LyrArc Article Gist
Alan Blinder points out that the political partisanship that has emerged in 2010 has not served America well, as it has deprived the government of the fiscal policy tools, which would be more effective than the Fed's only mildly effective tool of buying $100 billion a month of medium and long term Treasury debt. The country he says is tied up in partisan knots that prevents the use of the fiscal policy tools, and leaves the Fed with the choice of doing something only nudging the rates on government and private securites a bit (by 30 basis points for Treasury debt and 15 basis points for private securities as an example, not enough for more than a mild impact on corporate spending). The fiscal policy tools are he says of a wide variety and pack a lot more power, and he cites three as examples: offering significant lasting tax breaks for job creation, large enough to produce results (larger and long term than the HIRE program), government hiring directly onto public payrolls and government paying local and state governments for hiring at the local levels, the government offering to compensate states for a cut in the sales tax for a year to stimulate consumer spending. Would'nt this raise the deficit though? Blinder points out that the deficit problem lies in the future. Right now there is so much slack in the economy, that public spending will not crowd out private spending. And with Treasury rates at an all time low, Treasury can finance the larger deficit in the short term. A depreciation of the dollar or inflation, he says, is not a worry, because now there is worry about deflation, and the USA needs a lower dollar to push exports up and rebalance its economy. This does not slight the deficit issue and the culture of poor budgeting among both parties, as Reagan Budget Director David Stockman pointed out in an op-ed piece, but accomodates the real dangers and opportunities of difficult policy choices. This is why he laments the advertising campaign and public relations campaign against the 2009 stimulus bill, and the expected paralysis of fiscal policy from the extremely partisan 2010 midterm elections, and public opinion consumed by fear of deficits. Leaving the Fed with the unenviable choice of using only mildly effective tools. Other experts and columnists mention the risks associated with the Fed's large scale purchase of securities, if this leads to another asset bubble and subsequent collapse, and another bailout needed for financial institutions. Peter Eavis in one column in the WSJ points to the lack of effectiveness of the first round of quantitative easing of $1.7 trillion. And Kelly Evans, in the WSJ, points to the risks of "bad" inflation, if another round of quantitative easing by the Fed leads to increases in the price of commodities such as oil and food (such inflation falling heaviest on lower income households).The US Financial Regulatory Reform bill has received low grades, and recent standards for reserve capital in worldwide banking reforms are stretched out over a long period, leaving fragility in the economic system, if something were to go wrong....

LyrArc Article Gist
David Blanchford of Dartmouth College and Adam Posen of the Peterson Institute of International Economics argue in a recent paper that the true indicator of unemployment in this economy -with a low participation rate and millions dropping out of the labor market unable to find work- is the wage growth. This is particularly true with the U.S. Labor Department report of 288,000 new jobs in 2014 and a 6.3% unemployment rate, yet wages flat for March and April 2014, and no improvement in the participation rate. Blanchford says one should look at the wage growth and consider the rest to be noise. The Yellen Fed is looking closely at the participation rate.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. Federal Reserve chairman Bernanke, says the Fed will keep interest rates low till unemployment reaches 6.5%, as long as inflation remains at about 2%. If unemployment reaches 6.5%, and this is because more people are dropping out of the labor market, he will take this into account. If unemployment stays high the Fed indicated in its statement that it would tolerate a higher inflation of 2.5%, as long as the longer term outlook was for inflation to be at 2%. Bernanke said this doesn't mean monetary policy is on autopilot, because the Fed will watch conditions carefully and will leave room for flexibility- keeping an eye out for new asset bubbles that could develop, and monitoring labor market conditions and inflationary pressures and inflation expectations. If inflation falls well below 2%, or unemployment rate falls mainly because of people dropping out of the labor market, the Fed may continue to keep interest rates low. This policy was announced as U.S. fiscal cliff deficit negotiations continued in Dec. 2012 with one scenario being considered by both political parties being going over the Jan. 1 deadline before coming to an agreement. Bernanke pointed to this, saying "this is a major risk factor right now." The Fed's activist policy in economic policy has given financial markets and business a measure of stability not provided by government and Congress. Fed policy is to buy $40 billion of mortgage securities, and $45 billion of long term Treasury securities for each month in 2013. It will fund the purchases by adding reserves to the banking system, which is to say that it will print money to buy more bonds. This is a major decision by the Fed in that the Fed has shied away from unemployment targets in the past. Bernanke described this action as a new"automatic stabilizer" in the U.S. financial system- if unemployment rises investors know this pushes the Fed's interest rate increases further down the road and would drive interest rates down, if unemployment drops sooner than expected, investors anticipating Fed's rate increases would drive long term interest rates up, to keep stable growth....

LyrArc Article Gist
Professors Cole and Ohanian of the University of Pennsylvania and UCLA, provide a new interpretation of FDR's economic policies during the period 1932-1934 and the period 1937-1941, based on their research. This suggests conclusions different from that of Obama advisor, Christina Romer, and Fed chairman, Bernanke about that period. Changes in economic policies under the Roosevelt administration that helped bring wages in line with productivity, reduced strikes, and gradual elimination of the undistributed profits tax, improved incentives for business investment during 1938-1939. Cole and Ohanian, say that by 1941, before the U.S. entered the war, close to half of the increase in nonmilitary hours worked in the U.S. between 1939 and the peak of the war, had already been achieved. And this was primarily the result of the changes in FDR's policies in 1938. They say a similiar opportunity is presented by the proposals of the Bowles-Simpson commission on deficit reduction, by lowering the corporate income tax through simplification of the tax code and reducing or eliminating most tax expenditures. Improving the incentives for business to hire and invest through this and other steps is likely to do more for the economy than the steps tried so far since 2009....

LyrArc Article Gist
Declining manufacturing wages in the U.S. and the return of manufacturing jobs. Indiana's experience with new manufacturing plants.