Workers waiting for "big wage increases"? Ha! The days of corporate America (large and small) sharing the spoils with all employees are gone. Small business and corporate management seem fine with spreading profits around only at the top levels.
Hey NYTimes, how about polling various levels of small businesses and large corporations and asking at what level of profit would they increase sharing with the little guy?
The difference between 40 years ago and now is basically globalization. Jobs, including professional ones in engineering, software development, etc. are moved offshore so they can pay a pittance of what it would cost to hire workers here. Offshoring also eliminates the need to pay benefits, so companies get another benefit - besides lowering wages they do not have to pay health care or pension/401K costs. Since service jobs are more difficult to "offshore", companies have reacted by using "right to work" to lower wages and benefits. Conservatives keep telling people they need to work, any kind of benefits should be tied to working. People in general do want to work - but they also want to be treated with dignity and respect. When employers treat their workers are just another line item cost, they create the system we now have. As mentioned in other comments, workers often cannot even plan from day to day regarding how many hours they will work, what times they will work, or whether they will work at all. Conservatives love to say they are family friendly, but in truth they are anti-family. They support practices that result in no benefits, unreliable hours of work, and a wage far below the cost of living. The Fed's focus on inflation and the markets completely ignores the plight of the average working American in this country. Globalization was a boon for the overall economy, but a disaster for workers - I don't see this changing anytime soon.
9
Interest rates are rising because they were ARTIFICIALLY LOW (lower than inflation) for almost a decade. Despite that fact, the wage situation changed not one iota. So inflation was subpar for a ling time too.
The clear conclusion is that there is absolutely no correlation between wages, growth and interest rates. Raising rates is all about normalization, asset prices and not about consumer inflation.
If you want to solve the employment and wage problem, it's going to take more than just sitting in a glass tower and worrying about interest rates. You are actually going to have to do something to directly leverage the position of labor in the economy.
11
"My attorney friends are not hurting." Good quote. We need a much higher income tax, a financial transaction tax, a wealth tax and a reduction in the military budget by half or more. We need loser pays in civil litigation like England or Germany. A job guarantee. Illegal immigration has to stop.....way too expensive. Take care of the natives first. If the Koreans make peace do we get a peace dividend? One can dream.
6
My read:
The white house states that the economy is not overheating and cited its policies and thus lowering of prices.
The Fed officials looked at several economic data points including unemployment & believe that number to fall even more creating a problem.
The unemployment numbers of those - and I love this phrase - "...dropped out of the economy entirely" & not counted will be put back into the workforce by the white house: the old, sick, disabled who then increase the unemployment rate.
Therefore there should be no overheating. Correct?
I wonder though how someone drops out of the economy completely without dying.
4
they end up working for food or helping friends/family out with small businesses. then they get a gym membership for access to the showers. there are a lot of people who live in cities who are not economically able to participate in the economy as consumers, but they are squarely in the economy of favors.
In the 1970s even jobs at the bottom of the labor market were more often full time with fixed schedules. Lots of job "openings" now, particularly in service industries like retail and restaurants, are part-time and involve flexible scheduling. For many workers on the sidelines, there is a "cost of work", including gas, tolls, depreciation on a car, laundry/uniform, and child or parent care. That makes the low wage no benefit jobs our economy is producing less attractive, and will keep down the labor force participation rate.
20
Very often too, low paid service workers show up and are told they are not needed or told to go home early, after only an hour or two, if business is slow.
That's a bit discouraging to say the least. Puts workers in the red for that wasted day or time/energy required to get to the job place and arrange for childcare, etc. This tactic is not considered illegal, as it should.
16
I'm a nurse for a large (management heavy) healthcare company. They do the same to us. Called off (though still "on call", so your time is not your own), if census is low, called to come in when not scheduled if others call out, required extra shifts in summer, etc.. And we can be required to remain four hours past the end of a twelve hour shifts. No unions here. Everyone except management is treated as a prn "as needed" employee. Tough to schedule a life that way for anyone. As for those who have given up searching for work, they are living with family or friends. No thanks to those trickling down tax breaks.
4
thats a "right to work" state for you :p you have the right to wait in your car till your job-creator masters say you can clock in.
If economics was a real science they would actually be able to construct an experiment to support their hypothesis. But they can't. So let's throw out the whole notion that there's any rationality to economics. If I remember correctly I read a few months ago that few men and women of working age were actually working. Those not working were not unemployed because they couldn't find a job but because they opted to remain outside the labor market. So could it just be that unemployment isn't really that low and there's no incentive for those who dropped out of the labor market to get back in because COMPANIES AREN'T PAYING THEIR EMPLOYEES!
14
If people stopped voting Republican/against themselves, things would get better for all. How do you stop them before they kill again?
10
What's with your headline "Workers Feel. . . " ? And what's with the Fed person saying it's a problem that people "feel" like they're left behind? No - millions of working people KNOW that they're stuck with wages that don't amount to a decent living. This, while government deals out welfare to Walmart, Amazon, et al. through food stamps, Medicaid, and so on.
That is the measure of government failure, since the Reagan era.
18
Supply-side, schmuply side - still a crock and always a crock. Growth ultimately depends on fundamental demand - when people buy things. Without demand, most supply-side investments become wasted at the macro level. What they do accomplish in the short run, however, (before the waste starts showing) is raising asset prices so the rich get richer. It is merely a ruse for the oligarchs to increase their wealth on government money (both up front through investment incentives and later when the government has to bail out the waste). Continue raising interest rates until demand increases - from the "little people" earning a decent return on their savings.
10
Economists don't seem to live in the real world.
9
The economy is robust. The fed can raise rates because it can and must. Keeping low rates (as done throughout the Obama presidency) is not realistic. Very few people pay for their own healthcare as most receive it through employers, Medicare and Medicaid. For those who do not have it (self employed, etc.) we cannot put this country into another social entitlement we cannot afford as evidenced by the others. People who have their own business/s work tirelessly. If the woman in your article could not cut it; she could not cut it.
Considering around 20 million gained insurance coverage since the ACA is passed we can't tell them all "you can't cut it". The self-employed and workers who don't have employer coverage include people who work in service environment so if they leave their jobs good luck eating out, getting your hair cut, buying groceries, going to the gym, buying clothes, or using most any business that staffs with part time workers.
10
It would be easier to “cut it” as a self-employed person if one didn’t have to spend a fortune on health insurance. Other countries encourage new businesses and innovation by providing for this basic human need.
8
Seriously? If the economy is robust as you say, it is because of the Obama era and his policies. The trend is toward employers forgoing the offer of health insurance and pension benefits, which used to be considered part of the job package. Employees are not offering pay and benefits more and more. There is a trend toward employees becoming free agents, contract workers. This makes for a lot of abuse on the part of employers. No matter what people think of unions, they have done much to raise the standard of living in this country. The long-term impact of anti-union policies and laws in this country since the Reagan Administration has taken a toll and workers are losing.
1
We can’t get it right for everybody,” Eric Rosengren, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, said in an interview last week. “We can get it right for the overall economy.”
Apparently the "overall economy" is the stock market, the wealthy and large corporations. Too bad the millions who are still struggling aren't in the real economy.
20
If you haven't been investing whatever you can afford in the markets, you are insignificant in the eyes of post-1979 capitalism. Wage work is for those who prop up the dividends of those at the top. I've invested for 25 years in the full knowledge that our government will bail investors out, whatever the crisis. The system is rigged.
13
There you go again...supply side economics. With wages remaining stagnant demand is pent up and low. Demand drives the economy. The tax cuts for corporations are going straight to profit and will benefit those who need no benefit, the already over-wealthy who can't spend more in a way that stimulates the economy. They (tax cuts) are not available to the unwealthy to satisfy pent up demand, which could possibly have had some stimulative effect.
So much of policy is echo chamber hearsay and avoids seeing the world as it is. For example a reason unemployment is so low is wages are so low that everybody in a household has to work. Husbands wives and kids. Doing well on one salary is for the 1%. That doesn't mean the economy is sound. More importantly the economy is not a good measure of well-being for citizens. That is the more fundamental policy discussion to be having. The Fed's role in that discussion is peripheral.
19
Of course there'll be no increase in wages -- Big Business has already demonstrated that any extra money they get their hands on (like the deficit-exploding tax cuts) will stay in their and their shareholders' pockets, not be shared with the employees. And the Fed's increase in interest rates is driving up mortgage interest, for one, making it even harder for regular working people to buy homes. Thanks so much, supply-sider GOP!
20
The only ones who get ahead in our capitalist economy are the 1 percent. We were marching several years ago to bring attention to the 99 percent who are struggling under capitalism. People were marching in Europe also. So what do the GOP supporters do bring in a person who is out of touch with most of America and is only for the one percent. He gives the rich and workers a tax break for only one month . Following month the GOP raise gas to 2.70 a gallon on the east and over 4.00 on the west. Somebody has to pay for the welfare to the rich. When you keep voting for any GOP losers there will be more articles with the titles "workers still feel left behind."
14
Workers don't "feel left behind" - they ARE left behind, quite deliberately.
20 years ago, while working at a job that paid HALF of what I now earn, I was able to afford a season subscription to the ballet and to Carnegie Hall. Now, I attend neither, b/c I can't afford it.
I'm not working less hard - I'm working longer hours AND I spent years improving my credentials in my field.
My bosses rate me highly, but this year the CEO decreed that NO ONE in our (large) firm would get any raise at all - thanks for nothing, Mr. CEO! If you want to mismanage dedicated employees so that they really don't care about the company any more, you are succeeding beyond your wildest dreams.
BUT: the CEO got a raise this year - he's the only one who did. He got it for cutting expenses - by not giving any of us a raise!
I see nothing ahead of me except more corporate cost cutting at my expense.
33
It is too good and heading more so. For giggles, my wife and I track the "estimated" market value of our home. It has been climbing steadily. It's now up to $478,000! Somebody, or lots of them, are smoking something.
1
Canadian clinical psychologist and public intellectual Jordan Peterson is under attack from both the left and the right because like Cervantes man with the mirror he exposes us to truth. Twenty percent of our population is not equipped to function in our complex economy.
No amount of education or training will ever provide basic skills for an ever increasing percentage of citizens who have no place in a 21st century economy.
The military refuses 20% of the population because they cannot be trusted to even dig holes and fill them up and even jobs that are desperate for workers require reasoned responses that many of our fellow citizens cannot give.
It is easy to say educate and train but for many of us all the training and education will not impart the skills necessary for even the simplest and repetitious tasks.
Technology procedes ever more quickly and the 20% will be the 50% who take good jobs away from robots who can do a far better job. We have served the economy for far too long it is time to have an economy that serves citizens.
When the word worker becomes pejorative and assigns a class lower than citizen we should understand the USA's constitution has been rendered null and void because we the people is only us and not them.
9
What this and so many articles fail to mention is the effect that virtually unchecked mergers and acquisitions have had on workers. There used to be competition, now there are only several large conglomerates dominating almost every industry. In the industry in which I worked until recently, there are three major players. Over the course of the last two or three decades, they have gobbled up almost all the mom-and-pop regional players. The situation sure does make it hard for middle-aged folks like myself to find a job to replace the ones we've lost. So, NYT, when are you finally going to run an article about the deleterious effect of mergers and acquisitions?
19
A 10% increase in in pay after 2 years is pretty good. I'm not sure how Ms. Jacks is a good example of stagnating wages...
3
In a sane world, where workers are paid according to their value, a "10% increase after two years" would be phenomenal. But Ann Jacks lives in our world, where she has to survive on about $22,000 a year. She can't afford health-insurance, which her boss may not even offer, although if he does, it's still too expensive for Ann on what he pays her (which is a really bad idea, considering restaurant employees, who come into work sick because they can't afford a day's wage lost, are handling our food).
This is the dilemma in an economy designed to benefit an owner/investor/speculator class, but whose burden can only be supported by a huge population of seriously underpaid, underemployed people. They're underpaid not because the value of their labor is marginal (indeed, it's quite the opposite), but because "their betters" control the flow of money, and it flows to themselves, not to "the little people".
4
I think Fed is doing their job, and their job description does not reach the wage growth, unfortunately. Fed is controlling things more on the big picture level, and the government should have policies and other instruments to align itself better with Fed and with concerns for any wage or wealth distribution. The failure of current and past government on the job of wealth distribution thinking growth would solve all has led to the current situation. Linking the two in the article written this is misleading.
3
It's not the inflation, it's the cavernous income gap that is destroying our economy, our children and our nation.
20
Any chance the appearance is skewed because the metrics have been tampered with?
Dr. Krugman?
3
Today's consumer SURVEY date shows from the BLS shows in the preceding year through June 2017 consumer spent 3.9% more than they spent during the previous year but the annual income rose but .3% thereby increasing their debt burden just at the time interest have begun to rise. This is looking back through the window glass but during the Trumps year one presidency , debt grows faster gthan income as the spending continues, asn dht esaving rate has again begin to fall. Perhaps the the debt is covered by a rising stock market?
4
The structure of the system is, unfortunately broken. In a rising economy, those who are more financially literate are better able to compound their wealth and at a raster rate than those who are not financially literate (or able to afford skilled tax accountants, money managers, etc). With capital gains tax being at a much lower rate than income tax, you additionally have those who derive the majority of their income from capital gains able to compound that income at a faster rate than those who must cede a larger portion of their income to the govt.
Likewise, costs for those who are already wealthy are a smaller percentage of that income than those who are poorer (or even middle class) and are paying 50% of their income as rent.
These add up to an incredibly inefficient system whereby the bounty from a surging economy is funneled upwards to the wealthy population. Wealth inequality is further exacerbated, and no end appears in sight without overhaul.
Furthermore, the structure isn't necessarily the fault of those who have been rewarded by its setup. Many wealthy individuals feel they have done their due diligence to properly understand the financial system, to hire the best accountants, and are only being compensated for shrewd investment decisions and risk taking. It also doesn't help that these individuals are more likely to save, to build the nest egg, and to further grow it rather than pouring that money held in offshore accounts back into the American economy.
5
The fine folks at the Fed are bankers concerned with the wealth of their fellow bankers, along with CEOs, fund managers, and investors. As long as that wealth is increasing, "the economy" is doing well. The rest of the country matters only to the extent that it affects the wealth of the people and institutions the Fed's bankers represent.
The speech by Charles Evans, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, illustrates the disconnect between the Fed and "99%." He seems to believe workers are to blame for stagnant wages. From his perspective as a wealthy banker who need never worry about job insecurity, Mr Evans can't even conceive of why workers might be reluctant to uproot themselves and their families from their social support network and relocate at their own expense (not even deductible thanks to the Republican tax cut) to wherever there might be job openings.
It's obvious to those workers that the significant possibility of being laid off from a new job makes "chasing those openings" unacceptably risky; but that's apparently inconceivable to Mr Evans. Even though it's his own investor colleagues who insist that secure, stable employment for workers is incompatible with the "shareholder value" they're constantly chasing.
I don't think anyone at the Fed understands that an economy focused on impoverishing the people who consume goods and services to create short-term gain for investors is not sustainable. But that's what they seem intent on facilitating.
14
“'Our view is that most of our policies are going to create growth for the economy on the supply side, and that when the supply-side growth comes, then that’s actually good for inflation, because if you increase supply, it puts downward pressure on prices,' Kevin Hassett, the chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, told reporters in February. 'And so we think that we can get the 3 percent economic growth that we forecast without a big pickup in inflation.'"
Mr. Hassett may think that technology may enable companies to increase supply without adding a lot of workers, or that the cost-push effect of the ultra-low 4.1% unemployment rate will be mitigated by people not in the labor force looking for work again (mentioned in the article), or some combination of the two. But the cost of materials could be a big fly in his ointment.
1
Well, it's about time that the American populace awoke to the simple facts: GWB put our country in the worst financial condition it's been in since The Great Depression, and President Barack Obama spent eight years digging us out of it. So what did American voters do? They turned to a Republican Congress and a Dingbat President and we start the whole process again. Huge and permanent tax cuts for the wealthy and highly profitable corporations and a mere pittance of tax reductions for working people - and that pittance runs out in 4 years. So the rich continue to get richer and the poor begin the downward spiral to poverty again. We're an extremely weird nation
46
" We're an extremely weird nation."
And, stupid, too. People should be required to pass literacy tests in economics 101 before voting. The poor are always the first hurt - and they are too uneducated to know why. Upward transfer of wealth is the reason the GOP and Trump love the uneducated. Appeal to the anger and emotion - and you're home free.
4
Congratulations to the woman who started her own business and failed. She didn’t fail. She tried.
She learned lessons that will make her a better, more valuable employee, in her old job. She is also more likely to succeed as an entrepreneur next time. I totally respect people like her.
15
Yes, she deserves great respect. But for her enhanced abilities, she is not paid much more. We have to have policies that make full-time work pay (speed up minimum wage increase and index it for inflation)
6
Workers "still feel" left behind? So it's just a "feeling", eh? Editorializing in the headlines maybe?
Workers have been left behind for years, and it's not about "feelings." Elite Democrats had better get off their duffs and stop relying on cheap labor, i.e. working people sacrificing everything so elites can continue their comfy lifestyles.
I expect Republicans and rightwingers to fawn over the obscenely wealthy, but Democrats had better get off that fence and stop sucking up to Wall Street. That includes NYTimes. I voted Democratic in 2016, but there are still the Democratic Socialists and the Greens. Wall Street bootlickers have no place in the Democratic Party of the future, if it there is one.
38
I suggest Federal Fund Rate of the US Conspiracies if the situations I told occurred.
Please visit on these sites.
https://blog.naver.com/comforcom
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lx6O54OsWdg
The first site is naver blog of Korea. Second is Youtube.
My name is Dong Seol Park in Seoul, Korea and nickname is Reuben To.
I will work as a social working agent in Korea soon as I am mentally ill, at least socially.
Of course workers feel "left behind"! Trump has conned them in order to feed his Uber rich Trumplicans. Just wait until he tries to attack Medicare, Medicaid and SS entitlements saying that we don't have the money to continue to support them, but NOT saying that is because he has put us already into unsustainable debt with his "gift to the rich". THEY won't need Medicare or SS, but almost everyone else will, and their lives may depend upon these programs.
I feel terrible for workers; they helped to elect The Dotard - I did not, nor will I ever. There is much to be said for the caring of what these Trumplicans call "libtards" - we care about ALL Americans, in spite of their hatred and bigoted, myopic misconceptions. If they do not at least try to undo the horrible administration that they have produced, they do not deserve to be bailed out by the rest of us. Trump's cabal will certainly not give up any of their trillions to help them.
12
Fire em all in trump country
That should even things up
Start with trump
8
The article states that rising health costs are a concern by many. This is inflation in a specific sector of the economy. All those that receive healthcare through private employers or the government have seen a massive pay raise in the last 15 years. It just is in the form of companies and governments paying higher healthcare costs on their behalf. It is not showing up in wages but in benefits. One big reason why companies aren't raising wages.
8
It's not proper to expect the Federal Reserve to be tasked with helping those "left behind." Monetary policy isn't the place to experiment with policies to help balance economic inequality.
The unemployment rate is low, but we are also in a period of historically low labor participation rates. That is keeping wages low, and I don't think the Feds keeping rates low will help to raise wages.
What is needed to raise wages is explicit action, as readers have already commented, raise the federal minimum wage to $15. It will have the effect of raising wages in every sector. If you fear inflation, then the Feds can raise rates in unison. This will have a short-term effect on employment growth, but will be better in the long term. I hold out zero hope for supply-side to fix inequality.
The reason we have so much froth and fears of inflation is that taxes are too low, especially for the financial class. Didn't Trump promise to rescind the carry interest tax loophole?
One of the proper roles of government is to play a redistributionary role in the economy. We need to tax the wealthy higher, otherwise money begets onto itself, and we will end up with even greater inequality then we have now. We need very high estate taxes, so we don't end up reverting to gentries and serfs. Increased revenues can then be channeled to payments in kind: free tuition, maternity leave, child care, universal health care, etc. This will help build a stronger country and a stronger democracy.
19
Funny, my wife and I haven't seen a dime in higher wages and my taxes just jumped 10% on my home. These companies will never distribute money fairly. That is clear.
25
Main Street, not Wall Street, is the economy.
This "worry" is the result of the tax cuts. Cuts that benefited the rich (83% of the cuts) and will hurt the working class, whose taxes will be rising.
Tax revenues are to be invested in America, not given away to people who aren't investing in America. Oh, they are heating up the stock market, they are buying property, but that is not the type of investment America needs.
The idea that the tax cut will create jobs here was partially disproved with Reagan's tax cuts, only increase in employment was in low-wage jobs for the new Service Economy. With Bush II, think about the tsunami of jobs that went overseas in the first few years of his administration, and the Great Recession that followed. Now we have Trump's unhelpful giveaway to the rich. Remember, too, Bush started with a deficit under $10 Billion, Trump is starting with one at $20 Trillion--a deficit 2,000 times as large.
Each of these tax cuts, plans, reforms, call them what you will, included a 5 percent tax holiday on profits made overseas. These are profits that have been stashed for this holiday. Think of these profits as IRAs, you only pay taxes on the money when you take it out, in this case when you bring it back. Well, how does only paying 5 percent on your IRA proceeds sound compared to the normal tax rate? It is farthest thing from an incentive for multinationals to bring jobs home.
12
I just love how every Joe Schmoe (no offense) judges what the American Economy needs and how to fix it. "Friday Night Pub Bench Warmer Legislators", we used to call them in the old country. Redistribution begets unfairness, apathy, and sense of entitlement, it squashes initiative, entrepreneurship, and technological innovation. In short, look at the sad fate of the USSR, at the stagnation in major European countries, and you ill see what you're advocating. Sure, large historically ethnically monolith countries are doing fine (case in point: Germany, Sweden), but only those with strongest work ethics. Others falter (French, Spain). Not to mention lack of diversity, unwelcome to foreigners, lack of dynamism, etc. Be careful what you legislate from the pub bench, kind Sir.
1
What do you expect in a country where labor has almost completely lost a voice in governments, from the federal government down to state governments. If you have no voice, your interests will not be heard, let alone defended.
32
Unionize. The Republicans don't care the Democrats don't care. Certainly the companies don't care. Those professionals who don't need to be concerned won't care. The economic experts won't care. Unions are the only option in a capitalist society that simply and truly will not care.
24
Re: the article's opening anecdote about Ann Jacks
Over the course of two years, one would expect a cost-of-living adjustment of 4%. If Ms. Jacks makes anything less than $25/hr, an extra dollar an hour is more than reasonable. The implication in the story (that +$1/hr is chicken feed) is unwarranted.
That is independent of the fact that her (apparently part-time) job as a sous chef in Philadelphia only brings in $22,000/yr ... yikes.
4
The repercussions of applying flat percentages to wages is lost on many. 4% on top is 22k is a lot different from 4% on 100k.
4
Yikes, is right. A burger-flipper here in Seattle will make 31,200 per year with no education.
1
I'd be thrilled with a dollar an hour raise! Three of the past four years, I got $.50/hour. One year, no raise at all. Nurses (RN's) start at about $22.00/hour to max out at less than $40.00 regardless of years of experience. A 4% raise would be $1.50. In my dreams.
summary: the .1% are worried that they may be forced to share the gains in the economy instead of keeping it all for themselves. Fed officials share their concern.
22
The rich getting poorer will not make you richer. Their money is mainly in stocks and real estate. Which is only monetized when sold. Kind of like the retiree living in a $1.2 million home on a $50,000/yr retirement because they've owned their home for 30 years. You would have to force them to sell their home to pay a tax more than their income can afford.
3
:) The rich sure have no problem buying Whole Foods or mega-yachts. Or the Seahawks.
First of the year, Bonuses. Biggest I've ever received, felt good, really helped out my finances and my attitude about work, the boss says, "Thank Trump for the bonus." Oh yeah, raises at the end of last year also.
Here it is, coming into May. My water bill has nearly doubled. Gas and electricity have gone up considerably. Gasoline has gone up. The price of groceries has gone up, I'd estimate, by at least 35%. DMV registration and licensing have gone up about 40% (yet, my cars and motorcycle are a year older and worth less than last year). Health insurance went up. My Auto insurance went up $108/year (again, on vehicles that are a year older).
The lower taxes are helping our bottom line. But everything we've gained has been overcome by rising prices, we might even be behind where we were last year at this time. It felt good for a minute though.
17
Don't worry, once the Democrats take over, taxes will go up and we will have universal college, universal healthcare and universal basic income. We will pay for it with $10 trillion of perpetual bonds sold to the Fed at 0.5%. Then Bernie Sanders will institute the Purge, an annual event where citizens can take whatever they want from the 1%. The 1% will be exposed - addresses, holdings, etc. I know you are all getting excited by this, but you just have to wait a little longer for Adam Schiff to reveal his evidence of Trump collusion (which he has been sitting on for a year apparently) and Trump will be impeached. Democrats will have Pence arrested by the FBI and they will insert Kamala Harris as President. It's all coming together! Don't stop believing!
4
We could pay for universal college simply by pulling out of Afghanistan.
3
One can only hope that the teacher strikes in Kentucky, Oklahoma and now Arizona are a harbinger of things to come.
23
In our state, teachers only are required to work a 185 day year. The average American works a 250 day year. Tell me again that teachers are overworked and underpaid. I am not stupid enough to believe it, and I come from a family of teachers.
6
Teachers are like construction workers, most of whom do not work 260 day work years. What teachers earn over the 180 days is to last for the full year. Plenty of jobs in the economy work the same way (e.g., agriculture),
And you claim to come from a family of teachers ?
3
Uhhh, teachers don't get paid for the quarter of the year they're not in the classroom. How many teachers do you know?
It's not inflation. You are getting poorer. If your wage do not keep up with rising prices, you are falling behind. Remember, companies do not care if you make a living wage. Society was OK with slavery as overseers lived lavish lives. Why should they care if you live or die today? SAD! And don't count on the gov. to save you. The policians have been bought and they use the levers of gov. to allow the rich to repress the rest of us. Remember this in November.
30
That workers feel left behind is just further evidence of an economy that isn’t working and an economic structure that cannot endure. Significant changes and investments are needed to broadly benefit the public - health care, education, housing, etc. Enough charity to the 1%. While economists may not be able to forecast where this economy will lead, I’m sure there are historians well versed in revolutions who can.
18
An overheating economy? Well, perhaps if you're 25-35, know tech skills inside out and everyone from Google to Apple wants to hire you. Or if you were untouched by the recession and work in Silicon Valley. The wealth gap may be what's really "overheating" the economy. And the tax bill brought the already ultra wealthy more riches, so we may be feeling the effects of that.
I know what they mean, though; in my small California town, everyone is extraordinarily rich and getting more so. But the rest of us, from minorities to women to older folks, are getting left behind. If my parents hadn't bought a home in this small town in 1967, my family and I would certainly be out of the state and struggling.
26
When will there be legislation that ties a portion of federal funding to how many part-time instructors colleges respectively employ? Obviously not during this administration. There are more than a million of us who can't get full-time work despite willingness and demand because the so-called academic job market is a scam.
19
"Polling and interviews suggest that American workers are worried about rising prices but far more concerned about job and wage growth. In polling in March for The New York Times by the research firm SurveyMonkey, 62 percent of respondents said consumer prices had risen faster than wages over the preceding year. "
Yeah , well the Trump voters are going to 'Rolling in it" any day now as the $800 billion tax cut for the 1% tinkles down on them ! Ha Ha.
Not surprising that Trump is worried that steadily increasing price for oil is going to cancel the "big" tax cut the middle income folks will get. Even the few dollars saved by the unaware Red State welfare recipients will disappear. The coal miners will be OK though , if they stay out of the mine ?
6
Economics is no more a science than reading tea leaves. All the mathematical models they generate are just a more sophisticated version. If business owners are afraid to raise wages because they'd have to raise prices, that assumes their patrons don't make enough to afford those raised prices. Pretty obvious that the economy is caught in a spiral. Advanced mathematics isn't needed to figure that out. Monetary easing won't raise those wages either.
7
There is one simple, yet effective way to improve the lot of us 80 % or so not raking it in: Increase the federal minimum wage to approach a living wage. I know it's highly unlikely with the current Republican majorities in House and Senate, but I'd like to see Mr. Trump dare to veto a bill passed by both in 2019. The example of Ms. Jacks given early in the article illustrates the point. Assuming she works about 1800 hours a year (average for full time workers in the US according to OECD Data), she earns about $12.20 per hour before deductions. Even in rural NC, that's just not enough to make ends meet, especially with the subsidies of the Affordable Care Act for health insurance being terminated by the Republican congress and their president. Several studies have shown that a rising tide (increased minimum wage ) tends to raise all or most boats.
As for the Federal Reserve, I have almost given up hope: They seem to be bankers looking out for other bankers interest. Their actions certainly support that view.
15
There are numerous sectors in our economy that face the same issue as the restaurant owners mentioned by Ms. Jacks. They are simply not profitable enough to raise wages, and yet they employ a sizeable number of people. Retail outlets are closing all over the country because they can't compete with internet-based businesses.
This is a problem that can't be solved economically, but neither does it appear to have good policy solutions that politicians can back. Very soon we are going to have a major realignment of our economy, and no one really knows what it is going to look like. Most people are scared and worried about the future, for good reason.
15
Yes, it can. It is called income redirstribution and we used to do it. It is done in Germany, France and the Scandinavian countries. Taxes are high for the rich and used to finance infrastructure and education and medical for EVERYONE. It works. No hording of money in offshore accounts to pay bribes to politicians.
11
It works because of tight immigration policies. There is no redistribution with open borders.
2
I've come to the stark conclusion that rooting for the rise of stock indexes is tantamount to rooting for the oppression of the ordinary wage earners. They are diametrically opposed at this stage of American history, with income inequality what it is (those who earn income through investments alone!) and labor laws.
16
The higher stocks rise, the more wealthier the rich get. The rest of us get left out. For example, the wealthier can afford to bid up the price of nice housing. Then they restrict development to keep prices high. The rest of us can only look in and hope. A few mortgage the future in the hope of finding a lottery ticket. That does not work for the rest of us.
5
We did not get to where we are today by accident or by any natural law. For over forty years lobbyists and legislators beholden to corporate and big business interest have been shifting the economy, one rule and one law at a time, to favor their interests. The rights of labor and consumers have been slowly whittled away, depressing competition in the labor market and making consumers powerless in consumer markets.
Productivity in our economy grew, wages stagnated, and all the gains went to the top income earners. Is that because the people at the top of the pile all of a sudden got smarter and everybody else became dumber, less talented and their labor less valuable? I don't think so. I'd look rather to the thousands of rules and laws changed over the last several decades, ever so slowly, with little notice by the public. The the rules of the game have changed so that the economy now favors the rich and powerful at the expense of everyone else.
When politicians start talking about freedom and liberty and family values instead of what needs to be done so you can adequately feed, house, and care for your family, put your hands in your pockets - another nickel, dime or dollar is about to be picked from your stagnant wages.
30
As someone who entered the workforce in the early ‘70s, I have seen how large corporations and smaller companies have colluded with one another over the decades to keep wages down and, thus, profits up.
Oh, they don’t necessarily have to talk with one another. All they’ve had to do is look over the fence, see that their neighbor is keeping a lid on wages and just do the same. They’ve been rewarded by Wall Street for growing profits through cost-cutting and little else, so why not?
And while they’ve managed to cap wages, they’ve been far less successful in doing the same when pricing their own products, granting dividends to shareholders, giving salary increases to top executives or preventing their employees from paying ever-higher health insurance premiums. One thing they have been able to trim is employee training, which they’ve offloaded to community colleges and the like at worker or taxpayer expense.
All of this is disgusting but it is the inevitable result when capitalists are allowed to run wild.
20
Yeah it is great for wall street etc... The rest of us are living in an increasingly pear shaped economy , to a pyramid. Inflation statistics don't cout stuff like food, fuel, medical, housing. Just look at the homeless crisis, the opioid crisis, as to how the economy is doing, ask teachers how the economy is. The elites will let the us become more like a third world country every day . The thing that makes america great is that many people have a chance at a decent life, with a balloon shaped economy with lots of people in the middle and few at the top and bottom. Now with Banana Republic politics we are really circling in the bowl
9
Cool. A lot of people can't find jobs or benefits. My wife and I are solidly top 1%'ers, but there is still a lot of misery in this country that needs to be worked on, which is why we take our Trump tax breaks and donate the money to causes.
8
A lot of people who would like to work are not in the workforce and are not counted. The count also does not take into account people who are 55 or older. Yet these people were in the workforce when they lost jobs in 2009-2009 and have been trying to get back in since. Now they are seniors turning 65 or 66 and still want to work in order to afford to retire (ironic, isn't it?). The information being used is completely inaccurate and does not take into account many people. These new seniors completely resent being under-counted and ignored, and as it happens, are the mid-cohorts of the Baby Boom. Any policy that makes it harder for seniors to find work is going to cause more problems.
17
I remember the Irish economy was never better for its landowners than when it culled the bottom 30% of its citizens from its food export economy.
American society must decide what to do with the 20% of its citizens who will never have a place in an economy where the skills required for even minimal functionality are beyond the skill level of 20% of the population.
America is beyond the skill level of its best economists and must rely on our ethicists , philosophers and find a way to again trust liberal democracy. After 40 years of denial truth must be confronted 20% of America's population cannot be educated or trained to participate in the American economy where robots are less dangerous than humans in carrying out basic tasks.
Liberals answer we are our brother's keeper.
4
Economy too good, for who? I guess the writer didn't look at his own publications business section and other newspapers in which the Ford Motor Co. announced that over the next four years they will be eliminating all their sedan models in N/A. How many plants and jobs will be affected by this economy that is "too good"?
It seems that Ford is using the Trump tax cuts to create those thousands of new jobs. Oh wait, they are not, that money is going to the shareholders!
9
The cyclical unemployment from the Great Recession is gone. The challenge is how we are going to respond to structural unemployment and underemployment (and people leaving the workforce entirely). It is not something that a slogan policy such as "tax cuts" or "deregulation" can solve. I'm skeptical Trump and the Republicans understand this nuance to propose and advance policies that embrace technological and economic advancements that have made certain areas (mainly cities) booming economic centers, while also helping those with little education or advanced skills who have been left behind. Not to mention, the severe income inequality has been exacerbated by those who don't understand that rich people and corporations already have enough to buy whatever they'd like and that giving them more in tax breaks means that money will simply sit in a bank account or go towards dividends and executive bonuses. What is our plan to solve that problem?
10
Heard on NPR yesterday someone from the Economist talking about what happened in the late 19th century when England, Germany and other advanced countries faced large populations of workers displaced by the Industrial Revolution.
Political and business leaders of that time led a movement for universal free public education.
Compare that to the Red States of the US today, where drastic cuts in public education have been made at the very time the US is slipping in international rankings of educational outcomes.
Economic progress in the US is very uneven because the states have taken wildly divergent approaches to education, infrastructure, minimum wage and respect for social, cultural and gender diversity, the kinds of things that attract major employers.
Its not an accident that two thirds of economic output in the US occur in the counties that voted for Clinton in 2016.
19
The economy has been so rigged in favor of corporations and the very wealthy for more than 30 years that as a result, it has effectively removed 95% of participation from the working and middle classes. "Feeling left behind" is an GIGANTIC understatement.
41
Do realize this is a cruel joke...
Now that everyone with inadequate retirement savings - from individuals to funds - is into the market or cryptocurrency, going to hike the bond rate as one more prop for our Potemkin economy...
For savers, interest rates should've been higher long ago - but now...
Bonds with 30 years to maturity yielding 3% today could drop in price by as much as 30% if rates rose to 5% - and that's with high confidence of payout and payback...
What appear to unpredictable and erratic moves in the market are actually feints and dodges, based on what smart money is virtually certain is going to happen within the next two quarters...
Lightning trading in slow motion...
It's later that that the party games come to light...
> Selling insurance for things that might happen ten years later...Makes you look good for nine years, while everyone figures out how to game the system to collect...
> Lending your customers money to keep buying your products for a few more quarters...Lending $1B for products that cost you $100M to make - and so keeping your market valuation levitating $10B (or much more) higher than it otherwise would...
The way we get played for fools:
We think some company (and its jobs) are worth saving - and that their executive leadership agrees...
...
But, take heart - Gruber says the Chinese are too stupid to figure this out...
Think of our cities like slot machines in a casino - the ones that are winning are making a lot of noise...
9
Let's stop blaming the Fed for everything in the economy. The Fed controls monetary policy, which is a great blunt instrument for moderating the overall "pace" of things, but is not a good distributional tool whatsoever. The Fed can (possibly) hurt people on a fixed income by allowing too much inflation, but it can't address the great distributional issues that plague our country.
This is Congress' job, and it is either ignoring it, or deliberately favoring the rich -- take your pick. Congress has ignored the economy since before the recession, preferring to let the Fed do the work in its inefficient fashion. Aside from a single spending bill, what did they do?
14
Deliberately favoring the rich? You're not sure?
3
That feeling of being left behind? That sucking sound as the rich drink up all the gains of the recover is not an illusion, and it's not a feeling of being left behind, it's a home equity, 401K, take home pay, medical bill problem. It's not something a tip jar at Mar a Llago is going to fix, and soon to be former Republicans in red states are starting to wake up to the reality that anyone making less than 200K a year is as black as anyone who really is black.
24
The well-being of 80% of Americans has been systematically divorced from “The Economy” over the last several decades. The Dow goes up. Ever-greater piles of money are shoveled into the (offshore) bank accounts of the 1%.
“The Economy” of the Old South was humming right along too. Is anyone ever going to state the obvious? ... “The Economy” is NOT working for the vast majority of Americans.
: ) L
116
Agreed. Anyone who has seen the documentary The China Hustle, released in March of 20018, realizes that the fraud and corruption at the highest levels of investment banking, the banks, and the stock exchange is so deep it is virtually untouchable. Oversight and regulations are nil and Congress knows and is complicit. It's only a matter of time before there is another big meltdown.
The welfare of ordinary Americans counts for nothing in the eyes of these super predators/thieves.
A pox on those who prevented the election of Hilliard Clinton. She would most certainly have tried to enforce regulations and oversight and go up against the rich, whom she so well knew, as did Franklin Roosevelt did in the '30,s. Keeping the rich under control is essential to a democracy. It may be too late now.
13
Gwen, I'd have to disagree with that second statement. Hilary Clinton is one of them now. Going from, in her words, flat broke, to a couple hundred million in the black, means somebody owns her.
6
Boris, I think you underestimate Hilliary. It takes a rich and well connected person to understand the rich and well connected and how that whole system works. That's why my reference to FDR. She would have had an uphill battle with the Republican congress but her cabinet and appointments would have been top notch and her foreign policy intelligent and effective.
2
It is absolutely foul that the superrich are worried they're paying too much while most lower-tier workers are either just getting by or not making a living wage.
If the economy will crash because salaries at the top are too high and workers aren't making enough, then evil is abroad in the land. And it is.
Do the math. Giving huge benefits and wages at the top doesn't help the economy, it doesn't help corporations, and it doesn't help civilization. Removing benefits (health care, retirement, and actual employment instead of "gigs") from those who don't take home enough to pay for basic necessities is only justifiable if there's not enough money for the company to survive otherwise. Making new billions is not justification for starvation wages and debt slavery.
Giving tax cuts to the wealthy fixes nothing, and it harms everyone in the longer view, even the descendents of those who have wealth "beyond dreams of avarice".
Greed and pride are not Christian. Try the gospels!
22
The underpinning of the US economy is middle class consumption - and we are eviscerating the middle class. While aggregate numbers may be rising, inequality is as well. All the gains in wages are eaten away by increasing health insurance and the like. We need to realize we are in an unhealthy spiral and change course.
20
More than health insurance is the greed at the top, siphoning any and all cash into "wealth management" and top-tier benefits and salaries. Health care should be nationalized; Medicare is a great success story. Stop enabling the parasites siphoning off their bit and negotiate with the power of everyone. We have some of the worst and most expensive health care in the world. The reason: For-profit institutions taking their ever-increasing cut from real people doing real jobs.
18
Every time I read an article like this my anxiety increases. I own a small office building in NM and NM has not shared in the hot economy but I am getting pressure with the increases in interest rates . We are one state out of 14 that still in the recession . The value of the building is half what it was bought for and finding leases that can or pay market rate is almost impossible.
I liked when the economy was slow and steady because I was able to stay even with expenses and earnings but now I am reading how we need to slow the economy down because it's too hot because of inflation by increasing interest rates . Wow I am having to seriously think that I have to sell the building because I can ill afford the payments . I had to use a line of credit instead of a commercial loan because we have never had enough income to be given a loan . Maybe I don't deserve sympathy because I come from comfortable middle class but I feel as anxious as many other people as my income is under threat with higher taxes , interest rates , high cost of education , healthcare costs and a government that is deaf .
9
When the focus is solely on the stock market, quarterly earnings, then longer term trends get the backseat to the immediate and the now.
8
It's the wages, stupid.
So many of the problems that are issues come from the fact that workers take home pay is and has been largely stagnant and inflation- Main Street inflation instead of the cooked up numbers used to calculate pay increases- is eating tens of millions of households alive.
Every bill I have goes up faster than my pay and this pattern has repeated itself since before Obama was President. Millionaire TV Anchors tell us that there is no inflation when the price of housing, transport, healthcare, education, utilities and local taxes goes up every year. Maybe they do not feel the pinch, but look at this:
US Median Household Income:
$59,039
US Median Home Price:
$236,600
US Average New Car Transaction Price
$36,270
Half of the US population cannot handle an unexpected $400 expense.
You want to get depressed? Look at Bureau of Labor Statistics info.
Consumer expenditures
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cesmy.htm
America needs a Labor Union and they need to go on strike.
58
People talked about the "new economy" before and existing economic model no longer applying. They all ended badly. I don't see why that should be any different today. It is true that inequality is greater today and people in the lower echelon, workers and merchants alike, don't have the pricing power that they used to have at this point of the economic cycle. But it is also true that there are fewer workers available today and the wage and price will have to ignite sooner or later.
The rising wage won't do much good to working people if it gets wiped out by the inflation. The Fed will have to stay ahead of the inflation curve.
1
Well first of all, low unemployment rate does not mean that everyone who's employed is earning a living wage. I think the FED would like to think that those two things go hand in hand but that's not necessarily the case.
A bigger issue is what do we as a society feel that certain jobs are worth. Service jobs such as those in restaurants and retail just don't pay enough for most to make a living wage. Unless you're at the very top (e.g., owner or CEO), you're likely not making enough to be middle-class. We could raise wages for those poorer jobs. But it seems like everything else would cost more and then relatively speaking, those people are still not going to be able to make it to middle class. I'm not sure what the answer is. There's always going to be a spread of those who barely make enough to those who make well beyond what they need--it's a lot about choices and luck. I'm not sure (1) if society needs to regulate that and (2) if it is to be regulated, how do we do it?
4
The answer has to be income redistribution. If the Fed decides that increases in wages are inflationary, then it will raise interest rates and people will lose their jobs. The appropriate way to battle inflation under the present circumstances is fiscal policy not monetary policy—i.e. raise taxes on the rich, drastically increase them on super-high-earners, and increase public support of low-income people through public jobs programs, enhanced social security, federally supported childcare, etc. Of course, the government has just done the opposite.
12
There is no justification for going to extremes as raising the interest rate five times in two years. That is ridiculous. Especially for a theory not everyone agrees on. How about easing on the break and just raising it once a year for the next two years to see how the economy responds? That would be better than slamming on the breaks and causing major upheaval that may take years to recover from. This isn't just a line graph, it is people's lives. A few years to recover can mean not going to college or buying a house.
12
Nixon started the big push to corporatize America by approving the healthcare industry HMO,s, then, he went to China to setup sending U.S. jobs there to crush unions, to drive wages down, reduce or eliminate benefits, while corporations started demonized unions to the (sour grapes, jealous, envious) non-unionized working class as they started to raise prices of everything so Americans would really suffer latter. The smily faces at Walmart were put there for a reason, so you would drop your guard. Oh look, how cute, they love us. This was also the era when family farms were being run out of business so corporations could take over, feeding livestock toxic chemicals, government meat and food inspectors were let go, steel mills closed down, etc.
Then came union busting Reagan, and his New World Order (NWO) cohorts, HW Bush, Dick Cheney, who took full advantage of Reagan's quickly falling mental health to consolidate their power.
Then, came Clinton, Bush family puppet, who told banks and corporations to encourage Americans to spend, spend, spend using credit cards, home equity loans so they would think they we're living the 'American Dream'. Believing that would that never end, life is great, so who cares what the government is doing behind the curtain to undermine everything the working class and poor are trying to do to improve their life and survive.
11
4.1% means less than ever.
Underemployment is the rub: the gig economy, rising healthcare costs, and endless nonsense at the receding edges of employee benefits squeezes workers perennially...we have work, just not well-paying, or fully enough to comfortably live our lives. The corporate bottom-line thrives while society has its marrow painfully extracted. Thanks, Washington, for not interceding against corporate welfare.
55
Hanging out with my friends at our golf resort, we lamented how we were no longer ables to find skilled workers.
For example a friend said they were looking for a part-time( read no benefits ) journalist. Some requirements were having over 10 years experience at a major US newspaper. They were offering a generous salary of over $9.00 per hour. He was only getting a few unqualified applicants.
26
There's one key fact in this article that nobody seems to be focused on. Inflation has been below the official target for a long time now. And yet, not only has the prime rate been raised repeatedly, they want to raise it even more. The only logical conclusion I can draw from this is that they have given up on that target, the same way they have given up on wage growth.
The effect of the Fed's policy, for many years now, has been to keep inflation as low as they can manage. This is not a policy supported by economics, it's a policy that serves a tiny handful of ultrawealthy bankers. If they really wanted to support that target, as a moving average, they'd let inflation rise above the target for a few years. To bring the average up. Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen.
4
The reason employees feel left behind is that they are under paid and considered as liabilities instead of assets to the bean counters who are making decisions at many of our corporations. No one should be running a company who doesn't understand that people are the greatest asset that any company has.
26
As my namesake famously mused: "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American People" so when I read idiotic articles referencing how "good the economy is" I shout: For Whom? Yes, of course Wall Street -- the place that established the swamp -- are riding high. The rest of us? Well, buckle down and accept the fact that your job for working life will probably be minimum wage -- without benefits -- working for Amazon. It's a Brave New World
102
The Fed looks at the lumped parameters such as employment, growth and inflation. The detailed structure such as wage growth, median salary, loss of tax cut benefits on low to mid income groups with increases in interest rates. I wonder what the Fed Chairman do throughout the year for the salary he is getting paid. Simply put it, he is not doing his job and low income people are not on his Radar.
4
As long as conservative economic principles are dominant, it does not matter how the economy is performing, workers will be left behind. The primary objective of conservatives is to exploit workers for the benefit of the rich. So the American workers have gotten exactly what they deserve. Amazingly they still support the policies that will ensure they remain left behind. Really hard to to feel anything but disdain for their constant whining.
38
Inflation hurts the working poor much more than the rich.
8
No, inflation hurts those with savings, and that's the wealthy. That's why the Fed is afraid of inflation.
1
Waiting for wage increases? Some of us - over age 50, and now over 60 since the Recession hit in '08 - have been waiting for jobs to reappear, are still hoping that we will be hired back into the labor force. It looks like that *might* be possible now. It's been a horrible decade for many of us. And we in this group are well-educated, middle-class, 'white collar' workers who worked for decades before the economy crashed. We've have been waiting on improvements and opportunity for a heckuva long time. Turning down the heat at this time would be devastating.
28
Evans, the Chicago Fed president, complains that workers don't want to relocate (at their own expense) to where he thinks the jobs are. Tech workers, most of us, just aren't going to pack up Conestoga wagons and head for North Carolina or Kansas. First of all, nobody has a bag of money to go moving across the country chasing a job that could end tomorrow. Second, some companies have relocated to places with right-wing political climates where there are few or no worker protections and no investment in schools. Finally, gentle NYT readers, would you like to live in a culturally backwards place, the kind where
19
When my pay catches up with my yearly rent increase and the rising cost of my health insurance, I'll get back to you. Don't hold your breath.
66
There is no skilled labor shortage, there is no willingness to work for poor wages. I am a highly experience large aircraft mechanic, semi-retired. I often get offers to work contract jobs to work on airliners being serviced by third party, lowest bidder maintenance facilities for 1980 wages. No thanks, I'll stay home.
34
I guess it’s good to have that choice.
6
Did you miss the part about 1980 wages?
$30/hr today was $9.69/hr in 1980
3
I’m a highly trained classical pianist. I am working for the same rates I worked for just out of high school. When I told my extremely liberal church job that they are paying the same amount that I made in 1996 without my fancy degree, they simply ignored me. They either thought I was full of it, or they couldn’t afford to raise me, so they didn’t even acknowledge it. When I quit, they decided to pay the new person half as much as I was paid. Guess what? No one wanted the job and they are without a pianist.
No one wants (or can afford) to pay. Health insurance is too expensive. Training and college are too expensive. Childcare is too expensive (not that those workers make enough), and teachers are being paid dirt.
If you can’t afford to pay a living wage, you can’t afford to be in business. Period.
5
this article makes the implicit assumption that MONETARY stimulus can be good for the average worker--that it is flattening to the income distribution. this is wrong, wrong, wrong. those distributional impacts need to come through FISCAL policies.
monetary stimulus typically creates a wealth effect. that is, it is inequality increasing. fiscal policies are more likely to impact the skew of the distribution.
8
Where is the evidence that increasing interest rates curbs inflation? It's the opposite - When rates go up, costs go up for borrowers (which results in higher prices passed on to the consumer), and savers earn more interest on their money, which then gets spent into the economy.
2
Reserving the wealth generated by the productive capacity of this nation to a small sliver of the elite has been the principal goal of the Republican Party since the Reagan era. It’s working.
24
The Fed has a long history of snatching away the punch bowl. This time is no different.
2
Everyone's obsessed with unemployment, as conventional wisdom would dictate it. What is not reported, is the extent of under-employment and the tremendous amount of slack due to those who quit the labor pool and has yet to rejoin the market. In some markets where economy has been going strong, they'll continue to see tight job market. If we truly believe that tight job market will lead to higher wages, then let it run its course (which we have yet to see that happen), as the "trickle-down" is supposed to work.
For those in less prosperous regions, this will likely not happen any time soon, even if Fed holds the rate steady. While monetary policy like rate change works on a macro level, the impact (for better or worse) is likely to be felt more keenly on a micro- and local level. In generations past, the impact of this would have been to see labor movement, relocating to where the jobs are. THIS is the most puzzling piece since labor mobility geographically seems to have stopped working, and we (both government and cultural speaking as a whole) seem to have stopped expecting this to happen. Why???
3
Riddle, a huge number of jobs now are in the gig economy, and moving is a huge investment and a big risk.
Would you risk a move if the only job prospects were as an independent contractor, no job security, no healthcare, no guaranteed salary?
38
@Donut - You're asking the wrong question. Rather than "Would you risk moving for a contract job?" the question is really "Can you afford to stay put?" Let's put it this way: Most folks who choose to stay, particularly those in rural areas or in towns whose corporate patrons had ditched them for somewhere else, they already have no jobs (never mind "job security"), no healthcare, and income in the form of either disability claims from social security. Case in point: WV. THESE are the folks who have little to no prospects at all. Those in the gig economy might think they have a bit more luxury to choose, but in ten years' time when driverless technology is ready for prime time, do you seriously think the gig economy still needs them??
1
I don't get where the younger generation has got the idea that someone (previous generations, society, Government) owes something - ANYTHING - to them. AN employer, perhaps, does, as he/she has signed an employment contract (hopefully). But I, as a taxpayer, owe them nothing. I want my tax money go towards providing livable environment in this country: for the Army (read the DoD), the environment (read the EPA), the rule of law (read: police, firefighters, etc.). I don't even want it to go towards medicine (as the private sector takes care of it just fine) or education (again, all my kids went to private grade schools and colleges and are doing just fine, thank you). And I most definitely do not want the so-called "living wage" to be subsidized by my tax dollars: those who were dumb enough to get lib arts degrees (or none at all), have made their own beds; let them lay in them now. I am sick of irresponsible people dancing thru the summer and then knocking at the worker ant's door begging for shelter and accommodations. We - the worker bees - owe NOTHING to irresponsible bums. Period.
1
Someone thinks the for-profit healthcare racketeers are taking care of everyone just "fine". In the real world, the USA has by far the most expensive provisioning system in the world, 18% GDP, and millions are uninsured or underinsured, and either bankrupted or in debt hell due to complex and predatory billing. Many poor or elderly Americans can't afford vital drugs and have to choose between food and medicine.
This depressing post is exhibit A in why the USA is fracturing as a nation and may yet descend into chaos: the rich are doing fine and have opted out of the social contract. They say empathy negatively correlates with wealth.
47
I don't know where or if you work, Yulia, but hardly anyone signs an "employment contract" to get a job. Most of us work "at will" jobs, in which you have the right to quit anytime and the employer has the right to fire you at any time, for any reason or no reason (unless, perhaps, you're a member of a protected class or are in a union).
15
Well, it seems Ayn Rand is alive and well.
16
Can someone contact the nice woman who was so delighted about how her Trump tax cut would pay for her Costco membership and ask her if she has to give it up in order to cover increasing gas prices for her vehicle?
23
There is zero doubt that the economy is very strong. There is little doubt that interest rates are lower than the FED thinks is healthy long term for the country. Now is the time to move rates up in a slow steady way. Just keep going. Whether it takes two years or two and a half is less important than getting there
4
Gosh, you mean a roaring stock market and record corporate profits aren’t really helping the poor and the middle class? Golly, who’d have thought this was possible?
I mean jeepers, it’s not like the stock market has been completely decoupled from the health of the actual economy for around 20 years, and it’s not like the tax code has been messed up so badly that it benefits mostly corporations and big investors or anything.
Oh wait — they have been. Golly.
Ready to stop electing Republicans yet, America? You’ve been voting against your own best interests for 20 years. Turn off Fox News and start paying attention to what your elected representatives have actually been DOING.
83
The US is sliding into becoming Brazil. We're almost there.
24
Workers have been getting the shaft and wage cuts for 20 years while upper management and recruitment companies skim off the top.
Real wages have declined, not stagnated.
I was recently offered a great opportunity at a major "family-oriented" entertainment company. Meh. They were offering a whopping $16/hr for an experienced web developer with custom coding experience. That's not friendly to My Family. 10 years ago, I easily made $85/hr doing that same job. Programmers with experience used to get decent pay. That's been gutted
What used to be paid to the person doing the work is now siphoned off by 'offshore body shops' -- worker gets $20/hr. Body shop gets $80.
US Companies don't want "the best and brightest" they want widgets -- the "cheapest and the easiest to control." Why else lobby for more H1Bs and under-funded Public Education, eliminate on-the-job training, gut worker retraining, and make it impossible for all but the rich, already-employed to pay for on-going training?
Salaries for CEOs at 300% of average worker pay? Pay the CEO a reasonable premium? Sure. But when the shop floor hasn't seen a raise in 3 years, how do companies justify giving the C-suite a $20M bonuses and raises of 30%? They don't. They do it because they can.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/hbsworkingknowledge/2018/01/22/if-the-ceos-...
99
That's what a globalized marketplace looks like, in case you're not aware of it. Jobs that allow you to telecommute, work out of anywhere, are a two-edged swords. Yes, during the mid to late 1990s, we hailed that as the savior to work-life balance...until it becomes clear that it's also the meal ticket for those in countries like India, eastern Europe, and Asia, hungrier than us and far happier to work for 1/10th of our going rate, producing the same kind of work. But, in a way, can you blame companies for that? Sure, they want "the smart and brightest", but at a price they can afford to compete in a globalized marketplace where Chinese and Indians are churning quality gadgets at a fraction of our price.
In one of the startups I worked previously, we had to make this hard decision, hiring 4 experienced developers offshore that paid less than the price of one junior developer in US. The question becomes: Can you afford to do everything local? (Yes, we did this with clear-eyed view, with timezone differences, potential quality concerns and cultural differences, but it's something we have to work with.) Those countries churn out far more STEM grads than US can, and they are hungrier, eager to please (unlike some local americans do).
I hear your pain: You're paid $16/hr for work that used to pay $85/hr. Left unsaid is: The amount of work 4 developers can churn out overseas, for the price of one in US. The good easy life is no more. We all have to work far harder these days.
2
It was back in the 1980s that I first noticed a frequent inverse relationship between the stock market and the economy as seen by the groundlings.
14
“I think that they are examining the problem with assumptions from a different economic era. And they don’t know how to assess where we are now.”
Boom.
Constance Bevitt should be giving seminars to the Fed, Ivy League economics professors, and business leaders, because she knows more about the economy than they ever will.
Just about everyone in the real world who is unburdened by a PhD in Economics knows that the economists, policymakers, and politicians are dinosaurs, stubbornly clinging to economic theories that have demonstrably failed, because that's all they know. They're relics from a bygone era, but unfortunately, they remain in positions of authority, despite having been wrong about just about everything from globalization to the economic impact of the Digital Revolution.
As a result, they're applying 20th century solutions to 21st century problems, and are "puzzled" when they don't work. Yet they keep pulling the same "levers".
People who thought economists couldn't do more damage than they did in 2008 are in for a rude awakening. The opportunity cost of what is now a decade of their monumental incompetence is staggering.
At this point it's clear that nothing will change until everything changes.
And that day is drawing near.
Everything from Trump/Brexit/the ongoing collapse of Europe, to the teacher strikes here are warning signs of turmoil to come.
Worrying that "the economy is too good" is the 2018 equivalent of 2007's "What housing bubble?"
24
If the president has anything to do with this economy then we are already doomed by his ineptness and greed. All efforts to hollow out all of the cabinet level functions are full steam ahead. We are now approaching Banana Republic status.
13
Who is doing well these days is tightly constrained by geography and demographics as the Democrats recently found out.
Take a small state like Maine with only 16 counties.
Based on the average weekly income for 2016, two of the counties are doing OK but even in these counties the average weekly income is still $90 less per week than the national average. In the remaining 14 counties, four a doing not-so-well and the remaining 10 are doing not-so-well-at-all.
The median statewide household income in 2016 was $51,127 versus $59,039 for the U.S. Partition that median household income among the 16 counties like the average weekly income and only The Fed could think the economy is becoming overheated!
https://www.bls.gov/regions/new-england/news-release/CountyEmploymentAnd...
3
Here's a novel idea: Work harder. Or move to a state that has industry and jobs available. In New York State, people are leaving the moribund jobless counties north of New York, and relocating south. Thanks to our Democrat controlled state and local governments, industry is over regulated and taxed. It is only a matter of time until they give up the ghost and move to tax friendlier states.
3
paul, Ayup, the entire state of Maine will just move to where?
Buffalo or Syracuse?
12
Carn, Hardly. Upstate New York is likewise losing industry and jobs. But when your economy cannot support the population, the population needs to relocate. It's called survival, and Americans have traditionally moved long distances to pursue their economic dreams and financial success. Remember Horace Greely and "Go West young man"? Now he would say, "Go South young man".
2
The government should stop bragging about the 4.1% unemployment rate. We all know that the unemployed who are no longer collecting unemployment benefits are not counted. The government and big business have their noses in all aspects of our lives, so they should be able to count the unemployed who don't show up in the official statistics. The so-called low unemployment statistics don't take into account the millions of Americans who are only semi-employed since so many jobs today are not full-time.The majority of employed Americans are not making nearly enough money to make ends meet, and many would be better off on social services. The economy is only booming for people who are already at the top of the heap.
113
Government still brags about the low unemployment rate since it still beats other countries like Europe to the punch.
Some day, this will be a topic worthy of a Nobel for some indicators or measures that correlate the well-being of its citizenry than crude measures like unemployment rate. Unless and until then, mediocre economists will continue to use outdated measures to guide us through uncharted waters.
2
Total payroll (In dollars). The number already exists.
The Federal Reserve has helped create an unbalanced economy where capital assets have become grossly inflated. Meanwhile the have increased the 'supply' of debt across all sectors from govt. to individuals to historic highs.
Whats distorting the market/economy more that ANYTHING today are the policies of the federal reserve. If a fraction of the debt were to be paid off this would offset all inflation. Money is language we use every day but few understand it let alone speak it.
6
Today is indeed a different economy than the 70's & 80's. The radical right wing has taken over our governments and passed multiple laws to suppress worker rights. No rights at work laws, no minimum wage increases, union busting, no complete contracts, and dozens of other means have been used to suppress workers' ability to demand a family supporting income.
Time for workers to stand up for themselves and vote the anti-worker, anti-family, anti-American crowd out.
32
With greater global trade low domestic unemployment and higher growth doesn't need to be as much a cause of higher inflation. This is because goods and some services could be sourced from other countries where there is less wage pressure. Of course this will tend to hold down domestic wages in those industries where this occurs while US consumers overall will reap the benefits.
The Trump administration wants to use tariffs (a hidden tax) to reduce such trade that will increase prices in the US. This may increase employment and wages in the affected industries but overall US consumers are worse off. Also this will not improve the productivity of these US industries charging higher prices and so they will become even less competitive in the global market.
4
If "overheated" means corporations are taking advantage of their YUGE tax "break", but the banks haven't yet slammed us with higher interest rates ("why should those corporations get all the money? We're supposed to be skimming more!"), which will, of course, cause a major crashing thud, then yes, you could say that.
Janet Yellen was doing a great job, and then the traitor happened.
16
Only a fool would think that wage increases are in the cards for ordinary workers. We are now a plutocracy, with pockets of oligarchy in the Executive Branch. The wealthy are concerned only with cementing wealth, opportunities and advantages for themselves and their offspring. The middle class is disappearing fast.
33
Be very careful here, not taking care of the average person is what upset the apple cart and got Trump elected in the first place. There are millions of people who are just getting by, neither party has a plan to address their concerns. There is however, one tiny detail you may want to pay attention to - They Vote!
16
When you make changes in a bifurcated economy, you will get bifurcated results. People who have leverage because their skills are in demand are experiencing the overheating. Everyone else is getting left behind.
Meanwhile, as the price of housing keeps increasing, the bar for the minimum wage rises. You do have to pay full-time workers enough to house themselves and have something left over to eat and get to work, unless you want them to show up hungry after having slept outside.
It isn't all that complicated when you factor in human needs as an integral part of the mix.
28
The recently passed tax legislation will not provide much economic stimulus as most will be stuffed into savings. Interest rates are already rising, partly as a result of the anticipated clash of public and private financing. This will of course result in a drag on the economy, so I'm guessing the Fed has a bit more wiggle room than we might gather from this discussion.
Wages are just beginning to recover from decades of lag, but structurally we're no better off. Labor has no clout and won't for the foreseeable future.
The Trump White House, as usual, excels only in pandering. Repeating failed dogma, they promise it will all come true if we just hold our breath long enough.
10
Can one imagine an article about the economy being too good appearing under an Obama administration?
7
The nano second the working class sniffs a pay raise the banking elite step in to put a stop to it. The Fed is going to make real estate even more unaffordable to anyone but the rich while making sure the little guy stays put. If there is a compelling reason to elect a Democrat President its to assure low rates as the Fed has a history of jacking up rates and causing a recession every time a GOP President comes in. Globalist Fed has one priority: protect the assets of the rich.
38
Low interest rates benefit THE RICH only. Only them can borrow at almost zero interest and invest into risky assets. Poor schmacks like ourselves have their savings wiped out uder low interest rates.
12
The negative effect of low interest on savings is one issue. But you are ignoring the benefit of low interest rates to anyone who needs to obtain or refinance a mortgage, or take out a car loan, or a small business loan.
Is the government really concerned with the workers still out of the workforce?
12
No. The government was not concerned with working Americans when Bush crashed the economy.
It was not concerned when Obama bailed out billionaire banksters and Fraud Street, while leaving Main Street to drown.
Why do you think the government would be remotely concerned with working Americans when we are being ruled by oligarchs and plutocrats?
9
Sad stuff. The most insidious economic fact is income disparity. Who cares if the wealthy get wealthier when everyone else gets poorer?
Historically, that is the sign the guillotine is about to be hauled out.
77
I have a stockpile of pitchforks and torches in my barn. Have not yet spent any money on a guillotine. Perhaps the time is growing near.
16
Not here in the U.S. Instead, we continue blaming "illegals" and "liberal elitists." The economic situation may not be the one we want, but it's the one many voters deserve.
11
The economy is booming?? Not for the middle class. We are still stuck with stagnant wages and no benefits. Gas is inching towards $4.00 a gal and food prices are out of sight. The middle class in America doesnt care about DOW Jones boom or bust statistics exhorted on the news day after day; that's for corporate America. Our schools are in shambles in red states particularly. No one cares. The red state legislatures spend exhorbitant time and money on abortion bills but to fund education? Hell no, how dare those teachers be that impertinent?
106
But that's what the voters in those states appear to want. No one forced them to vote for those people.
6
And way too many of those Red State teachers still vote R for one issue - abortion.
3
The red state voters have been lied to. I really don't think they want to cut government funding for social programs. Pew and Gallup Research bears that out. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/26/few-americans-support-cu...
1
So the job you had for years, where you made $40K a year, has gone overseas. Now, desperate, you made $500 last month driving for Uber. According to the government, you are "employed." So much for government statistics.
137
There has been and always will be employment-related friction in the economy. The economy is constantly evolving and therefore so are the jobs driving it. As employment shifts occur, real people on the front line will feel the pain.
This is not to discount the pain being experienced, but I feel there is a difference between constructive and destructive friction. When the issues are tangible, say shifts in manufacturing due to greater AI, there is at least some clarity on constructive paths forward in terms of worker skills, education and the like. However today, the degree of growing disparity between the have and have nots feels quite destructive. Thus the high degree of disaffection that came to the fore in the support of both Trump and Bernie. The disaffection is still there, it's growing, and with little to no discussion of how to break this cycle and help people constructively shift to the needs of the current economy.
In the meantime we've all chosen a political tribe and focus on the bickering when neither Democrats nor Republicans are focused on doing anything constructive. It's just about winning points and it feels to me we're in a downward spiral without a way out.
9
IF someone gives up and stops looking for work, they are not counted as 'unemployed'.
If someone is working at minimum age and cannot support his/herself or family, they are still counted as 'employed'.
IF employers have trouble filling jobs because they can't find the 'qualified' people, they say there is a 'labor shortage'. But its actually a 'skill' shortage that could be addressed by training.
If employers say that can't find workers to work at low level jogs, they say there is a 'worker shortage'. But some of those jobs pay minimum wage then also 'deduct' from that pay for: uniforms, safety items, mobile pay-devices, and force the employee to use their own car with no compensation and/or have a hostile or dangerous workplace.
104
Wages have not kept up with inflation for the past 30 years or more. The real median wage has in fact fallen. For whom is it a problem if the labor market gets tight enough that real wages start rising again? The answer: It's a problem for owners of capital, who would see their real earnings fall. Why is the Federal Reserve giving more weight to the interests of the 0.1% who making their living from investment than to the interests of the 99.9% of us who must work for a living?
112
Inflation hurts everyone. Think of the senior on a fixed income. Think of the shopkeeper forced to pay higher wages and pay more for inventory while competing with Amazon. You don't know what you're talking about.
4
"Why is the Federal Reserve giving more weight... " Look at who sits on the Federal Reserve. That should answer your (rhetorical) question.
9
Inflation is a subsidy for speculators. The Kuchners and Trumps of this world depend on it.
6
Too good? For whom? The rich? Well, yes. Get ready for another financial crisis, where the average citizen, who hasn't benefited, will pay for bank, and corporate losses, AGAIN.
115
Great anger will play a more significant roll the next time in the general population (read: not rich) when things go south again, as they inevitably will.
The political climate and the threat of economic disaster personally will be far too great and many people are more aware than ever before of the PR spin designed to manipulate, coming from those in power.
So this lede is a complete editorial comment. Restaurant worker upset that her OBAMA CARE health insurance costs to much, BUT she found a job immediately.
So this is Trump's fault?
How?
4
The lede doesn't say whether the restaurant worker can't afford health insurance through her employer or the Affordable Care Act.
Re "she couldn't afford her health insurance deductible": I think the writer meant "health insurance premium." If she could afford her premium but not her deductible, maybe she has does have health insurance.
7
Well, first of all, she didn't "find a job immediately" - she went back to her old job, which was probably vacant because at $22,000/year, it's not much of a livable wage for anyone who has a family to support. Can't see how she'd be able to afford the deductible for any private health insurance either - not sure what Obamacare has to do with it. And finally - where does it say this is Trump's fault? The article is about Fed officials trying to balance growth with inflation, and their concern for employees who have not yet seen the benefit of an improved economy. Mr. Trump's name was only mentioned once in that WH officials felt his actions will yield "faster growth while suppressing inflation." No where does it say that Mr. Trump is at fault for anything.
4
“BUT she found a job immediately.”
Correct. Now, she can choose between dog or cat food for dinner.
10
The Feds need to get out in the real America. I believe over half of the country that is working, still makes under $30K/year. And the super wealthy in the cities are just driving up home prices so the middle class is being driven into living in RVs and Vans or in shelters. Just looking at their statistics of company growth, profits and unemployment figures doesn't tell the whole story. If the Fed raises interest rates, it only hurts the middle and working classes even more.
52
Bill--The Fed has become another self-serving bunch of bureaucrats, who serve a certain "class" of people. They will help start the next financial crisis.
25
Unfortunately, there seem to be different meanings to the language used to talk about the state of "the economy." Economists talk about levels of unemployment being very low, but being " employed" doesn't seem to mean what it once did. Maybe I'm "employed" in 2 or 3 jobs, neither full-time and neither with any kind of benefits, struggling to make ends meet. Am I supposed to be content that I'm not "unemployed?" Now, how many out there are in a similar situation, ironically contributing to a supposed labor shortage (based on unemployment statistics) that hypothetically will drive up wages? It doesn't add up for people whose income is from wages. Meanwhile the economists look at a hot stock market and conflate that with a hot " economy. " There must be a more accurate way to judge how well the average person is faring and what his prospects really are.
135
There is a more accurate way. The data is there. Look at the U6 unemployment rate and labor participation rate. Visit the St. Louis FED website for a treasure trove of intel.
They do know what is going on. Knowing and caring are two entirely different subjects. They do not care the proverbial rats behind.
9
One way of gauging how the average person is doing is to look at real median household income, which was at an all-time high of $59,039 in 2016, the last year of available data. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/12/business/economy/income-rebound-reces...
Just because the average person is doing okay does not mean that everyone is doing okay.
- Half of households make less than that median
- The number of people working part-time who want full-time employment is still over 5 million, although it is down from a high of 9.3 million
- people who lost jobs after age 50 are still struggling to find comparable employment. Many are "retired," although they would have preferred to keep working.
6
We need to add a full time equivalent and/or living wage equivalent employment number to get an accurate picture of the labor market in today's economy.
4
When you give large tax breaks to the very wealthy and corporations why would income go up for those in the middle class? Trickle down theory? Any evidence that trickle down theory worked in the past..........nope.
Inequality does not bring on income increase in the lower and middle class. Without Unions and with the GOP (US government) aligned side by side with big corporations means there is no counter balance to help shift pay to the middle class. Unless there is a change in governing philosophy this will only get worse.
44
“Yet Federal Reserve officials are beginning to worry about a possibility that seems remote to workers who still feel left behind: the danger of the economy’s running too hot, destabilizing financial markets and setting off a rapid escalation in wages”
In other words, what’s good for workers and society in general is bad for the tiny slice of the population, the wealthy, who hold all of the political power.
There is no stronger indictment of US-style capitalism and politics. And then we have the media, owned by the wealthy, that plays down and even tries to normalize the evil of this situation and the human suffering it has created.
221
I love how experts quoted in articles like this like to pretend how baffling it is that wages are stagnant or falling behind cost of living.
I’m sure they know full well the global economy is rigged by politicians, corporations and oligarchs, and the reality is that no economist or fed executive is looking out for ordinary Americans, struggling with multiple jobs, poor healthcare coverage, personal and student loan debts and unaffordable medication. Spare us this fake noblesse oblige, it rings hollow.
172
How's income inequality doing? Uh huh...
15
Of course; especially the new head of the Fed, a personal representative of the Koch Brothers and the banker gangsters who should have been jailed after 2008. Another Republican corrupted institution operating on the same voodoo economics that Republicans and their plutocrat owners have used to steal whatever isn't nailed down. Heavens forbid that wages might rise: maybe people won't be so harried and stressed and might actually begin to get ahead in this country, a concept the Republicans have destroyed with their 40 year war against workers, their unions, and the middle class.
November 2018: the beginning of the reckoning for Republican liars, thieves and traitors.
61
If only it was that simple. unfortunately, the Democrats have also contributed policies which have enhanced inequality: Clinton's deregulation of commodities and banking; Clinton's endorsement of NAFTA and other "trade pacts" while only giving lip service to worker retraining programs; Obama's ACA strengthened the private insurers - the private insurance system is a major upward wealth transfer mechanism; during the depths of the recession, Obama froze public employee pay.
There much more, but the truth is inescapable: both parties are to blame, though there is no argument that Republican class warfare is more robust.
12
Federal Reserve, meet inequality. Twenty or thirty years ago, when inequality wasn't as bad, what was good for the overall economy was good for most. Today, that isn't true.
The Great Recession was triggered by an excess of lending that falsely helped many people purchase homes. When that lending went bust, millions of people and their homes became collateral damage. Corporations immediately laid off millions to maintain profit margins. The downward spiral hurt workers the most.
So now the question is, at what point does overheating trigger the next bank crisis or surge in corporate layoffs which would hurt those people again? The Fed needs to really examine the effects of policy on everyday people, not just the banking sector and large corporations.
166
Unfortunately that's not the mandate of the Fed. How much a recession would hurt the people, is something politicians should be worry about. The Fed measures its actions and success by a set number of indicators (eg. unemployment rate, interest rate, money supply, regulations and enforcement). You are asking economists to do more than their purview would allow them to since they work mostly out of their ivory tower. That's why economists' analysis and reports are always so clinical, inhuman even.
3
Yes, but decisions as to which parameters and indicators that they would measure were decided by the wealthy bankers who run the Fed, and obviously, these people have no concern for the sizable portion of the population on the losing end of the economy. This isn't ivory tower, it's class warfare.
1
Ms. Bevitt is spot on. What is it they say? The generals are always preparing to fight the last battle of the last war. The 1970s and 80 were so different than today. Us boomers were all entering the job market and distorting everything. Now, us boomers are all leaving the job market and we aren't the consumption engine we used to be when we were building families. We used to have unions as a lever to move wages. Now we have nothing to move the wage scale. If we ask for too much money, employers just move the business overseas. Then, there's the automation that's replacing people with robots. Everything is different.
70