The much
lower nominal interest rate structure prevailing in Australia in the 1990s reflects, in part, the large decline in inflation since the late 1980s.
In this paper, the authors started with the following question: «Do persistently
low nominal interest rates mean that governments can safely borrow more?»
Not exact matches
In many cases, acceleration should
lower their costs, as
nominal interest rates will likely be higher two years from now than they are today, and idle construction crews in Alberta are relatively abundant.
Nominal interest rates, both short and long term, have been much
lower and more stable.
Low inflation and the impossibility of pushing
nominal interest rates significantly below zero meant that there was little scope for
lowering real
interest rates and easing credit conditions by conventional means.
While stocks have a terminal value beyond a 10 - year period, the effects of
interest rates and
nominal growth on those projections largely cancel out because higher
nominal GDP growth over a given 10 - year horizon is correlated with both higher
interest rates and generally
lower market valuations at the end of that period.
As long as this government debt is rolled over continuously at non-repressed
interest rates, which will be
low as
nominal GDP growth drops, China can rebalance the economy without a collapse in growth.
In a
low - inflation environment,
nominal interest rates are also
low, and households are able to service much higher levels of debt than they could in the past.
There are so many reasons why this is wrong (to list just the most obvious, poor countries have much
lower debt thresholds than rich countries, Japanese debt can not possibly be dismissed as not being a problem, and because it is almost impossible to find an economist who understands the relationship between
nominal interest rates and implicit amortization, Japanese government debt has probably only been manageable to date because GDP growth close to zero has permitted
interest rates close to zero) and yet inane comparisons between China's debt burden and Japan's debt burden are made all the time.
There is a growing sense that the world is demand short — that the real
interest rates necessary to equate investment and saving at full employment are very
low and may be often unattainable given the bounds on
nominal interest rate reductions.
Originally, the Liberals adjusted the private sector average forecasts (
lower real and
nominal GDP and increased
interest rates).
Interest rates of intermediaries in Australia remain historically
low, both in real and
nominal terms, and by international standards (Table 7).
Nominal interest rates are at historical
lows and new fiscal measures have shifted the budget into a sizeable deficit.
Although it now seems that the «zero
lower bound» for
nominal interest rates wasn't actually zero, it is not clear that the recent negative rates implemented by a handful of central banks in Europe offer some new vista of policy effectiveness.
The housing recovery is being supported by an historically high level of affordability of houses which, in turn, reflects the
low level of
nominal interest rates.
Even if the Bank of Japan did keep real and
nominal interest rates
low after the country returned to inflation, the old «deflationary equilibrium» would be broken.
If she had added: «Plus, even though we are currently above the Effective
Lower Bound on
nominal interest rates (which is probably below 0 %) we are worried that the margin of safety is getting a bit small, and are pleased that fiscal policy is making that margin of safety a bit bigger than it otherwise would be» that would also be an internally consistent thing for the Bank of Canada to say.
Although the
low interest rate environment over the past decade has compressed bank NIMs, we expect U.S. - led reflation — rising
nominal growth, wages and inflation — to accelerate.
By 2016 QQE had succeeded in
lowering real
interest rates through both
lower nominal rates and increased inflation expectations.
Now, we're sympathetic to the idea that prospective real growth and inflation may be sufficiently
lower in the future to place us into a
low nominal growth world, which would also justify
lower equilibrium
interest rate levels.
Basically, the
lower interest rates are, the more cash or reserves («base money») people are willing to carry around, per dollar of
nominal GDP.
Interest rates, both
nominal and real (i.e. after inflation), are incredibly
low, but other measures of financial conditions are less benign.
You see, many Eastern European borrowers like the idea of borrowing in Swiss francs or Euros, because the
nominal interest rate is currently drastically
lower than what they'd pay on a local currency loan.
Maximum ratios 29/41 30 year fixed rate loan only
Interest rate must be
lower than the existing loan to be refinanced If the final settlement statement shows
nominal cash back to the borrower, that amount must be applied as a principal curtailment.
What concerns me most is that
interest rates — real and
nominal — are so
low everywhere.
Inflation - indexed securities have a tendency to react to changes in real
interest rates, which represent
nominal (stated)
interest rates
lowered by the anticipated effect of inflation.
The yield of a global portfolio is about as
low as its ever been from a cyclically adjusted P / E, credit spread, and
nominal interest rate standpoint, while the global economy is more likely to be in the later (than early) stages of the business cycle.
Low nominal and real
interest rates on bonds mean a wider risk - premium spread on stocks and a cheaper relative valuation.
Also given the
low growth,
low inflation and
low interest rate environment and the somewhat above average valuation numbers, one has to expect
lower nominal returns from equities as compared to the past.
[10][12] «One of the main goals of financial repression is to keep
nominal interest rates
lower than they would be in more competitive markets.
As the Swiss National Bank demonstrated in December 2014 when the institution
lowered its deposit rate to − 0.25 %, the cost of storing cash is the actual
lower bound for
nominal interest rates.
In today's Zero
Lower Bound world, central banks have effectively set
nominal interest rates as very close to nothing.