The Fed Is Destroying Jobs: Ken Griffin

Is QE at this point counter productive, even if ideally it could be correct ?

  • Yes. QE is now counter productive.

    Votes: 30 78.9%
  • No. The economy is too weak and this is the correct course of action.

    Votes: 1 2.6%
  • I don't know.

    Votes: 3 7.9%
  • I don't care.

    Votes: 4 10.5%

  • Total voters
    38
Quote from achilles28:

The wealth effect isn't working. Real estate hasn't inflated, appreciably. Equities have, but 80% of Americans own a measly 7% of all financial wealth. The rest went into commodities - energy, industrial metals, agricultural products - which inflated the real CPI, dramatically. As a Keynesian, you would know increasing factor input costs shifts the supply curve left-ward, pushes up the price level, and causes a reduction in GDP/employment. Iow, prices rise, and wages remain stagnant = drop in living standards and employment. So his analysis is right. All the QE, while propping banks, and staving off the inevitable Great D 2.0, eroded living standards and destroyed jobs by inflating supply costs. That's the problem. The Fed has a broad sword, but it can't dictate which asset classes that money flows into. In this case, under these circumstances, the desired effect (reflating the housing bubble), wasn't achieved. Now, actually consider why that's a good idea, when the last one just popped with disastrous consequences?!?!

What isn't discussed, is the other side of that equation - wages. Wages are in decline. Offshoring, H1B and illegal "migrant" labor exerts massive downward pressure on wages. Take any metric, but good jobs are far fewer, shitty jobs are more prolific, and hours are being cut. The result - wages are in decline and prices are rising. So ya, consumption has taken a massive hit, so output is down, along with GDP etc. While the FED is more responsible for escalating supply costs, it's Congress that's to blame for destroying wages.

And the idea that technology kills jobs is bogus. If that were true, nobody would have a job. Technology has evolved considerably since cave-dwellers invented the wheel 100,000 years ago. And here we are. Most people, with a job. Strange?
Achilles, just curious about the 7% figure. Isn't it more like 60 % of U.S. citizens are directly affected by the equities market via their IRA's, 401K's, 403B's, etc. ?

Not concerned about another housing bubble at the moment, we are just seeing a slow return to a more normal housing market. The bubble was caused by mortgage industry excesses and malfeasance, and that's been fixed. Is the current shortage of inventory in some real estate markets being influenced by bank owned real estate being kept off the market? For example there is a low inventory available in New Orleans, yet there were many, many foreclosures. There should be more houses on the market in New Orleans, for example, than there is.

The minimum wage should go up to $10.50 to bring it back to mid 1960's level in constant dollars. That will boost consumer spending and create a more honest labor market by reducing taxpayer subsidy of low wage employers. I agree with you that Congress is at least partly responsible for "destroying" wages.

We need to move jobs from sectors where they are less needed, into sectors where they are more needed. To do that, without undue upheaval, you have to create the new jobs before you eliminate the old ones. That requires that the government step in with temporary funding. You can't rely on the private sector to create those changes because the private sector will always create jobs in the sectors where the money is now. Right now the money is in the medical and defense sectors, but for a healthier economy going forward it needs to be less in those sectors and more in education, research, and infrastructure.

You borrow and spend now so the economy will be stronger later. Then pay yourself back later. As the economy recovers, tax revenues will increase and deficits will decrease at a natural pace. Then it will be time to pay down the debt, but not now.

The country has experienced disastrous wealth redistribution starting in the late 1970's onward. This must be reversed in order to rebuild a strong middle class.

The current levels of defense and medical spending are not sustainable without further weakening of the middle class. Something will have to be done about this. The imbalances are too great to be correctable by increasing efficiency and productivity alone. That means necessarily that some wealth will move out of these sectors into other sectors. When that is going to happen you have a political problem. Currently, our U.S. government is too dysfunctional to handle that. This kind of situation can be expected to create a crisis eventually. That's the point at which effective measures will be taken. This is more or less standard procedure in the U.S. The boat doesn't get rocked until there is a crisis.

We are more or less already at the point of crisis with regard to medical care, but the crisis has to get a little more severe before effective measures will be forced on the medical industry. That's coming over the next few years as Obamney care gets tweaked to force costs down. I would not be surprised if the Obamney care 2014 version bears virtually no relation to the 2034 version. This is clearly a work in progress.
 
austerity as it has been defined recently seems to include more taxing.

However the countries which capped their spending or lowered spending and cut taxes are the ones who grew out of their recession.

We need lower taxes and less govt... not more.

We have a taxing and spending cancer. You dont fix that by taxing more.

Quote from piezoe:

Actually the EU is currently taking an austerity approach to extracting themselves from high debt and high unemployment. It is not working well of course. They need to follow Keynes, and there is increasing pressure to model their monetary policy after the U.S. Fed. I think you will see them move more and more in that direction over the next 18 months or so. Soros recently spoke in Frankfurt suggesting that either Germany should drop its objections to the Euro bond or else leave the Euro.

Keynes advocated something quite different from what the Europeans are doing currently. And he advocated different policy in boom times than in recessions.
 
Quote from pikachu9:

Low rates also encouraged public companies to load up on debt to buy back shares (and increase dividend per share), which has caused those stocks to soar as investors pile into dividend stocks while ignoring the additional debt burden.

This is always a warning sign when a company borrows to buy back shares. I won't touch this kind of company. I love share buy backs, but only when excess cash in the vault is used to do it. Diageo (DEO) is a nice example of doing it right! We know some other companies sitting on piles of cash!
 
Quote from jem:

austerity as it has been defined recently seems to include more taxing.

However the countries which capped their spending or lowered spending and cut taxes are the ones who grew out of their recession.

We need lower taxes and less govt... not more.

We have a taxing and spending cancer. You dont fix that by taxing more.
like Ed said, "Austerity isn't a plan, it's a result."
 
now is a very good time for the government to borrow and spend more money

when rates normalize, there will be no choice, and the government will be forced to start laying off government workers and reduce spending and the size and responsibilities of government.

makes no sense to start paying off debts when rates are almost negative

it's a good time to be a borrower, not such a good time to be a lender

you can split it and be an investor
 
our govt will just debase the dollar more.
which is a massive tax on the middle class and destroys their standard of living.

the spending has to be capped to control govt destruction of the middle class.
 
Quote from jem:

our govt will just debase the dollar more.
which is a massive tax on the middle class and destroys their standard of living.

the spending has to be capped to control govt destruction of the middle class.

why? obama is an admirer of juan peron,l but doesn't have his charisma. if you are clueless google juan peron.
 
Back
Top