The middle class keeps contracting. More and more Americans are on food stamps and other government assistance. People are dropping out of the work force because they have given up.
For three years, Madame Yellen has promoted and imposed a divisive, inequality generating monetary policy - an extension of the terrible Bernanke era - which savages the prudent and thrifty to fatten speculators in real estate and equities. That policy was a prime factor in the rise of Trump, in his own real estate dealings which fed on zero interest rates, and in his political ambition which fed on working class resentments that assets inflation sharpened.
Her policy to stick with money printing aka Quantitative Easing and suppression of interest rates and voting for these policies on the FOMC under Bernanke, year after year, even when they had outlived value. The cumulative outcome is an economy riddled with capital distortion and an amoral-unethical class grown rich on assets inflation.
Good riddance of Janet Yellen, the apostle of loose money-lax credit, who supported pro wealthy, anti everyone else economics.
Considering an Ayn Rand fanatic held the post from 1987 to 2006, then pro-1% Bernanke and Yellen, with predictably appalling consequences, I fail to see why it isn't the turn of a Marxist-Leninist for at least a few years, to balance things up a little.
Unfortunately we get another Goldman-Sachs shill.
Luckily, Bernie Madoff is in jail, or Trump might have picked him.
3
Stop it with the he said she said when it comes to Trump. His economic policies are not working. He has no economic policy. He has not passed one bill related to economic policy.
1
Fiscal policy was and still is the problem, not monetary policy. We were lucky to have Dr. Yellen when we did ... and would have preferred to have her reappointed.
2
Exactly.
We're told that Ms. Yellen is "polarizing," a charge never made, or repeated, against any of her male predecessors.
And the "slow growth of the economy" is, even partly, Ms. Yellen's responsibility? Please: the Federal Reserve can do nothing about the economic stagnation that prevails. Only strong fiscal stimuli could begin to deal with that.
1
I don't get why you used this as the headline: "As Fed Chief, Yellen Was Polarizing. The Numbers Show Why."
Yellen? Polarizing? Did you ever say that about Alan Greenspan?
4
How much easier this job would be were it not for politics. I suspect four smart people can solve all our problems in 20 minutes but for politics.
Why don't we, the people, take charge of elections instead of leaving them to the best people money can buy?
"As Fed Chief, Yellen Was Polarizing. The Numbers Show Why."
Oh, so Ben Bernanke or Alan Greenspan was never "polarizing".
Hm-m, seems NYTimes, Casselman, Granville are evincing some implicit misogyny -- a factor Hillary has flushed out from studies of the cultural phenomenon: e.g.,
"Many academics have written about it. It’s a pretty simple but unfortunate phenomenon. With men, success and ambition are correlated with likability, so the more successful a man is, the more likable he becomes! With a woman, guess what? It’s the exact opposite. So the more successful and therefore ambitious a woman is, the less likable she becomes. That’s the inverse correlation that lies at the heart of a lot of the attacks and the misogyny."
4
The real reason she wasn't reappointed: She didn't look the part. Yellen looks like your grandmother and not Fed Chairperson. In the Trumpian world, you have to look the part. All these supposed reasons are a bunch of baloney. All of these issues were inherited, and other than fact that GOPers want to go back to a world where their investment banking masters can play "heads we get millions, tails the taxpayer pays", there is nothing much else she could have done. GOP Congress is to blame for a lack of a infrastructure package to get people back to work.
2
Her tenure was a success. Her politics, neutral. I felt some comfort with her in charge. I don't think I will be able to say that for her successor. Once again, this was just a matter of eliminating one more Obama action, perpetrated by a racist and a misogynist.
4
Janet Yellen is a qualified economist to head the Federal Reserve.
Mr. Trump's hand picked replacement is not qualified to lead the Federal Reserve and is Mr. Trump's and Robert Mercer's lapdog.
3
"With notably rare exceptions... Fed chairs are not polarizing."
The position is polarizing. Yellen did a good job. And she was punished for being nominated by Obama. And for being a woman.
I think we should realize after Alan Greenspan's reign that lack of regulation of the banking industry is incredibly harmful to the economy - especially to those who will not receive massive bailouts from the gov't. Bankers themselves told Congress after the crash that "self-regulation" did not work. Moving away from Yellen's desire to regulate the banks (that is, after all, the job of the Fed), will lead to dangerous gambling once again.
24
@AnneCW
I strongly concur.
The key distinction between Ms. Yellen and Mr. Powell is that Mr. Powell can be expected to fiddle with something he knows well, regulations.
The predilection of the Republican fantasy to reduce or eviscerate finance and banking regulations assures us that chaos is just around the corner. The unintended consequences of deregulation are rarely, if ever, considered by ideologues.
I admit one of my tech startups benefitted from a small regulatory loophole to Reg E.
But the overall economy suffered profoundly from unconscionable exploitation of loose Reg Z consumer credit rules that we resolutely avoided. As one of our potential investors said, "What's wrong with selling heroin if they make it legal?" We may be entrepreneurs but we are not amoral.
We don't know specifically what Mr. Powell will do, but I'm not sanguine the next Not-So-Great Recession won't hit before 2020 due to his actions.
Ms. Yellen has done a competent job. Having said that, she should thank her lucky stars she is off the Trump Titanic.
6
Banks being tight with loans, millions unemployed, wages held low by Republicans who refuse to raise the minimum wage and you don't know why the GDP didn't grow faster? Less than 15% of the GDP is exported. If the buying power of American workers drops then production will drop. Seems obvious to me.
4
Sadly, the only issue she has from a Republican standpoint is the one she cannot change: her gender.
11
CV Danes, you are making a very difficult to defend statement when you assert that the GOP's only issue with her is that she is a woman. Clearly this has something to do with her unpopularity, but there are many other candidates. For example, the article goes into depth on her support for regulation against the abuses that triggered the 2007 crash. Another likely candidate is that her policies were much more likely to lower unemployment compared to the policies of her adversaries. Unemployment rates are key to whether workers get a larger or smaller piece of the overall economic pie. Unemployment, at 4.1% is now at the level where real wages are beginning to creep up, however slowly, as companies compete for the labor supply. Frankly, I think that "hyperinflation" has been redefined by the GOP to mean that the los unemployment rate is threatening to disturb the distribution of profits to the wealthy.
1
lol, she's not being booted because there is too much underemployment and stagnation of wages. She's recklessly endangered the bond portfolio's of the 0.1 percent who fear the bonds they live off of may precipitously decline in value. A collapse in the bond market could cost a Melton or a Rockefeller tens of millions. And what will the be left with then, just their homes and their stocks!
2
I think the title of this article is bizarre at best. The US is highly polarized because of the Republican Party and solely because of the GOP since Gingrich. The Fed vote was evidence of that polarization much like everything the GOP continues to do. The fact Yellen was a woman did not help as Trump is clearly a misogynist, but she also represented something Obama touched. Trump's and the GOP's bigotry is one of the two defining characteristics of the party along with acting solely for the benefit of the people who own them, the wealthy.
This is nothing more than a continuation of the same tearing down of the US that Comrade Trump has myopic minions McConnell & Ryan have made their job.
7
Ms. Yellen was assigned to the job by Obama. This is why she is gone.
Comey was also assigned by Obama. He would have been fired with or without Russia investigation.
The new chairman seems to be highly qualified, but generally speaking, people do not get jobs at Trump's cabinet based on their qualifications. Just look at the head of environmental agency, housing secretary, secretary of energy, secretary of education. The head of justice department committed surgery coupe of times. One of Trump's advisors is his son in law, an entitled, spoiled guy who is supposed to bring peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Whatever nightmares America had are coming true.
3
Part the reason Ms. Yellen wasn't reappointed is gender. With the exception of Betsy DeVos in education, look at this cabinet. After all, teachers and education imply women, eh Donald?
2
Mrs. Yellen's performance is laid bare by the economic facts of the period in which she served. In short, her performance was outstanding. She took the US economy from economic disaster (the Great Recession) to robust growth and full employment. The fact that she enforced the regulations passed by congress to restrain the perpetrators of the Great Recession should be hailed not criticized. To criticize her for not bringing employment to those who industries had fled the US or whose work skills became irrelevant is like blaming the weatherman for the hurricane.
7
It's always best to get a woman to do a man's job.
The FED can only do so much regarding the economy, employment, growth, inflation if congress and the president don't do their job on the fiscal side. Many on both sides don't get this. E.g., the FED can influence inflation only if it is due to the economy overheating (actual or potential), when demand for labor and inputs or for consumer goods has grown and driven prices up in general, but if increased prices are for a particular sector due to a shock, such as a drought or floods or other natural shock creating shortages and driving up farm prices, the FED can do nothing about this. Lawmakers need to get their heads out of the sand (or elsewhere), forget the bumper sticker slogans and ideology, and pass well-thought out good policy, something we haven't seen much of recently; I don't expect that to happen with this president or congress.
As for not renominating Yellen for a second term, my first reaction is that it's just spite - anything with the 'taint' of Obama must go! The most obvious evidence of this has been the opposition to the ACA, essentially a moderate healthcare reform package, if not conservative, that had bipartisan support as the Wyden bill as recently as 2008 and early 2009. That the rage has never been about the difference between the ACA and the Wyden bills (supported by Grassley, Graham, Corker and other republicans) but about the common elements speaks volumes, but the GOP choir won't listen or just doesn't care.
4
The phrase "Monday morning quarterback" springs to mind. Evaluating the Fed's performance is generally a difficult thing to do. It is limited in its instruments and in its effectiveness (depending upon where the economy is in the economic cycle). This is not an evaluation however, it is a "she said, he said" list. Half the list thinks she went too far, half the list feels that she didn't go far enough. A more valid point would be did she make any major errors; Like Greenspan's refusal to intervene during the housing bubble because of his ideological commitment to "free markets". The answer would seem to be that by the most important metric, how is the macro economy, she was a safe pair of hands. Her dismissal with but small thanks should be seen as not an evaluation of her tenure but a show of petulance by a President who doesn't understand elementary logic let alone financial economics
6
If you look at US and world GDP growth for the past 50-60 years, there is a slow and definite trend toward lower growth. This makes sense, as the world gets more mature, fuller, and more complex, with resources being used up, growth should slow down. It is the natural order of things, we cannot grow forever. Economists, though, ignore this 50 year trend and believe and expect economies can grow at high 3-5 % rates, and push stimulus policies that wind up merely pushing on a string while racking up loads of debt. I would love to see the Fed - and politicians- accept the natural course of events and lead us toward figuring out how to have a successful society while relying on very little if any growth.
8
Dr. Yellen's accomplishment is making sure the ultra-rich bankers had no competition. Her legacy? Inflation is low, only if you ignore the working class reality that everything is more expensive. Unemployment is low ... so many people quit looking. But most importantly, the gap between the rich and the poor has grown absolutely unimaginably. That is her true legacy.
7
I'm not convinced that the deregulation touted by republicans and wished for by trump in naming Jerome Powell will be the answer. Instead, I'm very concerned that removing stress tests for big financial institutions will make it likely we'll experience the catastrophe we did in 2008.
4
Quantitative easing did nothing it was supposed to, and now dismantling it is a major job for the Fed. Yellen was not the person for that job.
6
It kept the country and the world's economy from falling into a deflationary spiral. That's it did at the very least, and that's no mean thing.
9
Ok NYT... Beyond Mr. Trump being president, his views on the economy do not matter. He does not have the skill set, the temperament, nor the intelligence to understand what the economy is doing and where it is going.
Other than that its a pretty good article. Though more reliance on economic papers would be appreciated. A recent conference on Rethinking Economic Policy was held in early October and included papers by both Bernanke and Summers. The conference was held by the Peterson Institute for International Economics and can be found here; https://piie.com/events/rethinking-macroeconomic-policy.
3
Commenters don’t seem to be aware that Yellen’s replacement, Powell, was appointed to the FRB by Obama. So, scratch that. Here is why she’s on way out:
1. Speaking-out publicly against regulation, well aware that it would rankle her new boss, who, among many things, responsible for renewing her appointment
2. Not deferring to the new President/consulting him before raising rates. Yes, at least in theory, the FR is independent, but in practice not, especially when a significant chunk of the board is vacant. Essentially, Yellen raised rates like a know-all dictator, no consulting, no deferring, just thumbing nose at the CIC. Independence does not mean insubordination. Janet, you’re fired
3. Did not deliver on forecasted growth, demonstrating lack of growth chops, a key Trump objective
The good news is that once remaining appointments are completed, the FRB will soon fully sync-up with Trump’s vision of growth. The bad news for Trump is that now he no choice but to deliver. No blaming leftist judges in Hawaii or DC.
By the looks of it, Trump’s off to a good start. We will see.
3
So, what Trump described as a stock market bubble a year ago, is now a stock market based on solid fundamentals. That doesn't make much sense. Nreither does his claiming on the one had that the Fed's not raising interest rates was only done to aid Obama while claiming on the other that a raising interest rates would collapse the economy doesn't make much sense either. It's hard to imagine how this is a good start.
2
I do not have an economic's degree but have been watching this issue for many, many yrs.
The bottom line here imo is that the job requires somebody with a half a brain re economics who can guide the economy with a few weapons so it does not go too slow or too fast.
In the modern economy post-1945, problems are caused by lawmakers, not The Fed. Liberals tend to ruin the economy by going too far left and ditto for Republicans going too far right.
Politics will always enter the fray. If Jesus Christ was nominated and he came out as a Democrat the Republicans would oppose him.
5
Has this look at the Fed Chair appointment by the President reminded anyone else of the New York City Mayors and their appointments of Police Commissioners? How and why did Mayors Dinkins, Guiliani, Bloomberg, and now De Blasio fill this important position and why? They either kept their predecessor's choice of Commissioner, picked someone new to the job, or rehired a previous Commissioner. Maybe this is a similar hiring situations with not dissimilar motives (politics, sexism, making a hire that one is basing entirely on the opinions of experts in that field.)
2
Yellen has been a steady hand at the tiller; but a woman not shaped like a Barbie Doll replaced by a grey-haired white male. 'nuf said.
9
Yellen is smart, competent, efficient, independent and does not get bullied. Above all she is women. Five cardinal sins for Trump. Out she goes.
19
Disaster. Rates are still far too low. Savings rates have gone negative outside of 401k's. Inflation is rampant and improperly measured.
3
Like Bernanke, Yellen is a dinosaur, a relic from a bygone era.
The clueless bureaucrats at the Fed still haven't figured out that 2008 was a structural, not a cyclical, problem, and was in fact an economic discontinuity of historic proportions. That's why there are so many "economic mysteries" all of a sudden.
They simply don't understand how the economy works in the 21st century, as the Platform Economy and the Age of Automation accelerate, the nature of globalization and supply chains are being transformed by technology, and the economic impact of artificial intelligence ecosystems begins to shred one outdated economic theory after another.
When the stock bubble bursts--again--we will either have to build a real economy, or face massive social upheaval. Probably both, actually.
It's time to stop this Centrally Planned Economy nonsense, with the Masters of the Universe on Wall Street cowering in a fetal position as they parse the Fed statements issued from bureaucrats in Washington DC to see what adjectives are used so they can determine whether or not the party will continue.
All the praise for Yellen will soon be added to the list of economic blunders in the "Clueless Economists Strike Again" file, where they will join Bernanke, who said in 2007 that any damage by a housing bubble bursting--not that there was a housing bubble, but you know just in case, like hypothetically--would be "contained".
We really need to stop this madness, and the Downton Abbey poses.
6
But what do you suggest as solutions to the "cluelessness"? And which economy should they be applied to? Or are we supposed to rely on Alphabet, Amazon, Facebook and rest of New Gilded Age oligarchs to save us?
3
Anyone who tells you inflation is under control has not spent money for a long time. Maybe in New York, where overcharging is the order of the day, but not elsewhere. Take a grocery ticket from 4 years ago and buy the same items today and compare the increase to the "official" inflation rate. Every store is testing demand destruction constantly in an effort to raise prices.
9
Well, the two metrics in this article measuring her success are considered by some to be meaningless. There are millions of Americans who no longer look to be employed, and most new jobs offered to the unemployed pay very little, have fewer hours, and less benefits. The metric used by the BLS and pushed by the media is obsolete. The COLA measurement is based on faulty thinking by a small nation in the Pacific. Why it's used by the FED leaves the informed guessing.
The FED low interest rate policy is an academic theory allowed to be used in the real economy. It benefited only wealthy Americans having access to money to invest. If the FED's mandate to help the economy that effects all Americans, not a select group, then, of course, it failed.
Much of what has happened in the economy since the conservative Republican created 2008 financial crisis would likely have improved on it's own without the FED's helping the wealthy and the corporate sector.
We've spent ten years waiting for things to change. Let's hope.
3
Often I read what caused recessions was the excess business wants to pull out of the economy, and normally it is greed in the markets that ultimately result in bubbles. Of course the Fed must be hawkish when it comes to fed regulations, who else is going to curb Wall Streets excesses. Financial institutions are the centers of capitalism, they want to money, tons of it. If there is any failures on Yellen's part it would be she did not place more emphasis on fed regulations, and that applies again to the our GOP politicians that want less stop signs to their desire for more profits. It resembles the main emphasis of the upcoming tax changes: more greed and more money to the wealthy.
4
Janet Yellen, in my estimation, knew precisely the limits of the Fed; she hoped for fiscal policy (Treasury) to work to raise employment and wage levels. In the transcripts during the Bernanke era, she repeated these points against those indecent FOMC members who care zero for the populations of the USA and many other countries. She has long been correct in arguing that private banks need those controls that went out of action for 40 years and produced the GFC, and many previous financial meltdowns. I agree Bernanke prevented a "Great Depression" but the strategy ultimately assumed banks would deposit loans for productive enterprises to maintain and create more jobs. Milton Friedman was a "quantity" theorist, which suggests only states expand the "money supply". But banks still have endless choices about the direction of their own expansion in money creating, and the bulk is not towards economic activity to this day.
2
I think the writers of this article failed to understand that Yellen helped prevent the Great Recession from becoming the Great Depression. The great economist, Milton Friedman noted that a shrinking of the money supply after a recession triggered the Great Depression. If Yellen listened to her critics and raised the interest rates faster, the money supply would have shrunk and we would be in a depression. Thank goodness, Yellen stayed the course, and we now have an expanding economy because of her.
24
Yellen wasn't polarizing, her Republican antagonists in Congress and the media were the polarizing ones. Why do you get suckered into this mindset?
43
The very idea that Yellen was polarizing is absurd. Why would the Times use such a silly notion? Yellen did absolutely fine.
38
This was not broken, so of course Mr. Trump tries to fix it.
Dan Kravitz
22
I wonder what makes Ben and Kevin try to attribute Donald's decision to not reappoint the fed chief to anything but the real causes: a) she was appointed by a black man, and b) when one discusses her, one uses female pronouns.
28
I wonder what the authors believe Mrs. Yellen should have done, indeed could have done in her capacity and with the implements available to any fed chair to paint a "rosier" picture. This article is heavy on opinion and light on analysis.
20
Yeah, well, if Obama did not replace Bernanke, maybe Yellen would have been given two terms. Obama and democrats at fault as well, over replacing Bernanke.
What is this, Rapid Fed Chairman Movement?
After Obama replaced Bernanke, he lost a lot of respect from me.
Same goes for Trump. Almost all respect is gone for Trump, whatever he had left after his tax plan schemes.
What can you say? Guy is bankrupt and needs to destroy America by trillions, to earn a few billions to himself. But that shall not be so.
4
My "gut" tells me that Janet was canned for (1) being an Obama appointee, and (2) for not looking and acting like a Trump female stereotype. Trump knew he could not have "his way" with her as Fed chair nor would she admire and adore him.
23
Ms. Yellen has done a great job and is being replaced by Trump because she was appointed by Obama. This petty, spiteful cleansing of everything Obama by President Trump is made especially vulgar given that Trump is taking credit for an economy he maligned last year as a candidate. Last year he claimed the unemployment rate was at least 21%. In April of this year, when the first quarter numbers arrived at 4.7% unemployment, Trump took credit, a mere 2 months and 10 days into his Presidency. Ms. Yellen deserves partial credit for the greatly improved economy under Barrack Obama by protecting Dodd-Frank and continuing the quantitative easing started by her predecessor Ben Bernanke (a Republican appointment). Thanks for your great service, Ms. Yellen.
10
"i... a complaint that may have contributed directly to Mr. Trump’s decision not to reappoint her.'"
Trump needed only one reason to fire Janet Yellen: President Obama appointed her. It's part of his consistent pattern of trying to obliterate all signs of Obama, both out of his deep seated bullying inferiority and to satisfy his fact-free voter base.
20
Too bad Obama appointed her. She had no chance of Trump renewing the appointment because that would have meant that Obama had done something right.
10
Many experts regard Janet Yellen as the most qualified person to run the Federal Reserve. But because Trump is determined to erase every trace of President Obama, she was destined to be replaced.
10
The reason that Janet Yellen was controversial from the beginning is the same reason that she was not picked for a second term. She was: 1) a woman; 2) appointed by Obama. The attempt in this article to suggest that objective economic indicators drove Trump's decision is laughable. Trump doesn't even know what the Fed does. If you asked him what Humphrey-Hawkins was, he'd answer that he was a movie director who directed "Rio Bravo". He is ignorance personified. Any attempt to explain his decision based on anything other than naked bigotry and appeals to his most vile followers is pointless.
18
Ms. Yellen wasn't reappointed because of two things - she's a smart, capable woman and she is covered with Obama taint. trump wouldn't be able to tolerate either one.
7
"You only find out who's swimming naked when the tide goes out." Yellen's true legacy will remain unknown until the next recession reveals the economic distortions associated with prolonged low interest rates and the Fed's balance sheet expansion. Maybe she (and we!) will be lucky and it will turn that a $4 trillion lunch was actually free.
Or maybe we'll discover that Janet Yellen was swimming naked.
3
It's a shame that Trump did not renew Janet Yellen. She is the most qualified for the job, with a proven track record of effecting a recovery from the crash of 2008. His obsession with undoing all of Obama's work is shameful.
8
People always over think and over intellectualize things. Why did trump not reappoint Ms. Yellen? Hint: Ms. Yellen was appointed by President Obama. Enough said.
Ms. Yellen did a good job and in my opinion (which is worth zero) should have been reappointed. The amazing thing is that trump appointed someone who seems fairly competent and probably will more or less continue the present policies.
Republicans always want to gin up the economy, cut taxes on the rich, abolish all regulations, and run up the deficit. So expect another recession/depression in three to four years. Bush Jr. created a financial mess for President Obama to clean up; trump and the republicans will create a mess for the next democratic president to clean up.
6
One of the most important graphs that could have been shown in the article was briefly mentioned, but not actually shown: a graph of the prime age employment/population ratio. That shows the full extent of the failure of the economy to provide enough work for potential workers, even if they aren't currently searching for a job (e.g., because they've given up, or found a way to get disability payments, or decided it's good enough if only their spouse works). This would show a better picture of the lost potential in our economy.
4
Should this article be labeled an opinion piece? It seems exceedingly odd to blame the Fed chief for the slow growth of the economy.
During an interval when the Congress was gridlocked and opposed to nearly any form of economic stimulus the Fed acted by reducing interest rates and increasing the money supply...literally the only tools at its disposal. It then resisted calls to throw on the brakes prematurely and reduce the money supply and increase interest rates...although those calls seem (to me) to be muted since President Obama left office.
Hopefully her successor will show similar grit.
39
I'm quite sure her successor was NOT selected for his "grit."
1
Dr. Yellen can be proud of her accomplishments as the most important economic decision-maker. She set a fantastic example of what real fact-based leaders do, thoroughly understanding the environment when making her diagnosis and explaining complexity in plain language for anyone willing to listen to reason. She deserved another term. Some highlights:
1. Record household net worth--we're the richest we've ever been, driven by record stock market and near-record housing prices in real terms.
2. Record real median household income--the middle class never made so much income.
3. Consistent, moderate growth and low inflation, consistent with the Fed's mandate.
Dr. Yellen also explained the importance of addressing inequality in a wonderful speech on the subject back in 2014. This unfortunately is up to a Congress to fix, which made some progress under Obama by raising taxes on the rich and using it to fund Obamacare subsidies.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/yellen20141017a.htm
24
A very unfair decision, based largely on politics. Unlike glory seekers like Alan Greenspan, Ms. Yellen operated as a true professional, usually under the radar.
Well done, Ms. Yellen.
63
When the asset bubbles of the world pop, which sooner or later they will, and unlike 2008 in sync this time, we will all be rewriting the wisdom of the Fed. Their primary objective is now to keep banks profitable rather than to avoid economic instability. And it is economic instability that all this money printing will ultimately produce.
5
@scientella
palo alto
There aren't asset bubbles everywhere. The only one that really qualifies at the moment is Bitcoin. The so called money printing has largely gone to bolster bank reserves. The actual money in circulation by both measures has broadly tracked growth. Take an economics class.
16
So the money printing has gone to banks who bolster their reserves and then lend it to those who, in search of yield in a no growth world, who mainly put it into stocks or real estate.
The stock market is looney tunes. Chinas debt growth is hugely unproductive. Their economic numbers are rubbery and their stated growth of 6plus percent econmists think is closer to 2 or 3, there is an absence of global demand and the stock market doesnt even throw a taper tantrum any more because they know the Fed is owned by the stock market and silicon valley. Lets see who is right. No bubble other than bitcoin? Or a huge stock market correction coming up?
1
Do you have any clue what you are talking about? In 2008 we were in real danger of going down as a country. The government had no choice but to bail out the banks. And that is because no one knows where their money really is. If the banks had failed your savings, 401k's, annuities, insurance monies would probably have been gone. And to top that off we were going to take other countries down with us. But keep harping the ignorant view. WE just happened to have someone named Bernanke that had studied the Great Depression of 1929 and was smart enough to get us out of the mess the banks created.
5
Trump just couldn't stand the idea of a woman running the Fed.
107
Let alone a woman appointed by Barack Obama.
22
I think it is more the face that she was appointed by President Obama that Trump can't stand.
1
Yippee! The Fed will continue its policies... look out for Wall Street/The1%... and when their gambling debts come due – gambling they do with YOUR money – stick it to the 80%. And our children.
Can't ya feel it tricklin' down?
: ) L
10
I'm just very sad that a brilliant, very capable women is being replaced by an older white man. So many white men in the administration already, it's a shame that Janet Yellen couldn't stay on. Thanks for your service and for being a role model for women. We're proud of you!
118
Janet Yellen is a hero.
63
Yellen's term has been a success in terms of price stability and unemployment, especially given the political instability - aka, authoritarian nut job as president.
First QE would cause runaway inflation (which, by the way, would hurt savers most), now it's causing an asset bubble. Yet volatility indexes have been low. Yes, the stock market is up, but that is due to steady world wide growth and low returns on other investments, which again is the result of persistent low inflation in all advanced economies.
The question that should be posed to central bankers is empirical: why has inflation been so consistently below target. No one has a good answer.
Yellen should have been renewed. Side note: her speech on the challenge of being a woman in a profession dominated by men is worth reading. She's among the most accomplished women of her generation, and a true role model.
52
It is easy to think that the most significant reason Trump did not re-appoint Ms. Yellen is that she was appointed by President Obama. given her record and the apparently similar outlook and approach of her successor. An impulsive desire to negate any action taken or decision made by President appears to be Trump's major motivation in matters large and small.
75
It is questionable if QE helped the economy. To quote The Economist
"But the claim that the balance-sheet is stimulating the economy is far from an established fact. The theoretical case for it is weak (Ben Bernanke, Mrs Yellen’s predecessor, famously quipped that QE “works in practice, but it doesn’t work in theory”). While most studies have shown that QE brought down long-term interest rates, it may have worked by signalling that the central bank was serious about keeping rates low for a long time"
What is certain by now is that all money printed by the central banks did generate a world wide asset bubble.
Final point: the money printed wound up in the pocket of the credit worthy (i.e. the rich) and not in the pockets of the non credit worthy (e.g. home owners with under water mortgages) - where it, in a demand driven economy should have gone.
Until the 4 Trillion of the Fed are safely wound down, it is too early to judge Ms. Yellen's record.
6
Actually,,the printed money , for the most part, has wound up as excess reserves in commercial banks.
4
Ms Yellen is obviously a very careful, cautious, and low key person. We don't hear her often, and also don't know what she is thinking most of the time. It may be good or may be not. But due to her low key personality, she will not rock the boat to damage any existing recovery so far. But she will not change the course lay down by the previous predecessor. She just wants to keep the recovery going until further or until she can't. Then, she will change course a bit by introducing tightening or reducing the bond purchase. I would say that she is a very good person to be in a transition period into something totally different from the previous time period.
2
Since the Great Recession the Fed and other Central Banks around the world have added trillions to their balance sheets (which goes un-audited). Most of these monetary facilities like QE and Reverse Repurchase Agreements are difficult to understand even if you have a PhD in Economics. Suffice it to say they have printed their way into the largest asset bubble of all time, and "normalizing" their balance sheet will require the financial magic of Charles Ponzi. Good Luck Mr. Powell.
14
Nope....the various QEs and RRPs are not difficult to understand if one has a basic knowledge of economics.
2
Yea thats not really how that works at all... QE is taught in undergraduate monetary policy courses now and is well understood. Regarding asset bubbles, you clearly have not been paying attention to any of the recent literature or reporting. I recommend JSTOR and ECON LIT as good databases to do some personal economics research. A subscription to the Economist would help you as well. A recent issue of theirs was all about the bull market and how assets are not actually in a bubble but rather are incredibly stable.
As the NYT has previously reported, "success" and progress" have been mainly for the wealthy. During the past 8 years, the self-serving Fed has transferred trillions of tax dollars and lost interest on savings from the middle classes and seniors to Wall Street, suppressing spending, labor participation (presently near a 10-year low of about 63%), and real income for most poor and middle-class earners, while simultaneously increasing income inequality (currently near historic highs). Significant changes will be needed to reverse these trends.
17
Perhaps, but only because our Congress refused to do its job and handle those issues. Not one of those was/is the responsibility of the Fed! In fact, by targeting the wealthy as the main beneficiary of the income tax cut proposal, Congress will be deciding in favor even more income inequality, while the elimination of the Estate Tax will increase the wealth of the wealthy in exchange for... no work! Ugh.
5
I really don’t understand why Trump would take a chance of spoiling the one thing that is going right in his tenure by not reappointing her. Ultimately I do not trust any Republican, so am skeptical of her replacement. But I am sure sees that Trump destroys the reputation of all in his kakistocracy, and is relieved not to have to try to work with him.
12
I agree. He is replacing the "excellent" with another gray-haired man (I have nothing against men, but geez!) just to squeeze the life out of anyone associated with any other presidency or anyone else's ideas or any other thought but his own. Are you as worn out as me? I'm trying to keep my environmental fire burning, my care of this nation burning inside me, but it's becoming futile.
43
She was nominated by Obama. 'Nuf said? Trump is overturning every last remnant of his predecessor. And, she's a woman.
107
She's smart, female, and an Obama appointee. 3 strikes, for some.
5
Perhaps the most important accomplishment of Ms Yellen could be that we heard so LITTLE of the Fed these past few years.
No news was certainly good news from Fed during her tenure. The lack of drama and noise from her quarters is in such stark contrast to other areas of government, it is deafening, in a good way/
Thank You, Ms Yellen for your slow and steady hand in guiding the national purse strings. Good Luck in whatever you do henceforth.
63
She did a great job even if you want to argue that it was part of the Bernanke/ Yellen duo and thus there was no reason whatever why she should not have been re-appointed as is customary. Why was she not reappointed is the relevant question?
48