Is zero the safe real rate?

Abstract

The current economic debate with regards to the secular trend of ever lower, even negative, safe real interest rates is dominated by Keynesian, neoclassical and Austrian explanations. The former (two) argue that the interdependence phenomena of a global savings glut and a secular stagnation cause an oversupply of savings and thus drive down rates. From this position, central bank merely react to market forces. The latter dissent and argue that it was rather the other way around and an asymmetric central bank policy aimed at propping up equity prices led to the secular stagnation now quoted for its justification. In contrast, from the perspective of a critique of ideology, safe real rates where neither driven down by market forces nor central banks but by the weight of being not reasonably safe but riskless. Specifically, I argue that by equating the riskless return with the short-term interest rate, Black and Scholes (1973) state a tautology and imply that both rates shall be zero. In the subsequent inquiry, I show that this argument allows for a neat narration of the economic history of the neoliberal age. Furthermore, I explain why under current conditions ultra low interest rates fail to translate into inflation.