www.marketwatch.com/story/...chicken-with-markets-and-lose-2013-07-03(
game of chicken = Spiel mit dem Untergang)
Central banks play chicken with markets and loseCommentary: QE will be around for longer than investors realize
LONDON (MarketWatch) — What is the most useful piece of economics for analyzing the end of quantitative easing?
Monetary policy? Demand theory? You could make a case for any of them. But in reality it is game theory.
The central banks are starting a game of chicken with the markets, and it is a game they will end up losing.We have seen the clearest evidence of that in the last two weeks. First, the Federal Reserve starts discussing the gradual winding-up of the program of printing money. The result? The financial markets go crazy. Bond yields start to spike sharply upwards. The gold price tanks and the equity markets start to head down.
So what does the Fed do? It could simply shrug and point out that it is its job is to keep the U.S. economy on track.
But in reality that’s not an option.
The economy is now so dependent on the health of the financial markets the central bank had little choice but to row back from its earlier comments.....
siehe hier:
www.ariva.de/forum/...SA-Baeren-Thread-283343?page=4232#jumppos105822
...By the end of last week some officials were suggesting that the earlier remarks had been interpreted too harshly, and the end of QE was not nearly as close or as certain as people had started to assume.
William Dudley, the president of the New York Federal Reserve, argued the U.S. economy had fallen short of its employment objectives, striking a markedly dovish tone. After that, no one was quite sure whether QE was really on the way out — or whether the central bank was just testing the waters.
It is pattern we will have to get very used to over the next few years. A central bank wants to bring QE to an end. It sends out a few signals to see what the reaction to that might be. Once it sees the carnage that results, it gets nervous and immediately goes back to promising it will print just as much money as it always did.
The most useful tool for analyzing that is the game of chicken. Two drivers race straight toward each other at high speed. One must swerve first, or else they will crash into each other — and both of them will die. But whoever swerves first is the loser and both simply assume that the other guy will be the first to get out of the way because the costs of not doing so are so high. The point of the game is that although it is in the interests of both of them to avoid a crash, neither wants to make the first move....