Inflation (Economics)

More stories

  • 163 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    Why the Fed’s Jackson Hole Confab Matters for Wall St. and the Economy

    by

    The Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City’s annual conference in Wyoming gets a lot of buzz. Here’s why it matters for Wall Street and the economy.Anyone who has flipped through newspapers or business television channels this week might have noticed two words on repeat: Jackson Hole.They refer to the premier central banking conference of the year, which is held late each August at the Jackson Lake Lodge in Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming. This year’s conference kicks off Thursday and runs through Saturday.To the uninitiated, it might seem weird that what is arguably the most important economic event in the world is held in remote Wyoming, two time zones away from the Federal Reserve’s Washington-based Board of Governors and 1,047 miles from its host, the Kansas City Fed. And the symposium itself is hardly your average conference. Loafers cede to cowboy boots. Attendees snack on huckleberry pastries (or swill huckleberry drinks) while discussing the latest economic papers.But if Jackson Hole is a little bit incongruous, it is also unquestionably important, an invite-only gathering where paradigm-shaping research is presented and momentous policy shifts are announced. The event has long been an obsession on Wall Street.This year will be no exception. Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, is scheduled to speak Friday morning, and markets are waiting anxiously to parse his remarks for even the slightest hint about how much the Fed might cut interest rates at its meeting next month — and how quickly central bankers will reduce borrowing costs after that.Wondering how a monetary policy conference held at the tail end of August became such a big deal and why it has stayed that way? Curious whether this year’s Jackson Hole conference will matter for mortgage rates or job prospects?We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 150 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    Powell Faces Economic Crossroads as He Prepares to Speak at Jackson Hole

    by

    Jerome Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, will deliver remarks as inflation cools and growth holds up — but as labor market weakening threatens to interrupt the soft landing.Two years ago, Jerome H. Powell took the podium at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City’s annual conference at Jackson Hole in Wyoming and warned America that lowering inflation would require some pain.On Friday, Mr. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, will again deliver his most important policy speech of the year from that closely watched stage. But this time, he is much more likely to focus on how the Fed is trying to pull off what many onlookers once thought was unlikely, and maybe even impossible: a relatively painless soft landing.Both the Fed and the American economy are approaching a crossroads. Inflation has come down sharply since its 2022 peak of 9.1 percent, with the year-over-year increase in the Consumer Price Index falling to 2.9 percent in July. Given the progress, the critical question facing Fed officials is no longer how much economic damage it will take to wrestle price increases back under control. It is whether they can finish the job without inflicting much damage at all.That remains a big if.Consumer spending and overall economic growth have held up in the face of high interest rates, which are meant to cool demand and eventually weigh down inflation. But the job market is beginning to weaken. Revisions released this week showed that employers hired fewer workers in 2023 and early 2024 than was previously reported. The unemployment rate rose to 4.3 percent in July, up from 4.1 percent in June and 3.5 percent a year earlier. The latest jump could be a fluke — a hurricane messed with the data — but it could also be an early warning that the economy is hurtling toward the brink of a recession.That makes this a critical moment for the Fed. Officials have held interest rates at a two-decade high of 5.3 percent for a full year. Now, as they try to secure a soft and gentle economic landing, they are preparing to take their foot off the brake. Policymakers are widely expected to begin lowering rates at their meeting in September.Mr. Powell could use his speech to confirm that a rate cut is imminent. But most economists think that he will avoid detailing just how much and how quickly rates are likely to drop. Fed officials will receive a fresh jobs report on Sept. 6, providing a clearer idea of how the economy is shaping up before their Sept. 17-18 meeting.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Harris and Trump Offer a Clear Contrast on the Economy

    by

    Both candidates embrace expansions of government power to steer economic outcomes — but in vastly different areas.Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald J. Trump flew to North Carolina this week to deliver what were billed as major speeches on the economy. Neither laid out a comprehensive policy plan — not Ms. Harris in her half-hour focus on housing, groceries and prescription drugs, nor Mr. Trump in 80 minutes of sprinkling various proposals among musings about dangerous immigrants.But in their own ways, both candidates sent voters clear and important messages about their economic visions. Each embraced a vision of a powerful federal government, using its muscle to intervene in markets in pursuit of a stronger and more prosperous economy.They just disagreed, almost entirely, on when and how that power should be used.In Raleigh on Friday, Ms. Harris began to put her own stamp on the brand of progressive economics that has come to dominate Democratic politics over the last decade. That economic thinking embraces the idea that the federal government must act aggressively to foster competition and correct distortions in private markets.The approach seeks large tax increases on corporations and high earners, to fund assistance for low-income and middle-class workers who are struggling to build wealth for themselves and their children. At the same time, it provides big tax breaks to companies engaged in what Ms. Harris and other progressives see as delivering great economic benefit — like manufacturing technologies needed to fight global warming, or building affordable housing.That philosophy animated the policy agenda that Ms. Harris unveiled on Friday. She pledged to send up to $25,000 in down-payment assistance to every first-time home buyer over four years, while directing $40 billion to construction companies that build starter homes. She said she would permanently reinstate an expanded child tax credit that President Biden temporarily established with his 2021 stimulus law, while offering even more assistance to parents of newborns.She called for a federal ban on corporate price gouging on groceries and for new federal enforcement tools to punish companies that unfairly push up food prices. “My plan will include new penalties for opportunistic companies that exploit crises and break the rules,” she said, adding: “We will help the food industry become more competitive, because I believe competition is the lifeblood of our economy.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 150 Shares139 Views

    in Economy

    Kamala Harris Blames ‘Price Gouging’ for Grocery Inflation. Here’s What Economists Say.

    by

    Price increases when demand exceeds supply are textbook economics. The question is whether, and how much, the pandemic yielded an excess take.In detailing her presidential campaign’s economic agenda, Vice President Kamala Harris will highlight an argument that blames corporate price gouging for high grocery prices.That message polls well with swing voters. It has been embraced by progressive groups, which regularly point to price gouging as a driver of rapid inflation, or at least something that contributes to rapid price increases. Those groups cheered the announcement late Wednesday that Ms. Harris will call for a federal ban on corporate price gouging on groceries in an economic policy speech on Friday.But the economic argument over the issue is complicated.Economists have cited a range of forces for pushing up prices in the recovery from the pandemic recession, including snarled supply chains, a sudden shift in consumer buying patterns, and the increased customer demand fueled by stimulus from the government and low rates from the Federal Reserve. Most economists say those forces are far more responsible than corporate behavior for the rise in prices in that period.Biden administration economists have found that corporate behavior has played a role in pushing up grocery costs in recent years — but that other factors have played a much larger one.The Harris campaign announcement cited meat industry consolidation as a driver of excessive grocery prices, but officials did not immediately respond on Thursday to questions about the evidence Ms. Harris would cite or how her proposal would work.There are examples of companies telling investors in recent years that they have been able to raise prices to increase profits. But even the term “price gouging” means different things to different people.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 113 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    How Food Prices Have Changed During the Biden Administration

    by

    Grocery prices are no longer rising as rapidly, but food inflation remains a top issue for voters, polls show.A central issue has plagued the Biden administration for most of its term: the steep rise in grocery prices.Polls have consistently found that inflation remains a top concern for voters, who have seen their budgets squeezed. A YouGov poll published last month found that 64 percent of Americans said inflation was a “very serious problem.” And when it comes to inflation, several surveys suggested that Americans were most concerned about grocery prices.Despite the gloom about grocery costs, food price increases have generally been cooling for months. On Wednesday, new data on inflation for July will show if the trend has continued.Economists in a Bloomberg survey think that inflation overall probably climbed by 3 percent from a year earlier, in line with a 3 percent rise in June. That sort of reading would probably keep officials at the Federal Reserve on track to cut interest rates in September. Investors, who were recently rattled by signs of an economic slowdown, have looked to rate cuts as a support for markets.Some voters have blamed President Biden for rising prices, pointing out that food costs have soared over the past four years. Former President Donald J. Trump, when accepting the Republican nomination last month, highlighted grocery costs and said that he would “make America affordable again.”In the year through June, grocery prices rose 1.1 percent, a significant slowdown from a recent peak of 13.5 percent in August 2022. Many consumers might not be feeling relief, though, because food prices overall have not fallen but have continued to increase, albeit at a slower rate. Compared with four years ago, grocery prices are up about 20 percent.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    Annual change in grocery prices for U.S. consumers
    Year-over-year change in average for “food at home” index, not seasonally adjusted.Source: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 238 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Fed Rate Cuts Are Expected Soon, as Inflation Cools. But Will They Be Early Enough to Avoid a Recession?

    by

    The Federal Reserve was about to cut interest rates, turning the corner after a long fight with inflation. But now, its soft landing is in question.The Federal Reserve’s fight against inflation was going almost unbelievably well. Price increases were coming down. Growth was holding up. Consumers continued to spend. The labor market was chugging along.Policymakers appeared poised to lower interest rates — just a little — at their meeting on Sept. 18. Officials did not need to keep hitting the brakes on growth so much, as the economy settled into a comfortable balance. It seemed like central bankers were about to pull off a rare economic soft landing, cooling inflation without tanking the economy.But just as that sunny outcome came into view, clouds gathered on the horizon.The unemployment rate has moved up meaningfully over the past year, and a weak employment report released last week has stoked concern that the job market may be on the brink of a serious cool-down. That’s concerning, because a weakening labor market is usually the first sign that the economy is careening toward a recession.The Fed could still get the soft landing it has been hoping for — weekly jobless claims fell more than expected in fresh data released on Thursday, a minor but positive development. Stocks rallied in the wake of that report, with the S&P 500 rising 2.3 percent by the end of the day.Given the possibility that everything will turn out fine, central bank officials are not yet ready to panic. During an event on Monday, Mary C. Daly, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, suggested that officials were closely watching the job market to try to figure out whether it was cooling too much or simply returning to normal after a few roller-coaster years.“We’re at the point of — is the labor market slowing a lot, or slowing a little?” Ms. Daly said, as she pointed to one-off factors that could have muddled the latest report, like Hurricane Beryl and a recent inflow of new immigrant workers that left more people searching for jobs.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 138 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Trump Suggests that President Should Have a ‘Say’ in Interest Rates

    by

    Donald J. Trump suggested presidents should have input on interest rates, a comment likely to stoke fears that he could try to limit the Federal Reserve’s political independence.Donald J. Trump suggested on Thursday that the president should have a say in setting interest rates — a comment that could rekindle fears that the Republican nominee might try to influence the politically independent Federal Reserve if he is re-elected to the White House.“I feel that the president should have at least say in there, yeah, I feel that strongly,” Mr. Trump said at a news conference Thursday at his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, referring to the rate-setting process. “I think I have a better instinct than, in many cases, people that would be on the Federal Reserve, or the chairman.”Mr. Trump made a habit of loudly criticizing Fed policy while he was in office, often personally attacking Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair.Mr. Trump elevated Mr. Powell to his leadership position, to which President Biden has since reappointed him. But Mr. Powell angered Mr. Trump by keeping interest rates higher than he would have preferred. Mr. Trump responded by calling the Fed chair and his colleagues “boneheads” and at another point asking in a social media post who was a bigger “enemy,” Mr. Powell or Xi Jinping, China’s president.Mr. Trump acknowledged that history of animosity on Thursday, saying that he “used to have it out with him.”While Mr. Trump flirted with the idea of firing Mr. Powell during his time in the Oval Office, it is not clear whether it would be legal to dismiss or demote a sitting Fed chair. In the end, Mr. Trump never tried it. Still, there have been big questions about what might await the Fed if Mr. Trump were to win re-election. Mr. Powell’s term as chair runs to mid-2026.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 113 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    Stock Markets Signal Recession Fears. Here’s the Economic Outlook.

    by

    The economy has repeatedly defied predictions of a downturn since the pandemic recovery began. Now signs of strength contend with shakier readings.The U.S. economy has spent three years defying expectations. It emerged from the pandemic shock more quickly and more powerfully than many experts envisioned. It proved resilient in the face of both inflation and the higher interest rates the Federal Reserve used to combat it. The prospect many forecasters once considered imminent — a recession — looked increasingly like a false alarm.Until now.An unexpectedly weak jobs report on Friday — showing slower hiring in July, and a surprising jump in unemployment — triggered a sell-off in the stock market as investors worried that an economic downturn might be underway after all. By Monday, that decline had turned into a rout, with financial markets tumbling around the world.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    The number of jobs added in July was the second smallest monthly gain in years.
    Note: Data is seasonally adjustedSource: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York Times

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    The unemployment rate in July rose to the highest level since October 2021.
    Note: Data is seasonally adjustedSource: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York TimesSome economists said investors were overreacting to one weak but hardly disastrous report, since many indicators show the economy on fundamentally firm footing.But they said there were also reasons to worry. Historically, increases in joblessness like the one in July — the unemployment rate rose to 4.3 percent, the highest since 2021 — have been a reliable indicator of a recession. And even without that precedent, there has been evidence that the labor market is weakening.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    The Sahm Rule indicator suggests a recession might have already begun.
    Data is seasonally adjusted and shows the change in the U.S. unemployment rate compared with the low point in the previous 12 months. All calculations based on three-month moving average.Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. LouisBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More