Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
DOUBLE YOUR DONATION!
We don’t run corporate ads. We don’t shake our readers down for money every month or every quarter like some other sites out there. We provide our site for free to all, but the bandwidth we pay to do so doesn’t come cheap. A generous donor is matching all donations of $100 or more! So please donate now to double your punch!
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Too Soon for a Rate Increase

This week, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) is meeting to review the current state of the economy and decide whether or not to make any changes to monetary policy to promote the Federal Reserve’s goals of “maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates.”

The main policy tool available to the Fed at this juncture is raising the federal funds interest rate, which has been pegged at essentially zero for over six years. While Fed watchers and other experts don’t expect the FOMC to raise rates at this meeting, they’ll be hanging on every word of the FOMC’s announcement and Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen’s press conference afterwards to find out if they plan to raise the rate sooner rather than later this year.

Most of Wall Street appears to be expecting that the FOMC will wait until September or October to raise the rate, but a growing number of voices are predicting that the recent strong jobs report, which reported 280,000 jobs added to the economy in May, could motivate it to raise the rate as early as July. Another reason that is cited to support a rate increase is the fact that the official unemployment rate is currently at 5.5 percent. While that is a healthy drop from the peak of 10 percent in October 2009, many experts point out that in this weak recovery, that rate may not be an accurate measure of “full or maximum employment.” This is because the official unemployment rate fails to account for the significant numbers of part-time workers who’d like more hours, discouraged workers who’ve given up even looking for work, and others who are not counted as part of the labor force.

One way to get around these issues and more directly measure the recovery is to look at the employment to population ratio (EPOP), which basically is the percent of the population that is employed. My colleague at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, Nicholas Buffie, recently did just that.

His analysis shows that, for prime-age (25 to 54 years old) workers, the EPOP was 79.7 percent at the start of the recession in December 2007. During the downturn, the prime-age EPOP hit a low of 74.8 percent, or a drop of 4.9 percentage points. By March 2015, the EPOP has risen to 77.2 percent, or an increase of 2.4 percentage points. In other words, we’re less than halfway back to where we were before the recession.

When you look at different demographic groups, the story is even more telling. For example, the prime-age EPOPs for Asian-Americans has seen just a 15.3 percent recovery. Latino Americans have fared better than other ethnicities, but have only recovered 57 percent of employment lost to the recession. Prime-age African-Americans saw their EPOP drop by 8.1 percentage points, from 74.8 to 66.7 percent, during the recession. By March 2015, African-Americans’ EPOP has risen to 71.0 percent, which means that there are still 4.3 percentage points to go. That means that prime-age African-Americans still need to close an employment gap that’s almost as large as the entire decrease faced by whites during the recession.

It’s also worth noting that before the recession, the 74.8 percent EPOP for African-Americans is equal to the lowest point for whites during the recession. In other words, black Americans were already experiencing the equivalent of a white American recession before the economy crashed at the end of 2007.

So what does this mean for the Federal Reserve? The implications seem obvious: The labor market is still far from fully recovered, so we’re not anywhere near ready to raise interest rates. Prime-age workers’ overall employment is only about halfway back to where it was before the recession, and when you look at different demographic groups, it becomes clear that as African-Americans lost the most during the downturn, they still have the most to gain from the recovery.

Simply put, if the FOMC raises rates too early, then those groups that were harmed the most by the recession will also lose the most by the resulting halt to the recovery.

Nicole Woo is the director of domestic policy at the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

This article originally appeared on The Hill.

More articles by:
October 23, 2018
Patrick Cockburn
The Middle East, Not Russia, Will Prove Trump’s Downfall
Ipek S. Burnett
The Assault on The New Colossus: Trump’s Threat to Close the U.S.-Mexican Border
Mary Troy Johnston
The War on Terror is the Reign of Terror
Maximilian Werner
The Rhetoric and Reality of Death by Grizzly
David Macaray
Teamsters, Hells Angels, and Self-Determination
Jeffrey Sommers
“No People, Big Problem”: Democracy and Its Discontents In Latvia
Dean Baker
Looking for the Next Crisis: the Not Very Scary World of CLOs
Binoy Kampmark
Leaking for Change: ASIO, Jakarta, and Australia’s Jerusalem Problem
Chris Wright
The Necessity of “Lesser-Evil” Voting
Muhammad Othman
Daunting Challenge for Activists: The Cook Customer “Connection”
Don Fitz
A Debate for Auditor: What the Papers Wouldn’t Say
October 22, 2018
Henry Giroux
Neoliberalism in the Age of Pedagogical Terrorism
Melvin Goodman
Washington’s Latest Cold War Maneuver: Pulling Out of the INF
David Mattson
Basket of Deplorables Revisited: Grizzly Bears at the Mercy of Wyoming
Michelle Renee Matisons
Hurricane War Zone Further Immiserates Florida Panhandle, Panama City
Tom Gill
A Storm is Brewing in Europe: Italy and Its Public Finances Are at the Center of It
Suyapa Portillo Villeda
An Illegitimate, US-Backed Regime is Fueling the Honduran Refugee Crisis
Christopher Brauchli
The Liars’ Bench
Gary Leupp
Will Trump Split the World by Endorsing a Bold-Faced Lie?
Michael Howard
The New York Times’ Animal Cruelty Fetish
Alice Slater
Time Out for Nukes!
Geoff Dutton
Yes, Virginia, There are Conspiracies—I Think
Daniel Warner
Davos in the Desert: To Attend or Not, That is Not the Question
Priti Gulati Cox – Stan Cox
Mothers of Exiles: For Many, the Child-Separation Ordeal May Never End
Manuel E. Yepe
Pence v. China: Cold War 2.0 May Have Just Begun
Raouf Halaby
Of Pith Helmets and Sartorial Colonialism
Dan Carey
Aspirational Goals  
Wim Laven
Intentional or Incompetence—Voter Suppression Where We Live
Weekend Edition
October 19, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Jason Hirthler
The Pieties of the Liberal Class
Jeffrey St. Clair
A Day in My Life at CounterPunch
Paul Street
“Male Energy,” Authoritarian Whiteness and Creeping Fascism in the Age of Trump
Nick Pemberton
Reflections on Chomsky’s Voting Strategy: Why The Democratic Party Can’t Be Saved
John Davis
The Last History of the United States
Yigal Bronner
The Road to Khan al-Akhmar
Robert Hunziker
The Negan Syndrome
Andrew Levine
Democrats Ahead: Progressives Beware
Rannie Amiri
There is No “Proxy War” in Yemen
David Rosen
America’s Lost Souls: the 21st Century Lumpen-Proletariat?
Joseph Natoli
The Age of Misrepresentations
Ron Jacobs
History Is Not Kind
John Laforge
White House Radiation: Weakened Regulations Would Save Industry Billions
Ramzy Baroud
The UN ‘Sheriff’: Nikki Haley Elevated Israel, Damaged US Standing
Robert Fantina
Trump, Human Rights and the Middle East
Anthony Pahnke – Jim Goodman
NAFTA 2.0 Will Help Corporations More Than Farmers
Jill Richardson
Identity Crisis: Elizabeth Warren’s Claims Cherokee Heritage
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail