n******n
发帖数: 12088 | 1 【 以下文字转载自 Stock 讨论区 】
发信人: newgumin (新股民), 信区: Stock
标 题: 熟悉货币政策的青蛙来说说
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Feb 18 18:30:22 2010, 美东)
fund rate为何比discount rate重要很多？这两个rate的含义我知道。 |
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 2 Because discount rate is almost always higher than fund rate?
【在 n******n 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 Stock 讨论区 】
: 发信人: newgumin (新股民), 信区: Stock
: 标 题: 熟悉货币政策的青蛙来说说
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Feb 18 18:30:22 2010, 美东)
: fund rate为何比discount rate重要很多？这两个rate的含义我知道。
|
n******n
发帖数: 12088 | 3 ft.
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: Because discount rate is almost always higher than fund rate?
|
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 4 Why ft? If you could borrow at 0.25%, why would you care some
other "backup" rate jumps to 0.75%?
【在 n******n 的大作中提到】
: ft.
|
n******n
发帖数: 12088 | 5 how u know u could? what if ur counter-party not make the loan to u?
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: Why ft? If you could borrow at 0.25%, why would you care some
: other "backup" rate jumps to 0.75%?
|
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 6 Then I have no choice but borrow at 0.75%. That's exactly why
I call it a "backup".
As long as 0.75% is higher than 0.25%, it can only be a backup.
【在 n******n 的大作中提到】
: how u know u could? what if ur counter-party not make the loan to u?
|
n******n
发帖数: 12088 | 7 if u have 200k and u have reward checking 4.0%, hsbc 1.2%, will u consider
reward checking the major and hsbc the backup?
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: Then I have no choice but borrow at 0.75%. That's exactly why
: I call it a "backup".
: As long as 0.75% is higher than 0.25%, it can only be a backup.
|
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 8 If that's the situation currently at Fed, the last thing
it would dare to do is to raise to 0.75%.
Fed sees that now most "reward checking" has a limit of 1 million,
and then confidently dropped "hsbc's 1.2%" to 0.6%.
【在 n******n 的大作中提到】
: if u have 200k and u have reward checking 4.0%, hsbc 1.2%, will u consider
: reward checking the major and hsbc the backup?
|
n******n
发帖数: 12088 | 9 Do u have specific data showing inter-bank overnight loan is the major
funding source?
BTW, I assume bank would make loans to each other now and then. So the
higher rate effect is canceled with each other, isn't it? If so, why this
rate matters anyway?
Say, C borrow from JPM 10M today, BAC borrow from C tomorrow, and JPM brrow
from BAC later. Then the total cost for each is zero, as what they gain is
what they lose.
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: Why ft? If you could borrow at 0.25%, why would you care some
: other "backup" rate jumps to 0.75%?
|
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 10 I don't have the data since I am very green to money market.
But considering every bank is forced to put 10% or so down
to Fed, it must have a huge pool ah. If Fed's own pocket is
deeper than that, it must own 10000 cash printers which work
24x7. Again all these could be completely wrong as my
understanding is just at wiki level.
The 2nd question, no, the typical situation should be like:
C borrows from JPM 10M today.
BAC borrows from JPM 10M tomorrow.
and C borrows from JPM another 10m later.
S
【在 n******n 的大作中提到】
: Do u have specific data showing inter-bank overnight loan is the major
: funding source?
: BTW, I assume bank would make loans to each other now and then. So the
: higher rate effect is canceled with each other, isn't it? If so, why this
: rate matters anyway?
: Say, C borrow from JPM 10M today, BAC borrow from C tomorrow, and JPM brrow
: from BAC later. Then the total cost for each is zero, as what they gain is
: what they lose.
|
|
|
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 11 I think my answer to the 2nd question is complete crap.
All banks would want that rate to be as low as possible.
In emergencies you want to be able to borrow at cheap rate.
JPM doesn't rely on that mere 0.25% to earn money -- it can
easily earn 5% from a mortgage. Even its CD is higher than
that rate. It was just forced by law to put 10% money in Fed.
JPM is more like "what the hell, it's just 10%, I think I'll
let it be. Besides, maybe one day conservative guy like me
may also be short of money
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: I don't have the data since I am very green to money market.
: But considering every bank is forced to put 10% or so down
: to Fed, it must have a huge pool ah. If Fed's own pocket is
: deeper than that, it must own 10000 cash printers which work
: 24x7. Again all these could be completely wrong as my
: understanding is just at wiki level.
: The 2nd question, no, the typical situation should be like:
: C borrows from JPM 10M today.
: BAC borrows from JPM 10M tomorrow.
: and C borrows from JPM another 10m later.
|
n******n
发帖数: 12088 | 12 really. how do u know?
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: I don't have the data since I am very green to money market.
: But considering every bank is forced to put 10% or so down
: to Fed, it must have a huge pool ah. If Fed's own pocket is
: deeper than that, it must own 10000 cash printers which work
: 24x7. Again all these could be completely wrong as my
: understanding is just at wiki level.
: The 2nd question, no, the typical situation should be like:
: C borrows from JPM 10M today.
: BAC borrows from JPM 10M tomorrow.
: and C borrows from JPM another 10m later.
|
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 13 Which part?
【在 n******n 的大作中提到】
: really. how do u know?
|
n******n
发帖数: 12088 | 14 i can't agree. bank is both lender and borrower in term of inter-bank loan.
in total the meat is still in the big pot. the same logic can be applied on
higher rate preference.
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: I think my answer to the 2nd question is complete crap.
: All banks would want that rate to be as low as possible.
: In emergencies you want to be able to borrow at cheap rate.
: JPM doesn't rely on that mere 0.25% to earn money -- it can
: easily earn 5% from a mortgage. Even its CD is higher than
: that rate. It was just forced by law to put 10% money in Fed.
: JPM is more like "what the hell, it's just 10%, I think I'll
: let it be. Besides, maybe one day conservative guy like me
: may also be short of money
|
n******n
发帖数: 12088 | 15 how do u know there exists net borrowers and net lenders, instead of stand-
neutral.
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: Which part?
|
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 16 The higher rate will inevitable make everybody more conservative.
In case of an emergency, they will be punished. It's like if a
speeding ticket is $2500, most people will drive at 20mph on a
30 limit.
.
on
【在 n******n 的大作中提到】
: i can't agree. bank is both lender and borrower in term of inter-bank loan.
: in total the meat is still in the big pot. the same logic can be applied on
: higher rate preference.
|
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 17 I don't ah. Don't you see I used fictitious tone all along? @_@
It's just pure watering based on my poor knowledge and the rest
is just imagination.
【在 n******n 的大作中提到】
: how do u know there exists net borrowers and net lenders, instead of stand-
: neutral.
|
n******n
发帖数: 12088 | 18 why not like if gas price is $1, everyone drives truck?
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: The higher rate will inevitable make everybody more conservative.
: In case of an emergency, they will be punished. It's like if a
: speeding ticket is $2500, most people will drive at 20mph on a
: 30 limit.
:
: .
: on
|
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 19 You surely can say that, but it lacks "emergency" concept?
【在 n******n 的大作中提到】
: why not like if gas price is $1, everyone drives truck?
|
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 20 One thing I am not sure is who earns that 0.25%? The banks or
the Fed? @_@
Maybe the whole thing is not transparent to the banks? The banks
are just required to put 10% into the pot (consider it gone), and
then Fed manages it.
.
on
【在 n******n 的大作中提到】
: i can't agree. bank is both lender and borrower in term of inter-bank loan.
: in total the meat is still in the big pot. the same logic can be applied on
: higher rate preference.
|
|
|
n******n
发帖数: 12088 | 21 higher rate -> hard to borrow money. so be conservative, u assume there's
borrower role preference.
why not higher rate -> easy to make money. so be aggressive?
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: You surely can say that, but it lacks "emergency" concept?
|
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 22 First please see my comments in the previous post regarding who
earns that 0.25%.
2nd, even if the banks earn that 0.25%, I don't think they would
consider that as a significant source of income. Even if it's 0.5%,
so what? Does that look attractive to you if you are a rich man?
hehe.
【在 n******n 的大作中提到】
: higher rate -> hard to borrow money. so be conservative, u assume there's
: borrower role preference.
: why not higher rate -> easy to make money. so be aggressive?
|
n******n
发帖数: 12088 | 23 so u saying 0.25% too low and they r unwilling to lend?
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: First please see my comments in the previous post regarding who
: earns that 0.25%.
: 2nd, even if the banks earn that 0.25%, I don't think they would
: consider that as a significant source of income. Even if it's 0.5%,
: so what? Does that look attractive to you if you are a rich man?
: hehe.
|
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 24 It's not up to me. By law I have to lend at 0.25%.
fortunately only 10% of my money is obliged to that law.
【在 n******n 的大作中提到】
: so u saying 0.25% too low and they r unwilling to lend?
|
m******t
发帖数: 2416 | 25
Heh, not for or against your main point, but here in Virginia if you
get caught speeding for the second time, there _will_ be a $2k ticket.
People still do 70 all the time.
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: The higher rate will inevitable make everybody more conservative.
: In case of an emergency, they will be punished. It's like if a
: speeding ticket is $2500, most people will drive at 20mph on a
: 30 limit.
:
: .
: on
|
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 26 What's the speed limit?
【在 m******t 的大作中提到】
:
: Heh, not for or against your main point, but here in Virginia if you
: get caught speeding for the second time, there _will_ be a $2k ticket.
: People still do 70 all the time.
|
m******t
发帖数: 2416 | 27 55-65 on the highways around town. Admittedly most people doing 70-75 don't
get caught every time as long as they don't drive recklessly, but that's not
the point.
【在 K****D 的大作中提到】
: What's the speed limit?
|
K****D
发帖数: 30533 | 28 hehe, here people drive 55mph on 60mph limit, and ticket is
not that expensive. Too crowded to drive any faster...
t
not
【在 m******t 的大作中提到】
: 55-65 on the highways around town. Admittedly most people doing 70-75 don't
: get caught every time as long as they don't drive recklessly, but that's not
: the point.
|
