very little room for dissent when we're through here!

Opinion: yes
About monetary policy: yes
Prior discussion:
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: The rest is: M1, 3 to 8 percent; M2, 4 to 8-1/2 percent; and a money market directive. How many of the voting members do we have for that? 
speaker: MR. PARTEE.
text: An indication? 
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: An indication only MR. ALTMA". None. 

CHAIRMAN MILLER. "I knew we weren't going to get a vote today!"


Opinion: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: I'm very sorry that we have no swaps to renew this month, Alan! 
speaker: MR. HOLMES.
text: That's exactly what I was going to say! 
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: Well, I'm sorry. 
speaker: MR. HOLMES.
text: It is rather nice to be out of swap debt for the first time in almost ten years--the first time going back to the pre-71 period [unintelligible] Swiss franc debt. 
speaker: MR. MAYO.
text: You're not going to retire on that note! 

MR. HOLMES. "A total of 5-1/2 billion Deutschmarks were involved in that and the Treasury had spent 1.2 billion of that amount in intervention earlier this year."


Opinion: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: M R . STERNLIGHT.
text: Well, the downward movement was more than in just the short-term area. If anything it seemed to me the mortgage area was rather an exception in moving up a little further. We had rate declines in the long-term sector as well as in the short-term. I think it was more than just a day-to-day phenomenon. There was a feeling that the economy is likely to be weakening and that at some point the [long] rates are likely to be lower, although I would not say that there was an expectation of an imminent easing throughout [the yield curve]--just in terms of, say, the fed funds rate. 

MR. COLDWELL. "It was just a happy coincidence that they happened to have securities to sell at a higher price."


Opinion: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: MR. ROOS.
text: That would mean, if that is a valid assumption. that we still are in a position to affect this in a very real fashion by the decisions we make today. Are these guys way off base, do you think? 
speaker: MR. KICHLINE.
text: Well, I know some of those guys-- 
speaker: CHAIRMAN MILLER.
text: It's perfectly all right to take the fifth! 

MR. KICHLINE. "And it's quite clear to us that if we had lower rates of money growth over an extended period of time, we would get lower rates of inflation."

Full utterance: No, that's all right. I think I know some of the people from St. Louis in a way that transcends what I might say here. All I can say to that is that my view is simply that monetary policy has an important role to play. The difficulty in this exercise is looking at alternatives within what I would consider to be a "reasonable range," given past monetary policy responses. If, for example, one option were to reduce the stock of money 10 percent and run that way for 3 or 4 years, I would say we'd get tremendous impacts on the price front. We'd also have a depression, in my view. So, what is missing in this linkage is what happens to the real side and what happens to markets. It's that sort of thing that makes it difficult for me just to translate M1 numbers into rates of inflation. I certainly would not say that I believe money has no influence on prices. That's clearly not our view. It's really a longer-term effect in the way that we look at money affecting activity, which works through markets. And it's quite clear to us that if we had lower rates of money growth over an extended period of time, we would get lower rates of inflation. We'd also have other things happening, such as [effects on1 unemployment and real GNP, and I would presume other policy responses outside the control of the Fed.

Opinion: yes
About monetary policy: yes
Prior discussion:
speaker: MR. KIMBREL.
text: I'd be happy to see that continue, even the 11-1/2 to 15-1/2 percent [federal funds range]. And I'd prefer to see the borrowings more in the $1.8 billion [areal where I believe they are at the moment. So I prefer "C" with those [specifications] I'd add. 
speaker: CHAIRMAN VOLCKER.
text: Governor Schultz. 

MR. SCHULTZ. "It seems to me that autos and housing are very weak and the rest of the economy continues to hang up there."

Full utterance: I think the only economic law I believe in at this point in time is Murphy's Law. I don't know how human beings are going to behave in this particular period, so I'm torn. It seems to me that autos and housing are very weak and the rest of the economy continues to hang up there. I have a feeling that at some point that's going to change. Consumer attitudes are going to change and things are going to get pretty weak rather quickly; and I would like to be responsive when that occurs. On the other hand, it seems to me that we have some real dangers from oil and other exogenous shocks over the near term. I wonder what shape we'd be in if we hadn't taken the steps we took on October 6 , in view of what is happening in Iran. It seems to me that we'd be in pretty bad shape. So my feeling is that we have to continue to hold on to this [policy] a while longer and that puts me somewhere in between "B" and "C." I feel that Governor Partee's approach is a very reasonable one.

Opinion: yes
About monetary policy: yes
Stance toward easing (NLI): contradiction
Prior discussion:
speaker: MR. AXILROD.
text: ~ 2 therefore, , would be running even higher. That's the-- 
speaker: CHAIRMAN VOLCKER.
text: But M2 is only going to go off track in the second half of the quarter. 
speaker: MR. COLDWELL.
text: Because M1 is going to be pushed up 
speaker: MR. AXILROD.
text: Yes, as I say, banks may not get all that [projected increase] in time deposits. 

CHAIRMAN VOLCKER. "We just have to reach a consensus on how we phrase this."


Opinion: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: MR. WALLICH.
text: Therefore, I think we have to start with a low rate of money growth right away. I would say that 3 to 6 percent is a good starting point. If we went much higher than that, we'd be in immediate danger of getting into negative real interest rates with what they do to allocation of credit and inflation and the dollar. On the other aggregates, I'd like to see more clearly how they are likely to behave. But I think a fairly narrow [Ml] range like 3 to 6 percent, aiming at the midpoint of 4.5 percent and expecting that that really is a symbol for much more liquidity than it seems to give us, is the way to start. 

MR. AXILROD. "We showed the actual growth rate of M1 for 1979 of 5.5 percent and I meant to show also in parentheses, and did not, the growth of M1 as if there had been no ATS accounts."


Opinion: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: CHAIRMAN VOLCKER.
text: It would bother you if it were higher, right? 
speaker: MS. TEETERS.
text: Don't forget the $18 billion so-called tax cut is just not a tax increase. It's a funny tax cut. 
speaker: MR. WALLICH.
text: That should be offset or compensated for by a rise in the personal income tax, shouldn't it? 
speaker: MS. TEETERS.
text: Pardon? 

MR. WALLICH. "So we would have to anticipate the rise in the personal income tax as we cut back on the social security tax increase, if we didn't want to increase the deficit."

Full utterance: We're talking about a shift of the social security financing from the payroll tax to personal income tax. So we would have to anticipate the rise in the personal income tax as we cut back on the social security tax increase, if we didn't want to increase the deficit.

Opinion: yes
About monetary policy: no
Prior discussion:
speaker: MR. SMOOT.
text: There are a lot of marginal things that just add up to a somewhat more-- 
speaker: CHAIRMAN VOLCKER.
text: If I understand you, your forecast has a tax cut in it? 
speaker: MR. SMOOT.
text: Yes, we would anticipate one. I would also subscribe to Mark's comments that differences of 1/2 or 1 percentage point at this time really appear to be somewhat meaningless. 
speaker: CHAIRMAN VOLCKER.
text: Mr. Guffey. 

MR. GUFFEY. "The staff's forecast is a bit more pessimistic than our forecast, and that largely centers on two differences."


Opinion: no