samchain/econo-pairs-v1 huggingface dataset:
Contentious differences in Shariah opinion is a given but it must not hold us back, but rather be resolved through debate and discussion with a view to find truth and justice. In setting an example to inspire such exchanges, beginning January 2018, Bank Negara Malaysia’s website will feature an enhanced version of the SAC microsite, starting with the Bahasa version to provide more detailed disclosure of the SAC’s works. Over the years, the SAC has accumulated a treasure trove of knowledge which has been shared through various publications. In this digital age, it is high time that this be made even more accessible to the whole world. This new microsite will among others, serve as a repository for key discussions on fiqh matters and underlying reasoning of Shariah rulings. This is expected to promote greater understanding and appreciation of the thought process and rationale in arriving at a ruling by our learned scholars. I trust that this repository of knowledge will encourage more open and transparent conversations on Shariah issues. Our hope is that this will build greater mutual respect and understanding within the Shariah fraternity and the wider financial communities, and in turn, pave the way towards greater harmonisation of Shariah interpretation globally. Conclusion Let me conclude by quoting the words of Imam Al-Ghazali: "Knowledge without action is insanity, action without knowledge is vanity.” Let’s ponder that point. 1 This companion refers to Salman al-Farisi.

The last paper of the session, by Dean Corbae and Pablo D´Erasmo, studies monetary policy design in a detailed model of a banking sector with heterogeneous banks. Finally, the keynote lecture by Novel Price laureate Thomas Sargent and the policy panel composed of James Bullard, Esther George, Claudio Borio, and Pablo García , will for sure shed some light on the importance of all these topics for current monetary policy and its expected evolution, including important questions that may remain unanswered. 5. Acknowledgements  4/5  BIS - Central bankers' speeches  I would like to especially thank Gianluca Violante for being the external organizer of this Conference, as well as Sofia Bauducco and Andrés Fernández for putting together such a wonderful program. I also thank all the speakers and contributors and look forward to the Conference volume that will be published thereafter. Let me finish by thanking María José Reyes, Constanza Martinelli, Carolina Besa, Daniela Gaete, Álvaro Castillo, and both the Public Affairs Department and the Economic Research Department of the CBC for all their invaluable help managing the logistics of organizing the first hybrid Annual Conference. Thank you and have a fruitful discussion over the next two days. 5/5  BIS - Central bankers' speeches
For those interested in a real-life case study of such an outcome, I recommend a paper by Scott Frame, Kristopher Gerardi and Paul Willen about the stress test models used by OFHEO, the agency that oversaw Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the financial crisis.7 The paper documents the large understatement of the agencies’ credit risk exposures stemming from “hard coded” models that failed to capture innovation in mortgage underwriting. In fact, the Fed has proposed additional disclosures about its stress test models, including indicative loan loss rates and loss results based on standardized portfolios.8 These enhanced disclosures aim to provide greater insight into the Fed’s modeling approaches and thus to facilitate “peer review,” while maintaining the rigor of the stress testing regime. This is another area where academic economists can help enrich the debate. There is already a literature on the impact of the disclosure of supervisory stress test results;9 that literature could usefully be extended to consider the impact of underlying model disclosure, especially in the context of macroprudential goals. Clear and Predictable Goals and Actions The final element we identified supporting the macroprudential goals of the SCAP was that the exercise had clear and predictable objectives and actions. Our paper argued that the financial crisis environment gave the SCAP a very clear goal of providing confidence that the banking system could continue to lend even under more dire economic conditions as a way of mitigating the chance that those dire economic conditions actually materialized.

John C Williams: Moving toward "normal" US monetary policy Remarks by Mr John C Williams, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, at the Joint Bank Indonesia-Federal Reserve Bank of New York Central Banking Forum, Nusa Dua, Indonesia, 10 October 2018. * * * Thank you and good morning. It’s a pleasure to speak at the Central Banking Forum coorganized by Bank Indonesia and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. This is our second joint conference, and I am very much looking forward to the exchange of ideas and views on important economic issues affecting our regions. At the outset, I would like to thank Governor Perry and Bank Indonesia for their leadership and support in sponsoring this conference, amid what I am sure has been a very busy time with the IMF/World Bank meetings. Let me also say that our thoughts and hearts go out to everyone affected by the recent devastating earthquake and tsunami. In my remarks, I will focus on the outlook for U.S. monetary policy. The good news is that on the 10th anniversary of the worst days of the global financial crisis, the U.S. economy is doing very well. From the perspective of the Fed’s dual mandate of maximum employment and price stability, quite honestly, this is about as good as it gets. As a result, the Fed has naturally been moving toward more “normal” monetary policy.
2  BIS central bankers’ speeches  Like the chart for employment in all 12 of the Fed’s districts, the three districts’ employment levels are indexed to 100 in 1990. You will see that, at the end of June, the index stands at 150 for the Eleventh District, 125 for the Twelfth and 103 for the Second. Nonagricultural employment growth in Texas has compounded at an annual rate of 1.95 percent over 21½ years; that of California at 0.57 percent; and New York’s at 0.19 percent. If you are interested in the output of their workers over this same period, the compound annual growth rate of Texas GDP is 3.6 percent; California’s is 2.59 percent; and New York’s 2.06 percent. Now, let’s look at job creation in Texas since June 2009, the date that the National Bureau of Economic Research (or NBER, the body that “officially” dates when a recession starts and ends) declared the recent economic recession to have ended. There are several ways to calculate Texas’ contribution to national job creation from June 2009 through the end of June 2011. One is to look at the number of jobs created by all 50 states, including those that have lost jobs since the nation’s anemic recovery began. Using this metric, through June of this year Texas has accounted for 49.9 percent of net new jobs created in the United States.

People have taken those jobs of their own free will, even though the jobs may not measure up to the compensation levels everyone would like. And yet Texas, like all states, is subject to the same monetary policy as all the rest: We have the same interest rates and access to capital as the residents of any of the other 49 states, for the Federal Reserve conducts monetary policy and regulates financial institutions under its  2  The Code of the Woosters, by P.G. Wodehouse, New York: Doubleday, Doran, 1938. 3  See “Texas: What Makes Us Exceptional? Where Are We Vulnerable?,” speech by Richard W. Fisher before the 2010 Pre-Session Legislative Conference, Dec. 2, 2010. BIS central bankers’ speeches  7  purview for the nation at large. From this, I draw the conclusion that private sector capital and jobs will go to where taxes and spending and regulatory policy are most conducive to growth. Therein lies a lesson for our fiscal policy makers as they grapple with their monumental task of reconfiguring fiscal policy and eliminating the prevailing uncertainty about their remedy. We live in a world that, through steadfast sacrifice of the American treasure and with blood and capable diplomacy, won the Cold War, induced the Chinese to pull back the Bamboo Curtain and opened up the majority of the world to once unimaginable economic opportunity.
According to the August Inflation Report forecasts, they will continue to ease in the period ahead. BIS central bankers’ speeches  1  •  Asset prices have risen significantly, boosting economy-wide wealth. Since 2009, UK equity prices have risen by over 50%, UK ten-year government bond prices by around 15% and UK house prices by around 20%.1  •  Perhaps most striking of all, employment in the UK has risen by almost 1.8 million since its trough and by around 750,000 in the past year alone. The unemployment rate has fallen from a peak of 8.4% to 6%. According to the August Inflation Report forecasts, it is expected to fall further in the period ahead, to close to 5%. Economists since Arthur Okun have often combined macro-economic measures into a single index.2 It speaks volumes for economists’ psychological state that they tend to call these “misery indices”. Although something of a dog’s breakfast, misery indices provide a simple summary statistic of macro-economic health. I have constructed an index of unemployment, inflation and GDP growth in the UK. The higher GDP growth, and the lower unemployment and inflation, the higher is the index and the healthier is assumed to be the economy. The choice of these measures, and their weighting, is rather arbitrary.3 To buck Thomas Carlyle’s image of the economist as dismal scientist, let’s call this an “ecstasy index”. Chart 1 plots the ecstasy index for the UK since 1970.

If this was a business-as-usual recovery, with equilibrium real rates close to historical levels, the Taylor-rule would suggest a considerably more aggressive monetary policy response, and a tighter stance, than has been the case in practice.7 Of course, there are good reasons for believing this may not be a business-as-usual recovery. For one thing, medium-term real rates of interest are materially lower than in the past (Chart 12). If these expectations were to be mirrored in persistently lower growth rates in the economy, then that would imply a lower equilibrium real rate of interest.8 Assume that equilibrium real interest rates are not fixed at 2%, but move in line with the real forward rate curve shown in Chart 13. That would give the Taylor rule path shown in Chart 23. This is now consistently below the actual and market-implied path. In other words, if secular stagnation is the name of the game, the Taylor rule suggests interest rates could remain lower for longer than markets currently expect. So how should a policy-maker choose between these twin peaks and their implied paths? The optimal response could be to probability-weight the two peaks, updating the probabilities as new data arrives. Financial markets may be doing just that. Implied interest rates lie between the upper peak recovery of Chart 22 and the lower peak of Chart 23. Markets rates have coursed a path in the valley between the twin peaks. But this path is also shifting towards the lower peak.
TRICHET: The growth potential of Europe and the euro area could be significantly higher if all European countries had implemented the structural reforms of the so-called Lisbon Agenda. Now the Europeans are again committed to bold structural reforms. Two avenues seem particularly decisive amongst many others. I would insist on the full opening of a real single market in services. When we created the single market we were an industrialized economy and services were not particularly dominant. Now we are an advanced economy and services are playing a dominant part, and we still have resistance to a real single market in services. This could give a boost to European growth potential. The second point is labor market reform where we need significantly more flexibility in a number of economies. WSJ: This is your last year as ECB president. How important is it that the choosing of your successor by governments be a smooth process? TRICHET: I have very hard work until the end of October and I expect to exert, with all my colleagues, my impressive, inspiring and profound responsibilities until the last day. As regards my succession I have full confidence in the heads of state and government. It is their responsibility. WSJ: What has surprised you, both good and bad, over the last 12 years of the euro? What do you think the euro zone will look like in 2015?

That being said all central banks, in periods like this where you have inflationary threats that are coming from commodities, have to go through the hump and be very careful that there are no second-round effects. This is what we are doing. WSJ: When you hiked rates in 2008 there were signs of those second-round effects. Do you see evidence they are starting to take hold in Germany or elsewhere? TRICHET: At this stage, we do not see this. And everybody knows we would not let secondround effects materialize. We will continue to deliver price stability. WSJ: Could the ECB raise interest rates while still maintaining nonstandard measures including unlimited loans to banks? TRICHET: It is our doctrine since the beginning of the turbulence that interest rates on the one hand and non-standard measures on the other hand are decoupled. We design the monetary policy stance; we decide interest rates to deliver price stability in the medium term. Non-standard measures are there to help restoring a better functioning of monetary policy transmission. We are disconnecting both measures. We can move interest rates on the one hand, and we can move non-standard measures on the other hand independently. WSJ: Euro member states are working on comprehensive measures to address the debt crisis. What elements should be in that package? TRICHET: These decisions are the responsibility of governments. We have in particular a very strong message, which is that we need a “quantum leap” in the strengthening of governance of economic and fiscal policies.
Payments between banks – or their customers – are effected via the Swiss Interbank Clearing (SIC) system and result in the reallocation of sight deposits across the participating banks’ accounts at the SNB. Moreover, banks are obliged to fulfil the minimum reserve requirements of the National Bank Act, i.e. to hold sufficient reserves either in the form of banknotes or as sight deposits with the SNB. Deposits with commercial banks are distinct from central bank money. When speaking of these deposits in my remarks today, I will be referring to the sight deposits – also known as demand deposits – of their customers. Customers also hold savings and time deposits with banks. These cannot be directly drawn on for transaction purposes, but they are cash equivalents and are therefore included in broader definitions of money. Bank customers can use their sight deposits to make payments. Unlike central bank money, the deposits with commercial banks are not legal tender, but they do represent a claim on central bank money. Bank customers can withdraw sight deposits in the form of banknotes, i.e. central bank money, or instruct their bank to make a cashless payment. The latter leads to a reallocation of SNB sight deposits – again, central bank money – from the customer’s to the payment recipient’s bank. From the public’s perspective, cash and deposits with commercial banks are virtually the same for payment purposes. However, deposits are subject not only to the risk of inflation, but also to credit risk.

Finally, let me thank the Forum for inviting me and wish all the participants a very fruitful and productive day. 10. Thank you for your attention. 3/3  BIS central bankers' speeches
This is a good example of identifying regulatory burdens that are not worth the cost. We are also considering the implementation of a stress capital buffer that would better align the dynamic stress capital requirements of CCAR with our more static, point-in-time regulatory capital rules. Other potential adjustments include changes to the assumptions about the pace of a firm’s planned dividend and share repurchases, and how a firm in a stressed environment would likely manage its balance sheet and business footprint. The financial crisis provided a vivid reminder that a well-functioning financial system is a necessary condition for a vibrant economy. The efficient intermediation of funding from savers to borrowers supports economic activity and, over time, raises living standards. This means that we need a financial system that is robust and resilient to shocks. Most of the changes that have been implemented since the financial crisis have moved us in this direction, and it is important that any new changes to laws and regulations be grounded in what we have learned. Our central purpose must be to ensure a safe and sound financial system that efficiently provides financing to households and businesses through the ups and downs of the business cycle. Thank you for your kind attention. I would be happy to take a few questions. 1 James Bergin, Dianne Dobbeck, Jack Gutt, Kristin Malcarney, Kevin Stiroh, Joseph Tracy and Emily Yang  assisted in preparing these remarks.

Resolution We also must have an effective resolution mechanism that allows a firm to fail without threatening to bring down the entire financial system. We are not quite there yet—given some of the challenges in executing resolution on a cross-border basis—but we have made significant progress. In particular, I would point to two developments that are especially important. The FDIC and the Federal Reserve have used the authority provided by Title I of the Dodd-Frank Act to oversee the so-called “living will” process—the resolution planning that large financial firms must do as a contingency for their potential failure. Developing living wills necessitates that firms and regulators consider, in advance, how bankruptcy can serve as the basis for resolution, and take actions to address any obstacles to an orderly resolution under the bankruptcy code. This effort has helped to reduce the complexity of large financial firms and has made them better positioned to enter bankruptcy without imposing large costs on society. In addition, the Federal Reserve recently finalized a rule that requires systemically important bank holding companies to have minimum levels of total loss absorbing capacity (TLAC). Firms are expected to meet this requirement mainly via the issuance of long-term debt by the holding company parent. In bankruptcy, this debt could be used to recapitalize these firms and would be available to absorb any additional losses. The Dodd-Frank Act also created a “last resort” option for the resolution of a large financial firm— Title II Orderly Liquidation Authority.
There has been a lot of concern about the Chinese economy for obvious reasons – it having become the second largest economy in this world. And among many regional economies, it is now their most important trading partner. So, if the Chinese economy catches a flu, we will all feel the effects of its sneezing. Having said that, the Chinese economy will continue to grow and the policymakers there seem to be determined in ensuring that it does. Implications to Malaysia Malaysia will certainly benefit from the more positive growth environment, especially given the better growth of its major trading partner economies. The Malaysian economy is  BIS central bankers’ speeches  1  projected to grow by 4.5–5.5%. This outlook is supported by the strong growth of 6.2% in the first quarter of 2014. The outlook has improved due to better external demand conditions. After growing by only 2.4% in 2013, Malaysia’s exports have grown by almost 13% so far in 2014. For a small open economy like Malaysia, and others like it, the experience of the crisis and the years since has certainly brought home the vulnerabilities and risks of being integrated with the global economy. But, I believe that it has also highlighted our dependence on the global economy and the need to be even more integrated with the global economy. At the risk of a slight diversion, allow me to elaborate a bit on this point.

In the US, the unemployment rate has fallen from its peak of 9.8% to 6.3% in May 2014 but productivity was only growing 1%, less than half of what it was in the years prior to the crisis. 2  BIS central bankers’ speeches  There are a number of possibilities as to what is going on: •  In the UK and US, it has been noted that the number of business start-ups has increased significantly in the post-crisis years. One interpretation of this is that, increasing number of people have given up on gaining employment and have decided to become self-employed. If this is true, it would help to explain the decline in unemployment and low productivity growth. Being in business means you are no longer unemployed and new businesses generally do not have very high productivity. •  Another interpretation is that a significant part of the fall in unemployment has come not so much from more people being employed but rather from people leaving the labour force. The labour force participation rate in the US has fallen from 66% prior to the crisis to its current level of 63%. Essentially, the labor force is shrinking. In which case there would be no reason to believe that the decline in unemployment should be preceded by rising productivity. Another factor undermining productivity could be the fact that the number of part-time workers has also increased – in the US, from 3% of the working population to 5% in 2014:Q1.