samchain/econo-pairs-v1 huggingface dataset:
The Dodd-Frank Act left intact the decentralized structure of the original federated Federal Reserve System – the twelve Reserve Banks and the Board of Governors in Washington. Each Reserve Bank continues to operate as a separately capitalized corporation with its own Board of Directors. 14 But, to limit the role of bankers on the Federal Reserve Bank boards, the Dodd-Frank Act prohibited the bankers on each board from participating in the selection of its Reserve Bank president. 15 Even prior to the Dodd-Frank Act, it is important to emphasize that the directors played no significant role in setting policy. 16 Instead, their role has been to advise the Reserve Bank  12  Several other conditions had to be satisfied as well. 13  Although considerable progress has been made in ending TBTF, I think it is premature to declare victory. Some banks still have work to do to make their resolution plans credible, and there needs to be more work on cross-border issues to ensure that such a resolution would proceed smoothly. 14  Each Board is made up of nine members divided evenly into Class A, B, and C directors. The Class A directors represent the banks of the District that are Federal Reserve member banks, the Class B and C directors represent the broader public interest. Only eligible Class B and Class C directors can participate in the process for selecting Reserve Bank presidents.

With regard to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which I have the responsibility of leading, I’d observe that the New York Fed, like the other eleven reserve banks, serves to  19  A historical example was the disclosure of Reconstruction Finance Corporation loans to banks in the Great Depression. This disclosure often created runs at the respective banks. See James Butkiewicz, “The Reconstruction Finance Corporation, the Gold Standard, and the Banking Panic of 1933,” Southern Economic Journal, vol. 66, no. 2, October 1999, pg. 271. BIS central bankers’ speeches  7  support the overall mission of the Federal Reserve System. But, by virtue of its location, the New York Fed has a unique responsibility on behalf of the System – namely to serve as the operational arm of the Federal Open Market Committee with respect to the implementation of monetary policy. This separation of the policy arm and the operational arm of monetary policy in two distinct institutions is a very unusual setup among central banks. 20 There are good reasons why these important functions are assigned to the New York Fed. Monetary policy works by affecting financial market conditions in order to promote the economic outcomes consistent with the Fed’s dual mandate. As such, effective and efficient monetary policy execution requires a practical and thorough understanding of the broad range of the financial markets through which monetary policy operates. New York City is the nation’s principal financial center.
It is then of course essential that one also ensures that Finansinspektionen is equipped with the most efficient tools possible to be able to manage its task in a good way. And if one later discovers that there are doubts regarding some parts of the mandate, it is of course important that these are remedied without delay. 2  Finansinspektionen was intending to introduce an amortisation requirement from 1 August 2015. However, the administrative court of appeal in Jönköping, among other instances, questioned the legal authority of Finansinspektionen to decide amortisation requirements. Finansinspektionen decided not to go further with the amortisation requirement as the legal position was uncertain and at the same time observed that its mandate needed clarification; see press release from Finansinspektionen on 23 April 2015. BIS central bankers’ speeches  7  To avoid a future economic downturn from being deeper than normal as a result of the high indebtedness, it is therefore essential that the Government quickly ensures that Sweden has an efficient framework for macroprudential policy and that Finansinspektionen has a clear mandate. It is almost seven years since the financial crisis broke out. One of the major lessons learnt from the crisis is the importance of an efficient macroprudential policy that enables early identification of financial imbalances and rapid implementation of necessary measures. There is broad agreement on which imbalances have built up in the Swedish economy, but there also appears to be what is known as an inaction bias, which means that no authority has taken adequate measures.

Developments during the summer Focus on Greece As you know, at the beginning of July the Greek people voted no to the proposed measures presented by the country’s creditors in a general referendum. However, shortly thereafter the Greek parliament nevertheless decided to make extensive reforms and savings. They have thus been able to reach an agreement of principle regarding a third loan programme and negotiations are currently under way regarding the details of this programme. However, it will be some time before we can fully understand what effects the summer’s discussion on the future of Greece will have on the monetary union and the development of the euro area. On the one hand, it was a relief that the euro area succeeded in reaching a new agreement with Greece. On the other hand, confidence in the euro area and in Greece may have been damaged further, which creates uncertainty and may further delay the growth that the area so needs. There is still the question of whether Greece will succeed in recovering without needing to write off some of its debts. Here, for instance, the IMF has been very clear that such writedowns are necessary to create reasonable conditions for a recovery. So far, the crisis has not led to any major turbulence on the financial markets, or to any other significantly negative effects in other countries. This means that developments as a whole can be said to be in line with our assessments.
The ECB has had to use different instruments at different stages of the crisis. Now the economic and financial situation in Europe is significantly better. Financial fragmentation has receded, Member States have made significant efforts towards economic convergence and the governance of the euro area has been strengthened. We are gradually moving out of the  BIS central bankers’ speeches  1  crisis phase into a different environment, with the focus shifting from solving the crisis to ensuring stable economic growth and inflation close to 2%. It requires a different approach and different instruments. The developments beyond our eastern border are the big topic of debate in Poland at the moment. Could the conflict between Russia and the Ukraine affect Europe and its economy in any way? The impact on trade or the financial system has thus far been limited. But this situation does give rise to uncertainty, so it can be regarded as a potential negative factor that could hinder economic growth in Europe, and that is part of our risk assessment. What about the strong euro? Aren’t you worried it could cause problems for European exporters and hinder the recovery? The ECB doesn’t target the exchange rate. Our primary mandate is price stability, and within this mandate, the exchange rate of the euro is among the factors determining the level of inflation. And indeed, the strong euro is contributing to the current low inflation.

I am also delighted to welcome to our shores and the conference the Secretary General of ASBA, Mr. Rudy Araujo, the Chief Representative of the BIS Office of the Americas, Mr. Gregor Heinrick, the Senior International Adviser of the Comptroller of the Currency, Mr. Lester Miller and Advisor on Economic Crimes in the US Treasury Department, Mr. Thomas Noller. I have no doubt that your considerable experiences will add value to this conference. It is also fitting that I welcome the Hon. Minister of Finance, Dr. Ashni Singh and the Hon. Minister within the Ministry of Finance, Bishop Juan Edghill. The importance of this Conference is underscored by the fact that both Ministers enthusiastically agreed to adjust their work schedules to be present at this opening ceremony with Dr. Singh consenting to deliver the feature address. Delegates and invitees can expect a very insightful presentation by the Minister. Ladies and gentlemen, the theme of the Conference refers to the evolving financial landscape which is quite evident in many tangible forms though not always easily manageable. As a matter of fact, the changing financial landscape has brought challenges almost every step of the way. It is a testimony to the quality of our regional banking supervisors and the support and nurturing provided by the Caribbean Group of Banking Supervisors over the years that our region met the challenges posed by the changing landscape and has remained safe and sound.
What we in fact expected over the next couple of years is continuing growth somewhat above trend with inflation picking up towards 3%, though rising which by our own past standards is a relatively benign outlook. What we are seeking to do is to moderate the pace of expansion before inflationary pressures begin to build in order to ensure that the outlook remains benign next year, and a year after, and well into the future. And that, Mr. Chairman, is precisely what most business people - whether in industry or commerce or financial businesses - tell us they would want us to do. It is also the purpose of the Government’s Inflation Target. Let me then turn to Europe and the question of monetary union. I do not think anyone questions that economic prosperity in Europe is crucial to economic prosperity in this country. Our fundamental interests are the same. And not many people question that the effective functioning of the European single market can make a major contribution to our collective prosperity - it is a positive sum game in our mutual interest. It is clear I think too that the single market in Europe will function more effectively if each member country pursues disciplined macro-economic policies in a context of structural, supply-side, flexibility - again as a matter of national as well as collective interest. So much it seems to me is common ground in all 15 EU member countries - and indeed beyond.

Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen, the contribution of financial services to individual entrepreneurs as well as small and medium sized businesses cannot be over-emphasised. As you are no doubt aware, following the liberalization of the financial sector in the early 1990’s, the financial sector in Zambia has evolved rapidly spurred by increasing competition. Similarly, policies and the legal and regulatory frameworks have been developed to take into account the fast changing liberalised environment. These developments have resulted in a considerable increase in the number of banks and other financial service providers. Therefore, the banking sector has over the last few years, witnessed significant growth in consumer lending. As a matter of fact, on a sectoral basis the “personal loan” category has been the largest recipient of total credit in the recent years and accounted for 22% in November 2009. Small and Medium Enterprises have also significantly benefited from credit expansion. The resultant credit expansion has no doubt brought significant benefits to the economy as resources are increasingly channeled through to the lower end of the market. However, most of the credit extended by banks and microfinance institutions is targeted at individuals in formal employment or already established enterprises. Only an insignificant amount is extended to start-up initiatives or the informal sector. This has been exacerbated by the inability of entrepreneurs to articulate and sell bankable projects through robust business plans.
It is making a promise about the future, particularly about future interest rates.”[17] And despite the intervening (and frequently re-iterated) point that our statements about future policy were “an expectation, not a promise”, a recent newspaper comment, published only a couple of months ago, referred to the “many promises [made by the MPC] to raise interest rates”. There may be several reasons for this. One must be the very fact that there are these two distinct forms of communication – one much closer to a “promise” than the other – yet economists use word the “guidance” for both, distinguishing them only with the (slightly arcane) classical descriptors “Delphic” and “Odyssean”. This kind of jargon can obscure more than it clarifies and one can quite understand why people might muddle them up[18]. More generally, it’s possible that central banks probably don’t help themselves with language which, while it may seem clear to people whose job it is to think about these things, is unclear or ambiguous to others. To the economist author the meaning of a phrase “we expect the appropriate level of interest rates to be X” may be “X is the arithmetic mean of a conditional  distribution for interest rates”. To others it may come across simply as “interest rates will be X”. In hindsight, the logical structure of the MPC’s 2013 guidance linking policy to the rate of unemployment – “if not p then not q” – may well have been too convoluted to be readily understood.

But if you can find a way of tying yourself to the policy in advance – like Odysseus lashing himself to the mast of his ship – then this is in principle an effective way of easing monetary conditions, even when the policy rate itself can’t be lowered any further. It’s striking that this “Odyssean” guidance has received much more attention in the economics literature – but, in the real world, and despite often being right up against the lower bound, central banks have used it only rarely. This may be because, in practice, it’s quite difficult to make credible commitments of this sort (and because central banks have also been able to use QE). Whatever the reason, most “forward guidance” has been of the “Delphic”, more conditional form. Yet my impression is that outside observers can sometimes mistake one for the other: the “if” clause is forgotten, or downplayed, and purely conditional statements somehow get interpreted (or rather misinterpreted) as hard commitments. It’s not entirely clear why this is the case. It may be quite a deep-seated tendency. Some psychological research demonstrates that people can misconstrue “if…then” statements, particularly if they’re fairly abstract. It may also be wishful: because people don’t like uncertainty and would therefore prefer there to be some fixed path of interest rates set in advance, perhaps they’re prone to believe that this is what they’re being told. But there’s no doubt it happens.
William C Dudley: Housing and the economic recovery Remarks by Mr William C Dudley, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, at the New Jersey Bankers Association Economic Forum, Iselin, New Jersey, 6 January 2012. *  *  *  Housing and the economic recovery It is a pleasure to join you today for the annual meeting of the New Jersey Bankers Association. In a recent speech1 I talked about a number of the challenges facing the economy as we seek to secure the recovery and build for the future. Today I will focus on one of these: the problems in the U.S. housing market. In focusing today on housing, I would emphasize that this is only one factor behind the frustratingly slow economic recovery. Nevertheless, it is an important one that deserves our attention. As always, what I have to say today reflects my own views and not necessarily those of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) or the Federal Reserve System. The New York Fed is deeply committed to contributing to efforts to resolve the housing crisis that still afflicts our nation. Our economists monitor the housing market and analyze its impact on the national economy. My outreach staff work with community groups and housing practitioners to support local programs that aid distressed homeowners.

Persistent weakness in housing is particularly problematic because it acts as a drag on spending and job creation in an environment in which such weakness can not be easily offset  8  A number of these issues were documented by an interagency task force that included the Federal Reserve and are being addressed through consent orders requiring supervised institutions to remedy deficiencies. 9  When the amount of debt secured by a property exceeds its likely net sales price, a “short sale” can be a less costly alternative to foreclosure. The short sale agreement between the homeowner and lender often grants the lender final approval of the sales price and may release the homeowner from any deficiency. 4  BIS central bankers’ speeches  by other policy adjustments. Housing policy should seek to break adverse feedback loops, promote more economically efficient outcomes in housing and support growth. In recent speeches,10 I have called for a “comprehensive approach” to stabilize the national real estate market and lay the foundations for recovery. I believe this should include measures to improve access to mortgage credit, reduce obstacles to refinancing, lessen the flow of homes into foreclosure through bridge financing and accelerated principal reduction, and to facilitate the absorption of REO back into use as owner- or renter- housing.
For 2014, we think that the banking industry should better support the private sector, considering that:  •  IMF’s agreement with Albania will mitigate government’s need for borrowing;  •  Public arrears to the private sector are expected to begin to be paid off shortly;  •  Worsening financial ratios in the banking industry imposes the gradual return to lending to the private sector, in order to improve the generation of income. Second, I would like to underline the need for the significant improvement of technical capacity and structures for risk management. In this regard, your decision making should include analytical assessments of the performance of your institutions against various scenarios. This is a requirement stipulated in the existing regulatory framework, which we will monitor with additional caution over the next year. In our view, this element constitutes a bank management quality indicator. Sparing the details, I would like to emphasize that the Bank of Albania will continue to provide the necessary support for all these processes. We appreciate the professional and direct cooperation with you, as an important element to comply with the requirements of the supervisory and regulatory framework. Moreover, the IMF’s agreement and additional financial support from the World Bank and the European Union will contribute to restoring the country’s long-term economic stability, translating the macroeconomic stability into higher economic growth rates.

It is whether they can convince investors that it is safe to provide them with funding at reasonable spreads over Bank Rate without central bank support. As the Financial Policy Committee (FPC) noted in its recent Review, UK banks are still some way from being able to convince the market in this respect. Regulators, who from 1 April will be in the Bank of England’s new Prudential Regulation Authority, are now working hard to ensure that banks are making adequate provisions for future losses, the likely costs of regulatory penalties and compensation to customers, and stating the riskiness of their assets in a more prudent way. A lesson from past crises, and also from this one, is that it is important to act now rather than hope that problems will go away of their own accord. As the FPC said last December, it is likely that banks will be required either to raise more capital or to restructure their businesses or exposures, and the FPC will review the position in March. There is no single remedy appropriate to all banks. With proper implementation, there is no reason why the two banks with significant state shareholdings could not largely be back in the private sector within a relatively short period. After all, in the United States banks that received state support are already back in private hands. Restoring our banking system to full – and transparent – health is only one of the structural changes that will be necessary to rebalance the economy.
This includes requiring listed companies to make timely disclosures on 1/4  BIS central bankers' speeches  material transactions and have in place adequate internal controls and governance structures. The MAS supervises the SGX in the discharge of its regulatory function. SGX’s RegCo Board also has oversight of the exchange’s regulatory responsibilities. This MAS-SGX regulatory model, where the statutory and market regulator each have their distinct role but also share the responsibility to ensure sound functioning of the capital markets, is not unique to Singapore. Similar approaches are adopted in many financial centres, including in the United States, Australia and Hong Kong. So each time a corporate failing of one form or another happens, both the MAS and the SGX would review and investigate the matter. The specific regulatory response would obviously depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. Often, a kneejerk tightening of rules may not be in the best interest of the market. Tighter across-the-board regulations can impose additional costs on all listed companies, and these costs must be weighed against the benefits. It may not be appropriate to prescribe the same standard on all companies, as they can differ in size or business complexity. The MAS has therefore been deliberate in calibrating our rules. For example, there are more stringent CG standards for banks, compared to for other listed companies; and rightly so due to banks’ potential systemic impact. This is also why in the latest review of the Code, the Council took a pragmatic approach.

As they stand, the current technical proposals put forward for consultation by the Basel Committee do not respect this commitment: they must therefore be revisited. Second, we should be careful not to oversimplify the regulatory framework and loose the risk sensitivity. Adjustments to the internal models approach should not amount to imposing the standard approach on all, either explicitly, or implicitly by applying poorly calibrated “output floors”. *** Let me conclude with some words on the strengths of the Paris financial centre itself: robust banks and insurance companies, a dynamic asset management industry, strong financial market infrastructures, a highly skilled labour force. And you can be assured of three points: 1. First, French authorities, including the Banque de France, attach utmost importance to making sure Paris is one of Europe’s strongest financial centres. This is crucial for employment, for investment, as well as for the strength of the euro area economy as a whole. 2. In addition, we are already making every effort to build an innovation ecosystem: through the recent and efficient ACPR-AMF cooperation on FinTechs; through our support for the development of new tools – such as ESNI on securitization and Euro GC+ on repos, or our upcoming project to test interbanking information sharing processes based on blockchain technology; and also through our partnerships with many French universities renowned for their excellence and their Masters in Finance. 3.