Stimulus (Economic)

More stories

  • 113 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    How Tech Is Helping Poor People Get Government Aid

    by

    Even as the government expanded aid programs, many people faced barriers to using them. That problem is now being addressed with apps and streamlined websites.WASHINGTON — In making his case that safety net programs should be easier to use, Jimmy Chen, a tech entrepreneur, recalled visiting a welfare office where people on food stamps endured long waits to submit routine paperwork.They passed the time as people in lines do, staring at their phones — which had the potential to do the work online with greater convenience, accuracy and speed.The image of aid-seekers wasting time with a solution literally in hand captures what critics call an overlooked challenge for people in poverty: Administrative burdens make benefits hard to obtain and tax the time and emotional resources of those who need help.“Too much bureaucracy prevents people from getting the help they need,” said Mr. Chen, whose start-up, Propel, offers a free app that five million households now use to manage their food stamp benefits.Barriers to aid are as old as aid itself, and they exist for reasons as varied as concerns about fraud, the bureaucratic tension between accuracy and speed, and hostility toward people in need. But the perils of red tape have drawn new attention since the coronavirus pandemic left millions of Americans seeking government help, many for the first time.The government approved vast increases in spending but often struggled to deliver the assistance. While some programs reached most households quickly (stimulus checks), others buckled under soaring demand (unemployment benefits) or daunting complexity (emergency rental aid).“The pandemic highlighted how difficult these programs can be to access,” said Pamela Herd, a professor at Georgetown and an author, with Donald P. Moynihan, of “Administrative Burden,” which argues that excessive bureaucracy deepens poverty and inequality.The share of eligible people receiving benefits varies greatly by program: It is about 82 percent for food stamps, 78 percent for the earned-income tax credit and 24 percent for Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, or cash welfare, according to government estimates. That means billions of dollars go unclaimed.On his first day in office, President Biden issued an executive order asking agencies to identify “systemic barriers in accessing benefits,” with the results due in January.Shaped by forces as diverse as the tech revolution, welfare rights and behavioral psychology, the movement to create a more user-friendly safety net was underway before the pandemic underscored the perils of bureaucracy.Code for America, a nonprofit group, spent years devising a portal that makes it easier for Californians to apply for food stamps. Civilla, a Detroit-based nonprofit, helped Michigan shrink its 42-page application by 60 percent.In an age of ambitious social movements, the cry of civic tech — power to the portals — may seem obscure, but Mr. Chen, 34, says democratizing technology’s rewards is essential to social justice.“For someone like me, a phone is like a magic wand,” he said. “If I want to call a cab, there’s an app; if I want to book a hotel, there’s an app; if I want to get a date, there’s an app. It’s just incredibly unfair that we don’t apply more of this sophisticated knowledge to the problems of lower-income Americans.”Among those drawn to the app — recently renamed Providers, from Fresh EBT — is Kimberly Wilson, a single mother in Spindale, N.C., who has a 7-year-old son and cleans vacation rental homes. With her work interrupted by the pandemic, she turned to food stamps, which is also known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.Kimberly Wilson, a single mother in Spindale, N.C., said the app’s most appealing feature is that it gives her the ability to check her food stamp balance.Mike Belleme for The New York TimesWhat Ms. Wilson said she likes most about the SNAP app is the ability to instantly check her balance, which she does almost daily. “It’s a comfort knowing I’m going to be able to feed my kid,” she said.The app also explains the timing and amounts of her payments better than the state, she said, and it steered her to a broadband subsidy that saved $50 a month.But the app’s rewards transcend the particulars, Ms. Wilson said: It leaves her feeling respected.“It makes you feel like it’s normal to need help,” she said, which is especially welcome because she has relatives who post memes depicting people on SNAP as lazy and overfed. “It’s like somebody behind the screen is looking out for us. You feel like they care.”Andrea Young, a Providers user in Charlotte, N.C., goes as far as to say the app “makes us feel like we’re Americans, too.”Propel offers an account that can also receive paychecks and other government benefits with the same balance-checking features, in recognition that most low-income households have multiple sources of income and need stable banking.PropelWith 42 million Americans receiving SNAP, many conservatives dispute the notion that aid is elusive. They see dependency as a greater concern than red tape and argue that administrative contact serves important goals, like deterring people who do not really need help or letting caseworkers encourage the jobless to find work.“The system should be striving to help individuals achieve self-sufficiency through employment” rather than maximize benefits, said Jason Turner, who runs the Secretaries Innovation Group, which advises conservative states on aid policy. “When you pile benefit on top of benefit, you make it harder to break free.”Poverty has long been linked to oppressive bureaucracy. “Little Dorrit,” the 1857 novel by Charles Dickens, lampoons the omnipotent “Department of Circumlocution,” whose stupefying procedures keep the heroine down. The 1975 documentary film “Welfare” offers a modern parallel with footage that one critic called “unbearable in its depictions of frustration and anger” among caseworkers and clients.Sometimes barriers to aid are created deliberately. When Florida’s unemployment system proved unresponsive at the start of the pandemic, Gov. Ron DeSantis told CBS Miami last year that his predecessor’s administration devised it to drive people away. “It was, ‘Let’s put as many kind of pointless roadblocks along the way, so people just say, oh, the hell with it, I’m not going to do that,’” he said. (Mr. DeSantis and his predecessor, Rick Scott, are both Republicans.)Other programs are hindered by inadequate staffing and technology simply because the poor people they serve lack political clout. Historically, administrative hurdles have been tools of racial discrimination. And federal oversight can instill caution because states risk greater penalties for aiding the ineligible than failing to help those who qualify.To show that Michigan’s application was overly complex, Civilla essentially turned to theater, walking officials through an exhibit with fake clients and piped-in office sounds meant to trace an application’s bureaucratic journey. Working with the state, the company created a new application with 80 percent fewer words; the firm is now working in Missouri.Michael Brennan, Civilla’s co-founder, emphasized that the Michigan work was bipartisan — it began under a Republican governor and continued under a Democrat — and saves time for the client and the state.“Change is possible,” he said.With its California portal, Code for America cut the time it took to apply for food stamps by three-quarters or more. The portal was optimized for mobile phones, which is how many poor people use the internet, and it offers chat functions in English, Spanish and Chinese. In counties with the technology, applications increased by 11 percent, while elsewhere the number fell slightly.During the pandemic, Code for America built portals to help poor households claim stimulus checks and the expanded child tax credit. The latter alone delivered nearly $400 million. David Newville, who oversaw the work, quoted a colleague to explain why web design matters: “Implementation is justice.”Mr. Chen, right, and Propel’s chief operating officer, Jeff Kaiser, at the company’s office in Brooklyn. Propel has landed investments from the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz and the sports stars Kevin Durant and Serena Williams.Karsten Moran for The New York TimesAs the son of struggling immigrants from China, Mr. Chen, the founder of Propel, understood hardship before he understood technology. “There wasn’t always enough to eat” in an otherwise happy Kansas City childhood, he said. (The family did not receive SNAP, though Mr. Chen does not know why.) He graduated from Stanford, worked at Facebook and left at 26 for a fellowship in New York, hoping to produce software for people in poverty.Mr. Chen founded Propel in 2014 with $11,000 from a Kickstarter campaign, pitched about 60 investors without success and went two years without a salary. After planning to work on SNAP applications, he shifted to focus on people who were already enrolled and developed the balance display.The existing technology did allow people to check their balances, but it did not work well on mobile phones, and a phone line required a 16-digit number. While studying how poor people shop, Mr. Chen saw them buy cheap items — often a banana — to check the balance on their receipts. It struck him as “disrespectful,” one more hassle that they did not need.In tech terms, a balance display was no special feat, but reaching SNAP recipients was. Mr. Chen said the app’s users checked it on average 17 times a month. Ms. Young, 54, said she checked it more frequently than that.“I check it all day, every day,” she said. “It makes me reassured, knowing that I’m going to have food.” Ms. Young, who gets by on a disability payment of about $800 a month after injuring her back, said she had run out of funds at the register; discarding items while others watched “makes you feel like you’re just pitiful.”Ms. Wilson said the app created a sense of belonging among people used to feeling stigmatized.Mike Belleme for The New York TimesMs. Wilson is so concerned about her balance that she keeps it in her head: It was $14.02 the other day.While the app does not let users talk to each other, she said it still created a sense of belonging among those who felt stigmatized. “It just made me see there were a whole group of people out there in the same circumstance,” she said.The app also tells people how much they have spent and where they spent it; offers recipes and budgeting tools; and provides news about other benefits. It generates revenue by selling ads, often to grocers offering discounts or employers offering jobs; Mr. Chen said the goal was to align the company’s financial interests with those of its users.In early 2016, the app had a few thousand users. A year later, it had about 200,000. Propel landed investments from Andreessen Horowitz, a top venture capital firm, and the sports stars Kevin Durant and Serena Williams. Forbes estimated that the company was worth $100 million, a sum that Mr. Chen called “not far off.”Partnering with a charity, Give Directly, during the pandemic, Propel distributed $180 million to randomly selected app users, offering them $1,000 each. It also moved into advocacy, adding a feature that lets users ask their members of Congress to extend the temporary child tax credit expansion. The app now offers an account that can receive paychecks and other government benefits, prompted in part by the difficulties that the poorest households experienced in collecting stimulus checks, because they often lack stable bank accounts.However they make ends meet, Mr. Chen said, poor people should know where they stand without having to buy a banana.“We pay hundreds of billions of dollars to fund these programs,” he said. “Why not make them work well?” More

  • 125 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    Why the November Jobs Report Is Better Than It Looks

    by

    The number of jobs added was below expectations, but otherwise the report shows an economy on the right track.Everything in the November jobs numbers Friday was good except for the number that usually gets the most attention.The 210,000 jobs that U.S. employers added last month was far below analyst expectations. But most of the other evidence in the report points to a job market that is humming. An open question a few months ago — is this a tight labor market or a loose one? — is quickly being settled in favor of “tight.”Most notably, the jobless rate fell to 4.2 percent from 4.6 percent, a remarkable swing in a single month. The speed with which unemployment has gone from a grave crisis to a benign situation is astounding. Unemployment was 6.7 percent last December. In one year, we’ve experienced an improvement that took three and a half years in the last economic cycle (March 2014 to September 2017).Sometimes a falling unemployment rate is driven by a pernicious trend: People drop out of the labor force. The opposite was true in November. The survey of American households on which the data is based showed uniformly positive signs. The number of people working was up by 1.1 million while the number of adults not in the labor force — neither working nor looking for work — fell by 473,000.Among people in their prime working years, those 25 to 54, the share of people employed rose by a whopping half a percentage point. It was 78.8 percent in November, rapidly approaching its pre-Covid level of 80.4 percent. By early in 2022, it’s easy to imagine that people in that age bracket will be employed at prepandemic rates.Even the disappointing number on job creation, derived from a separate survey of employers, has some silver linings. For one, it was accompanied by positive revisions to September and October job growth numbers, amounting to a combined 82,000, which takes some of the sting away. Revisions have been uncommonly large, and mostly in a positive direction, in recent months, reflecting challenges collecting data in a pandemic economy.For another, soft job creation numbers may also be evidence of a tight labor market. Employers may want to add jobs in larger numbers, but are constrained by the number of workers they’re able to find. That story is certainly consistent with many business surveys and anecdotes about labor shortage issues.A tight job market — one in which workers are scarce and employers have to compete to attract workers — is generally the goal of economic policy. Compensation tends to rise, and workers are confident in their ability to find a new job. The new numbers are just the latest evidence that this is the world American workers are living in right now. (Among the other evidence: The rate of people voluntarily quitting their jobs is at record levels.)That’s not to say everything is perfect. The share of adults in the labor force remains significantly below prepandemic levels — 61.8 percent in November, compared with 63.3 percent in February 2020. That reflects in part the decisions of people to retire early. And it remains unclear how many of those people might return to work as the economy and public health conditions improve.But in terms of policy, this increasingly looks like an economy on the right track. The work of macroeconomic stabilization appears to be pretty much complete. At its coming policy meeting, the Federal Reserve will seriously consider winding down its program of bond-buying faster than planned, Chair Jerome Powell said this week.Despite the soft job creation numbers, the overall November employment report appears to support those plans. Fed officials would like to see a stronger rebound in labor force participation, but that measure was at least heading in the right direction in November. And ultimately it isn’t Fed policy that will decide whether, for example, a 62-year-old who left his job during the pandemic decides to start working again.If anything, the new numbers support the idea that the Fed has found itself out of position, with a monetary policy that is looser than it should be at a time when the labor market is quite healthy and with inflation far above its target.Consider this: In the last economic cycle, the Fed began tapering its bond purchases in December 2013, when the unemployment rate was 6.7 percent and inflation was coming in below the Fed’s 2 percent goal. This time, it began when the jobless rate was 4.2 percent and inflation was in the ballpark of 6 percent (November inflation numbers have not yet been released).Even if you believe the Fed was too quick to tighten monetary policy in 2013 — and the sluggish recovery of the 2010s is evidence that it was — the contrast is striking. In that sense, a more aggressive tapering plan from the Fed will be an effort to adjust its policy stance with the facts on the ground without causing too much disruption to markets or the economy.If the Fed succeeds, the economy will keep growing steadily and the labor market will continue its gradual improvement. But it’s worth noting just how rapid the improvement has already been. In February, the Congressional Budget Office was forecasting the unemployment rate would be 5.3 percent in the current quarter. It has ended up a full percentage point below that level.Ultimately, this has been a speedy labor market recovery, and one that appears to have more room to run. Policymakers have every reason to take the win and continue adjusting to that reality. More

  • 163 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    A Top Official Says the Fed Will ‘Grapple’ With a Faster Bond-Buying Taper

    by

    The president of the New York Federal Reserve said Omicron could prolong supply and demand mismatches, causing some inflation pressures to last.John C. Williams, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, said the latest variant of the coronavirus could prolong the bottlenecks and shortages that have caused inflation to run hotter than expected, and is a risk Fed officials will assess as they “grapple” with how quickly to remove economic support.It is still too soon to know how the Omicron variant, which public health officials in southern Africa identified just last week, will affect the economy, Mr. Williams said Tuesday in an interview with The New York Times. But if the new version of the virus leads to another wave of infections, it could exacerbate the disruptions that have caused prices to rise at their fastest pace in three decades.“Clearly, it adds a lot of uncertainty to the outlook,” Mr. Williams said of the new variant. He later added that a risk with the new variant is that it “will continue that excess demand in the areas that don’t have capacity, and will stall the recovery in the areas where we actually have the capacity.”That, he said, would “mean a somewhat slower rebound overall” and “also does increase those inflationary pressures, in those areas that are in high demand.”Mr. Williams’s comments are the latest indication that policymakers are growing more concerned about inflation and are weighing how to respond. Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, signaled on Tuesday that the central bank could move to withdraw economic support more quickly than it initially expected and suggested that such a decision could come as soon as the Fed’s December meeting.The Fed had been buying $120 billion in government-backed securities each month throughout much of the pandemic to bolster the economy by keeping money flowing in financial markets. In November, officials announced plans to wind down that program gradually through the end of the year and the first half of 2022, a process known as “tapering.” But Mr. Powell indicated on Tuesday that the central bank could wrap up its bond-buying more quickly.Mr. Williams, who is vice chair of the Fed’s policymaking Open Market Committee and is a top adviser to Mr. Powell, did not explicitly endorse a faster tapering process, saying that “there’s a lot to learn and digest and think about coming up to the next meeting.”.css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-1kpebx{margin:0 auto;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-1kpebx{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-1kpebx{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1kpebx{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-1gtxqqv{margin-bottom:0;}.css-19zsuqr{display:block;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-qjk116{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-qjk116 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-qjk116 em{font-style:italic;}.css-qjk116 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:visited{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}But he emphasized that the economy had rebounded more strongly this year than he and other officials had been expecting, and said the unemployment rate had fallen quickly. That economic strengthening at a moment of high inflation may warrant less Fed support, he said.“The question is: Would it make sense to end those purchases somewhat earlier, by maybe a few months, given how strong the economy is?” he said. “That’s a decision, discussion, I expect we’ll have to grapple with.”Inflation has proved a thornier problem than the Fed and most private-sector economists predicted earlier this year. In March, Fed officials said they expected their preferred inflation measure to show consumer prices rising at 2.4 percent at the end of 2021; by September, they had revised that forecast to 4.2 percent.That’s likely to increase further. The central bank’s preferred inflation gauge climbed 5 percent in its most recent reading. Policymakers are closely watching to see what happens in a Consumer Price Index report set for release on Dec. 10, just before the Fed’s meeting on Dec. 14 and 15.Mr. Williams acknowledged that inflation had proved stronger and more lasting than he initially expected. But he said the error wasn’t the result of a misunderstanding of how the economy works; rather, it was his failure to anticipate the resurgence of the pandemic itself. Mr. Powell made similar comments in his testimony before the Senate on Tuesday.The spread of the Delta variant over the summer delayed the return of workers to the labor force by disrupting child care and making some people nervous to return to in-person work. It also contributed to supply-chain issues by causing a new round of factory shutdowns in some parts of the world and by extending the pandemic-era shift in consumer spending away from services and toward goods.Empty office space in New York this summer when the Delta variant wave delayed the return of workers. A new wave of cases could lead to more and longer-lasting inflation.Gabriela Bhaskar/The New York Times“These are all things that are driven — I think in large part, not totally, but in large part — to Covid, and the ability so far for us to get control of that,” he said. “This is just lasting a lot longer than expected.”The new variant, Mr. Williams added, “has that potential to just extend this process we’ve been going through.”If the Omicron variant further delays the return of workers and the easing of supply shortages, that could lead to more and longer-lasting inflation. But a new wave of virus cases could also hurt the demand side of the economy, leading people to spend less at restaurants and movie theaters and provoking a new wave of layoffs.Understand the Supply Chain CrisisCard 1 of 5Covid’s impact on the supply chain continues. More

  • 100 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    Powell Says Fed Could Finish Bond-Buying Taper Early

    by

    Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, signaled on Tuesday that the central bank was growing more concerned about high — and stubborn — inflation, and could speed up its plan to withdraw financial support from the economy as it tries to ensure that rapid price gains do not become long-lasting.Mr. Powell, whom President Biden plans to renominate for a second term, testified before the Senate Banking Committee at a fraught economic moment. Inflation has jumped to its highest level in three decades and a new coronavirus variant, Omicron, threatens to keep the economy from returning to normal, potentially dragging out supply and demand mismatches. Yet millions of workers are still missing from the job market — and the health threat could keep them on the sidelines.As arguably the nation’s most important economic policymaker, Mr. Powell must navigate that divide. His comments Tuesday suggested that he was preparing to do it with an eye more firmly focused on the threat of inflation.That could mean ending the Fed’s bond-buying program sooner than expected. The central bank had been buying $120 billion in government-backed securities each month throughout much of the pandemic to bolster the economy by keeping money flowing in financial markets. In November, officials announced plans to slow those purchases by $15 billion a month, which would have the program ending midway through 2022. But Mr. Powell said the central bank could wrap up more quickly, reducing the amount of economic juice the Fed is adding.“At this point, the economy is very strong, and inflationary pressures are high,” he said. “It is therefore appropriate in my view to consider wrapping up the taper of our asset purchases, which we actually announced at our November meeting, perhaps a few months sooner.”His comments further rattled investors, who had already been fretting about Omicron’s potential impact. Stocks, which had been down roughly 0.5 percent for much of the morning, tumbled after Mr. Powell’s comments and the S&P closed down 1.9 percent. Short-term bond yields, which are heavily influenced by expectations for Fed rate increases, spiked as investors began to expect what is sometimes referred to as a “hawkish,” or aggressive approach to interest rate policy.“The tone of his remarks was notably hawkish, suggesting that the Fed’s primary focus is on the risk of more persistent excess inflation,” Krishna Guha, an economist at Evercore ISI, wrote in a research note reacting to the testimony.Mr. Powell said he expected Fed officials to discuss slowing bond purchases faster “at our upcoming meeting,” which is scheduled for Dec. 14-15. He stressed that between now and then, policymakers will get a better sense of the new Omicron virus variant, a fresh labor market report and updated inflation numbers.While he emphasized that much is unknown about Omicron, he said experts could get a better sense of it “in about a month,” and will know at least something about the risks “within a week or 10 days.”For now, he focused on the risk the central bank has already come to know: rapid price gains. Inflation is running at its fastest pace since the early 1990s in the United States, and prices have picked up in Europe and across many other advanced economies as booming consumer demand runs into sharply constrained supply. In the eurozone, annual inflation jumped to 4.9 percent, according to data released Tuesday, the highest since records began in 1997. Global factory shutdowns, clogged ports and unusual shipping patterns have driven shortages in couches, cars and computer chips.Fed officials had for months predicted that the snarls would clear and price gains would fade. Instead, they have broadened — and that has made central bankers like Mr. Powell increasingly worried.“Generally, the higher prices we’re seeing are related to the supply-and-demand imbalances that can be traced directly back to the pandemic and the reopening of the economy, but it’s also the case that price increases have spread much more broadly in the recent few months,” Mr. Powell said Tuesday. “I think the risk of higher inflation has increased.”Monetary policymakers had spent recent months focused on helping the economy to heal, hoping to pull the millions of workers still missing from the job market back into work.To that end, the Fed’s policy interest rate, its more traditional and more powerful tool, has remained set to near zero. Officials had been stressing that they would be patient in pulling back that support and cooling down the economy, giving missing employees more time to return.But their tone appears to be shifting as prices for food, rent and goods are jumping.The Federal Reserve chair, Jerome H. Powell, and Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen appeared at a Senate Banking Committee hearing on Tuesday.Sarahbeth Maney/The New York TimesSlowing bond purchases quickly would put officials in a position to raise borrowing costs sooner than previously forecast. Lifting interest rates earlier or faster would pump the economic brakes, helping to slow home-building, business expansions and consumer spending. Weakening demand would in turn help to weigh down prices over time.By trying to rein in price increases, the Fed would probably slow hiring. Doing so could be painful while people still remain out of work partly out of virus fears or a lack of child care.That’s why Omicron could pose such a big challenge. If the new variant shuts down factories and slows shipping routes while keeping would-be job applicants at home, it could put the Fed in a tough spot. Central bank policymakers are supposed to foster both full employment and keep prices stable, and such a situation would force them to choose between those goals.Mr. Powell’s willingness to pull back support faster despite the new variant — and his full-throated recognition that price gains are not poised to be as short-lived as officials had once hoped — caught investors’ attention.Understand the Supply Chain CrisisCard 1 of 5Covid’s impact on the supply chain continues. More

  • 138 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Inflation Surged Again in October, With P.C.E. Index Climbing 5 Percent

    by

    A key measure of inflation showed consumer prices rising at the fastest pace in three decades, as energy prices and demand for goods and services soared, posing a challenge to both the White House and the Federal Reserve.Prices climbed by 5 percent in the 12 months through October, according to Personal Consumption Expenditures price index data released Wednesday. That was the fastest pace of increase since 1990.The gauge was lifted by a 30.2 percent annual increase in the price of energy and a 4.8 percent increase in the price of food. Prices rose 0.6 percent from September to October, as supply chain disruptions continued to clamp down on the availability of certain products and components.Inflation is increasing at its fastest pace in three decades.Personal Consumption Expenditures index, percent change from a year prior

    The Federal Reserve wants inflation to average 2 percent annually over time.Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic AnalysisBy The New York TimesThe increases were in line with what analysts had expected, but the rise in the Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation gauge will only add pressure on the central bank to take quicker action to maintain stable prices.Price increases have shown few signs of fading, as some officials in the Biden administration and at the Fed argued they would earlier this year. The central bank is facing growing calls to hasten plans to end their stimulative bond-buying program and to begin to raise interest rates, a process that could risk slowing job gains and economic growth.While inflation has soured consumer sentiment and weighed on Mr. Biden’s approval ratings, those price increases have been spurred in part by a strong economic recovery. Separate data released by the Labor Department on Wednesday found that initial jobless claims dropped to their lowest point since 1969, falling by 71,000 to 199,000 last week.Mr. Biden hailed the drop in unemployment claims on Wednesday but conceded that the country was still far from a full recovery and that it had to address rising inflation.“We have more work to do before our economy is back to normal, including addressing prices increases that hurt Americans’ pocketbooks and undermine gains in wages and disposable income,” Mr. Biden said in a statement on Wednesday.In an attempt to drive down gas prices, the United States and five other world powers announced a coordinated effort on Tuesday to tap into their national oil stockpiles. Mr. Biden has ordered the Energy Department to release 50 million barrels of crude in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, lower than what traders had expected from the emergency stockpile, which is the biggest in the world with 620 million barrels.Consumers have grown increasingly concerned about the spike in prices. A survey from the University of Michigan released on Wednesday found that consumers expressed less optimism in November than at any other time in the past decade about prospects for their finances and the overall growth of the economy. The decline in consumer sentiment was a result of the rapid increase in inflation and the lack of federal policies that would address the damage to household budgets, according to the report. More

  • 138 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    What Jerome Powell Didn’t Do: Lay the Groundwork for Higher Rates

    by

    He said high inflation was mostly a result of pandemic effects like supply network disruptions, a problem he thinks the Fed can’t fix.The real news out of the Federal Reserve on Wednesday was not in what it did, but in what Chair Jerome Powell didn’t do.The thing that the Fed’s policy committee did — announce that the central bank would gradually wind down its economy-stimulating program of buying bonds — was highly telegraphed and comfortably in line with investors’ expectations.The thing that Mr. Powell didn’t do was give any hint that persistently high inflation in recent months was leading him to rethink his patient approach to raising the Fed’s interest rate target. Rather, he repeated his longstanding belief that high inflation was mostly caused by disruptions in global supply networks and other ripple effects of the pandemic — problems that the Fed can’t do much about.It is a delicate moment. President Biden must decide whether to reappoint Mr. Powell to a second term leading the Fed. High inflation is causing economic discontent for Americans, according to surveys, and helping to drag down the president’s approval ratings. Global bond markets have been gyrating amid uncertainty about whether the era of ultralow interest rates may be coming to an end.On interest rates, Mr. Powell rejected the thinking of leaders at several other leading central banks and of a handful of his own colleagues. They think that excess demand in the economy is a big part of the inflation problem and that rate increases would help address it — and that current high inflation could become ingrained in economic decision-making, with long-lasting consequences.If he had expressed more alarm about those inflationary pressures, it would have been a signal that the Fed might act to raise rates more abruptly than it once planned. The Bank of Canada, the Reserve Bank of Australia and the Bank of England have recently done just that. Several Eastern European central banks are going a step further, aggressively raising rates to try to combat inflation (including a 0.75-percentage-point rate increase by the Polish central bank on Wednesday).Mr. Powell himself has essentially conceded in recent appearances that surging prices due to supply disruptions are on track to last longer than he expected. He said in late September that it was frustrating that supply chain bottlenecks weren’t improving and might be getting worse, and said this would hold inflation higher for longer than the Fed had thought.But he was steadfast on Wednesday in not suggesting that those developments were a reason to accelerate the Fed’s interest rate hike plans. He suggested those would need to wait until the tapering of bond purchases was complete and until Fed officials concluded the economy had achieved maximum employment.“We understand the difficulties that high inflation poses for individuals and families,” Mr. Powell said Wednesday. But he continued: “Our tools cannot ease supply constraints. Like most forecasters, we continue to believe that our dynamic economy will adjust to the supply and demand imbalances, and that, as it does, inflation will decline to levels much closer to our 2 percent longer-run goal.”With language like that, he was declining to embrace the use of “open-mouth policy,” or of essentially trying to assuage inflation fears by using more specific language to suggest the Fed had a hair-trigger readiness to take immediate action to head off higher prices.He appeared to be applying the lessons of the 2010s labor market in setting the central bank’s course. Over that decade, unemployment kept falling lower, with participation in the work force rising higher than many analysts had thought plausible. With hindsight, the Fed may have erred by raising interest rates prematurely, slowing that process of labor market improvement.In a 2021 context, that means allowing more post-pandemic healing of the labor market before assuming, for example, that many of the Americans who currently say they are not in the labor force will return as public health conditions improve.“There’s room for a whole lot of humility here as we try to think about what maximum employment would be,” Mr. Powell said. The last economic cycle, he said, showed that “over time you can get to places that didn’t look possible.”Understand the Supply Chain CrisisCard 1 of 5Covid’s impact on the supply chain continues. More

  • 150 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Fed Expected to Announce Plan to Slow Bond Buying Amid Rapid Inflation

    by

    The Federal Reserve is expected to announce a plan to taper off its bond buying. With inflation surging, economists’ eyes are already turning to rates.Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, is on the cusp of accomplishing something that would have seemed like a victory a year ago: Central bankers are expected to announce a plan to wean the economy off their asset-buying program on Wednesday without roiling markets, a delicate maneuver that was in no way assured.Instead, Mr. Powell and his colleagues face pressing questions about their next steps.Inflation is running at its fastest pace in roughly three decades, and hopes that the jump in prices will quickly fade have dimmed as supply chain snarls deepen and fuel costs rise. Wages are increasing swiftly, and consumers and businesses are coming to expect faster price increases, pumping up the risk that high inflation will become a fixture as employers and workers adjust their behavior.Though the Fed is expected to announce this week that it will slow the $120 billion in asset purchases it has been carrying out each month to support the economy, Wall Street economists have already turned their attention to how worried the central bank is about brisk inflation and whether — and when — it might start raising interest rates in response.“The question in the mind of the market is 100 percent what comes next,” said Roberto Perli, a former Fed economist who is now head of global policy at Cornerstone Macro.Slowing bond buying could lead to slightly higher long-term borrowing costs and take pressure off the economy at the margin. But raising interest rates would likely have a more powerful effect when it comes to cooling off the economy. A higher federal funds rate would cause the cost of buying a car, a house or a piece of equipment to rise and would slow consumer and business demand. That could tamp down price gains by allowing supply to catch up to spending, but it would slow growth and weigh on hiring in the process.The Fed has signaled that bond buying could wrap up completely by the middle of next year. Economists increasingly expect the Fed to move its policy rate up from near-zero, where it has been since March 2020, as soon as next summer.Goldman Sachs economists now expect a rate increase to come in July 2022, a full year earlier than they had previously anticipated. Deutsche Bank recently pulled its forecast forward to December 2022. Investors as a whole now put better than 50 percent odds on a rate increase by the Fed’s June 2022 meeting, based on a CME Group tool that tracks market pricing.But raising rates poses a risky trade-off for Fed policymakers. If inflation moderates as the economy gets back to normal and pandemic-related disruptions smooth out, higher borrowing costs could leave fewer people employed for little reason. And with a smaller number of paychecks going out each month, demand would likely weaken over the longer run, which could drag inflation back to the uncomfortably low levels that prevailed before the start of the pandemic.“The risk is not really about the Fed beginning its rate hikes behind the curve,” said Skanda Amarnath, executive director of Employ America, a group focused on encouraging policies that help the work force. “The risk is that the Fed overreacts to this.”That markets are penciling in rate increases more quickly could suggest that they are optimistic about the economy’s chances, said Neil Dutta, head of U.S. economics at Renaissance Macro. The Fed has said that before lifting rates, it wants to see the economy return to full employment and inflation that exceeds its 2 percent target and is on track to average it over time. Investors might think those targets will be met by the middle of next year.“If it was a problem, why aren’t stocks falling?” Mr. Dutta said of the earlier rate increase expectations. “The economy has done better than anticipated.”Still, millions of jobs remain missing from the labor market, and employment growth has slowed sharply. Payrolls expanded by just 194,000 jobs in September, and while fresh hiring data due on Friday is expected to show that companies added 450,000 workers in October, the trajectory is anything but certain.If workers take a long time to come back to the job market, either because they lack child care or fear contracting the coronavirus, it could be the case that the Fed finds itself in a conundrum where inflation is high but full employment remains elusive. Mr. Powell has signaled that such a situation, in which the Fed’s goals are in conflict, is a risk. But he has also said the economy is not there yet.The future of Jerome H. Powell as the Fed chair is being debated within the Biden administration, complicating the decision on rates.Stefani Reynolds for The New York Times“I do think it’s time to taper,” Mr. Powell said at a recent virtual conference. “I don’t think it’s time to raise rates.”Understand the Supply Chain CrisisCard 1 of 5Covid’s impact on the supply chain continues. More

  • 100 Shares139 Views

    in Economy

    Biden's Stimulus Is Stoking Inflation, Fed Analysis Suggests

    by

    Inflation is likely getting a temporary boost from the $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package that the Biden administration ushered in early this year, new Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco research released on Monday suggested.The analysis may add fuel to a hot debate in Washington over whether the administration’s policies are contributing to a spike in prices. Critics of the government spending package that was signed into law in March, including former Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers, have said it was poorly targeted and risked overheating the economy. Supporters of the relief program have said it provided critical aid to workers and businesses still struggling through the pandemic.The new paper comes down somewhere in the middle, finding that the spending had some effect on inflation but suggesting that it is most likely to be temporary. The economists estimated that it would add 0.3 percentage points to the core Personal Consumption Expenditures inflation index in 2021 and “a bit more” than 0.2 percentage points in 2022. Core inflation strips out volatile items like food and fuel.While those numbers are significant, they are not what most people would consider “overheating” — the Fed aims for 2 percent inflation on average over time, and a few tenths of a percent here or there are not a reason for much alarm.But the result is only a rough estimate, one the researchers came up with to help inform an continuing political and economic debate.Both the Trump and Biden administrations signed trillions of dollars in virus relief spending into law. The packages included two bipartisan bills in 2020 that pumped more than $3 trillion into the economy, including direct checks to individuals and generous unemployment benefits. Another $1.9 trillion — called the American Rescue Plan — was passed this year by Democrats after they took control of both Congress and the White House.“The later timing and large size of the A.R.P. stirred debate about whether it is causing an overheating of the economy and fueling a sustained increase in inflation,” the San Francisco Fed researchers noted.The economists tried to answer that question by looking at how much spare capacity is in the economy using a labor market measure — the ratio of job openings to unemployment. The logic is that inflation tends to pick up when there is very little labor market slack, because businesses raise wages to attract workers and then raise prices to cover their climbing labor costs.Government stimulus can push up the number of job openings in the economy as it fuels demand while constraining the number of available workers because it gives would-be employees a financial cushion, allowing them to take their time as they search for a new job.Based on the package’s size and using historical evidence on how fiscal spending affects the labor market, the researchers found that the American Rescue Plan might raise the vacancy-to-unemployment ratio close to its historical peak in 1968, fueling some inflation — but that the price impact would be small and short-lived.U.S. Inflation & Supply Chain ProblemsCard 1 of 6Covid’s impact on supply continues. More