An Environmental Economist to Take the Head of the IMF


QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; You had once written the Christine Lagarde was only a lawyer and she was really put in the role of the IMF chief by Obama. What do you have to comment on this new Bulgarian selection? DO you know her?

HU

ANSWER: Kristalina Georgieva will probably take over the International Monetary Fund (IMF). At least this Bulgarian is an economist, and she has banking experience whereas Christine LaGarde did not. Georgieva is currently chief executive of the World Bank. I do not know her personally, although we probably shook hands yet nothing more.

Georgieva was considered back in 2016 for the post of the UN Secretary General, but was passed over for the Portuguese António Guterres. For the IMF, Georgieva was the candidate of France and of some Eastern European states. Germany and others were backing the former Dutch Finance Minister Jeroen Dijsselbloem. This time the French won.

If we look at Georgieva background, she does hold a doctorate in economics and research at the London School of Economics and at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). From 1993 to 2010 she worked at the World Bank. She headed the Environmental Department of Washington Bank and, in the meantime, her representative office in Moscow. In 2010 she moved to Brussels becoming a Commissioner as Europe’s top development aid worker.

When Jean-Claude Juncker took over the Presidency of the Commission in 2014, he made Georgieva Vice-President in charge of the budget. Georgieva had been involved in a major restructuring at the World Bank turning it greener. We should keep in mind that Georgieva wrote her doctoral thesis on “Environmental Policy and Economic Growth in the US.”

 

Can the Fed really Control the Economy?


QUESTION: This whirligig talk of whether the Fed cuts rates by 25 or 50 basis points is carnival-level absurdity. Does the Fed have the “pretense of knowledge,” as F.A. Hayek, said, that they can regulate the economy like turning up or down the thermostat? I know you don’t agree with this, Martin, but then, Wall St. trades on daily sentiment not ideology.

TM

ANSWER: I understand the theory, but where it is seriously flawed is the idea that people will borrow simply because you lower rates. More than 10 years of Quantitative Easing, which has failed, answers that question. The way the Fed was originally designed allowed it to stimulate the economy by purchasing corporate paper directly, which placed it in a better management position. Buying only government paper from banks who in turn hoard the money fails. As Larry Summers admitted, they have NEVER been able to predict a recession even once.

 

 

The Fed lowered rates during every recession to no avail just as the ECB has moved to negative rates without success. The central banks are trapped and they are quietly asking for help from the politicians which will never happen.