tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN October 8, 2016 12:55am-1:41am EDT
word. with the recession. i really do hope that they can find solutions. lod it is up the unity. to go through geneva to stand up behind a key objective with the economic growth. all i can do is know that this is a successful endeavor. >> the final question. rather fleeting professional organization for journalists.
for more information go to our web site press.org the secretary of the navy will address the press club also kareem abdul-jabbar will be here then the secretary of education will speak to the press club audience. i will now presented with the national press club mug. [applause] >> the last question to you compare the of quality of soccer in geneva to soccer in brazil? >> it is a very challenging experience. honestly and not trying to be up politician and that
finances annual meeting. will hear from stanley fisher and a panel of four banking chief executives to discuss the outlook on the global economy. this is this is about one hour and 45 this very amoeba will again readied to get started if you're talking indeed ideals take your conversations to the foyer or please take your seat also free should have a full house so please move to the middle and make the seats available for
anybody who wants a seat can get one we are delighted the next panel can join us as the vice chair of the federal reserve in before we bring them on stage that critical question facing us what will happen with the fed and the employment report so grab your mobile devices now do think the fed will hike by the end of the year?federal hike presumably them on my raiseou interest rates but i cannot imagine that happening.hey 62.5. that is the wall street consensus that it is pretty
likely given where the wages are. you need to hear from me on that but you can hear from steven fisher himself the vice chair of the federal reserve. [applause] >> thank you very much it is a real pleasure to have a dear friend and somebody i have admired from my entire professional career who has done a little bit of everything and is probably trained more economist and leaders than just about anyone else so it is a real pleasure to have a vice chair of the federal reserve here with us today he has probably talk more about the economics and i ever will know. he was just appeared to describe the jobs numbers and wages.
is a goldilocks quick. >> is pretty close we think of the range that they are producing the jobs to keep unemployment from rising and what it did today with the participation rate went up wentp as it was going at a rate that was consistent to keep unemployment. >> and wages are starting tort pick up by. >> that wage change of 2.6% is closer to three men in this at two. a friend at 70 said i am closer to 60 than 50. [laughter]
>> how d.c. the economy generally? >> the problem is the remarkable success of quality in reducing unemployment and a very lowly rate of growth of gdpere very unemployment is somewhere close to the natural rate. and growth isn't close to what we used to think of as normal and the rate of growth of productivity plus the rate of investment and that part of the story is pleasing and that is what
worries people and has consequences for the long run and short run. we used to think the standard of living would be double those hours that is not the situation now. we actually had dash productivity growth through the last three quarters which is possible you don't forget how to produce but it makes higher productivity down at low productivity buthigp the growth of this story is very important to to change as some point we will go with dash productivity growth forever but precisely what they will go back to is not clear. at 1.5% and i learned many
things from herbert stein we used to be richard nixon's council of economic advisor is used to say the difference between the growth rate of 1% and 2 percent is 100 percent. that is absolutely true over 30 years you double at 2% and you don't double of 1%. even after 35 years if you were growing at 2% but these are important consequences for the long run. >> everybody tries to find out what is going on. but you talk about long-term interest rates.
and we had this discussion about productivity. and with the cash and the board rooms are not interested in capital expansion. why is that a missingash, boa ingredient? what must happen before we see the acceleration quick. >> that was higher before the oil price and the decline of the price of whale which not coincidentally is to leveleclino of production of shale in is marginal. of the capital goods needed to expand production. we lost a lot of investment from shale production with the price of oil but overeded t and above that they're
sitting on a wad of cash from the united states and there is the air of uncertainty in the situationabot that is not encouraging of investment if you say animal spirits are not there and people are not excited about the growth prospects that has to do with productivity and invention when you get pessimistic than look at what happened at the nobel prize to days in a row one day give the prize for those properties that matter then the next day they get a prize to be able to design machines at the molecular level. summer 25 years from now we will be aware of these again
. but what will it take to janet - - generate from them industrial production? hap. there is a very interesting results that looks that the diffusion of technology. turns it turns up the rate of growth of the leading firms of the industry has not declined relative to the precession is the same.the diff the diffusion is weighed down so it is a spreading into the industry so what whattly is happening? you don't know why it is a spreading a can be that the cost of investing is expensive as it is close to zero, in terms of a financial cost so confident
gravitas to be turned on so we are waiting to see that happen but precisely when that matters. >> we also have roadwork that shows those sectors that are exposed to trade are more productive as well with health care education those are huge we have seen very little better really is about openness to force the companies to innovate and invest. >> also the difference between the service sector in the manufacturing sector that is real look for it in
the sector that is declining in size. int output but employment that is for the productivity growth is high. >> have there been policies at have exacerbated the problem that we have quite. >> if you talk toin businessmen that is what you hear but the problem with that there has not been a change in the level of complaints of regulation since before the year of the crisis. so i dunno to what extent that is true but i have impressed by how much mendez some point somebody who is serious about growth to goy through the regulatoryan framework to figure out how i amhange it.
i am sure you have read those famous works to one economist to try to see why it is after world war two days grew faster than those that won the war. his conclusion they get a lot of cobwebs over the course of time. and the compromises tend not to go away because of those people in the political process. so we're wipes all the way to start again. that is not what we shouldti be looking for. but it is certainly true
that there is something like that hanging around in the western economies that have been there for a long time without much civil strife. and it could be something. it doesn't take more than a political change. doesn't take more for much more digital services with those demographics. one of the challenges of is that they are deindustrializing and growing older with that human capital with respect to services and the digitized economy.ia but with productivityespect t because of the structural changes, are we still stuck in the 20th century mind set? centu winner really is about platforms and other service
providers? pdf. >> maybe but the point is that there is relating to productivity in the service sector there are so many industries that could not operate without the computer systems to which enable them to run many more flights. in the same thing of the medical system but it never shows up in the data and some of that has to do with the fact some of the output is not measured it think marty feldstein has been heard to say the help would of kugel or face book doest not show up whiff said gdp data.
those that argue of the surplus in fact has continued to grow up the rate it has before but the non measured cost of gdp i don't think it has been established but it is a possibility.k ther the ticket relieve the growing role of services that could be responsible. as a miss measurement argument ionize article called does the united states have a productivity or a data problem? the data and that we must measure productivity. the answer of mostly economist those that have a data problem but it cannot
account for the decline that b.c. with the measured data for. >> described the weight of a small dog of the "new york times" review of books. otherwise a miraculous century and then to know we're on the cusp of something great. >> as a mere -- america is professor but that revolution is everywhere except gdp data. two years later it showed up magnificent before about 10 years. i am also from m.i.t. so we
have to stick together. [laughter] but he really said all the great employment technology improvements talking about simple things like flush toilets or electricity. >> i grew up in kentucky. >> ag drug with less of those they and you did. >> but these changes they are profound. and he has had an impact on the labor force with the political discourse but a holding down of certain jobsthel
, more exposed because of technology, heidi think of the changes in the of workforce with monetary policy? >> as we make monetary policy be looked at the data and go into the details of who is unemployed of what we're doing in monetary policy -- policies if it is effective with this group for that group. we think about it we have a work force equipped with a certain education 50 years old you have trouble operating your computer when your grandchildren show up in to fix a problem that you have under machine and they j just have the different system.
and we have workforce the people that are very upset are e are the of older people and modern technology is different. they did not learn that and it affects them more than you and your people.s affect -- yonder people. there are retraining programs as a colleague of mine went to philadelphia and was very impressed that a lot of the people came down with the other skills that enable them to work. it can be done. but how we get investments in that area other than through the markets is a
matter that needs to happen. >> the 100 year life. is a new book that is based on those that will leave to be 105 of today's teenagers. if you think of the pace of technological change the ada to have a career you will have three or four distinct careers pension and savings has to change radically. >> and pass to and sometimes politically as a little example in israel you were at retirement age than it would be implemented three years after but therein be a separate vote.
between the time the law and the vote the women mobilized this was a law which was important for the budget.f i called the finance minister place said it was one vote for raising theca retirement right age and it was mine. [laughter] i don't like that very much but it will happen in. it will have to have been. >> i want to touch backup political discourse there is of portion of the population that feels this miraculous remarkable growth and production within countries globally in the ranks of the
middle-class and in some ways the last 20 years have been pretty remarkable butmiddlc what do we do about that quite. b >> there is the trend pecans explained very simply set of fas through the set of facts that while inequality has increased cool inequality has declined a feeling of all the people in the world began as you move the chinese are the indians the distribution of income each country has a problem that is in that they take great satisfaction.
so that problem is out there and to deal with that the international level having to do with their educational system and the education andwh those things have to be l taken seriously look at what the scandinavian o. and whether our society is willing to do that is something we need to explore progress can canadians we cannot do that.g we nee and then try to do that. >> i greet. >> one of the questions of regulation is a potential inhibitor to growth sure do better job to the measure the impact?er job
and have we done enough? several years after the crisis? do we have enough regulation with the financial sector and should we be thinking about measuring the rates of the impact greg. >> and to have that cost-benefit analysis nothing could have beeneasure unless it turns out to be that positive but that analysis isn't precise if you started on that we would end up doing better is another way of getting growth. so you need to make the arguments for whether it is numerical is another issue
but what you think you're doing by increasing regulation. even with the former regulation. and i worry a and little bit about the fact that we in the and and states to not have very good mechanisms to deal with the shadow banking system that is something that has to be looked at again. >> with these particular aspects, what leads you that you want to focus on blacks and what about it makes you want to focus? >> the public sector doesn't have a lot of information
about what is going on in the various sectors that our active and in the shuttle banking system. and we also have relatively few tools if you listen to the people that say with those banking regulations that is okay and if it isn't with those interest rates to use those measures to deal with that.them. with those non-interest measures to deal with the the ncial sector. the europeans have a lot of them. but if you are a good for regulator but i say we can we do have some but we do
have much less.and so i i cannot say i am frightened of anything in particular in more than a year-and-a-half ago to make a lot of noise about it. in the level when down but that doesn't seem like that at the moment but regulators can do what i am very worried and people ask me every one that is too big to fail my view is the regulator or the intelligence agency doesn't know of has a particular problem. and they should get somebody
else who understands they're in a battle. one of the things is what will i do of there is an accident? had arrived build up defenses against one of these agencies getting into a problem? as a regulator i used to spend most of my time convinced walleye was looking for a problem that was coming from over there somewhere about to hit us. like the great financial crisis see you have to be watching the whole time i don't know what we can do to make this better budget i think we have done a lot.
>> it understand that obsession about size the hurricanes going up the east coast i am sure some say they need to bring up a hurricane but that first crisis by wizened the white house at the time. and a cost the president his h job. oftentimes they come fromom small places or interconnected places wee don't think about the waistband of lot of timeth talking about these institutions? $500 billion worth of equity capital do you worry so much about those metrics?
>> have to look at them as the first and last line of defense. you have to make sure they have the ability to withstand the adverse affects that is where the stress testing is part of those changes that were introduced since the crisis. when they dislike the amount of work that is involved because those are seriousa desia and on the of whole a desirable development. >> talk about the global environment five straight years of 3 percent growth coming out with a forecast about 3% next year globally globally, trade has grown
faster than coble gdp at about growing at half the rate. i did think about growth going forward? >> what i think is the nature of growth matters. as an example of what i mean , in the 1990's if you wander around the countries bordering china, they were all concerned they would be all produced or out to competed by china would you rather have a neighbor who was prosperous or poured to trade with? so that shifted the debate a was le bit. that was the science of what
you were trading with. but what we've learned in this crisis from the slowdown of chinese growth and its impact is great by historical standards whether six source 7%. but the impact on trade has declined and it has gone down a lot and reached a conclusion that actually because a lot of their trade was in goods with the raw materials it is most useful but it was the rate of growth of china that mattered just as much as the growth rate of the economy an a whole. and that is racy this transmission of trade.
the chinese growth rate went from 10 down at six. look at the west coast of africa or latin america or the east coast. it is phenomenal because of china.but to but to go from a situation when i was in the imf wed used to think that it grew at a twice the rate of the world economy. spirit that is a huge difference related to the chinese growth and also production as it outsource to their neighbors as we do as well so that level of trade has gone down.ment, as
and as a growth machine and what worries me is the viewll that globalization is useless to rebound ourselves from global growth and global markets and there areri very few countries that have succeeded to grow rapidly over sustained periods without integrating into the haveal economy. and what is going on politically in the world that the moment the. >> faction lea was in johannesburg last week talking about the el loco and china if you were on the west coast, it is all about commodity prices.er.
>> i was not aware of that. >> trying to bring some good news. [laughter]his week >> with al lovell of indebtedness. advanced economies in the emerging economies.our numb because of the financial sector but inevitably this long trend and and the capacity to service the debt >> but the one thing is that debt service has not grown
up anything like the amount of debt because of interesty rates are very low. predecessor missing burden and that isn't anywhere like those numbers but interest rates are very low and that nothing can revealing any secrets to say least one member of the federal reserve board is from today and now will make a difference so that is a bomb in the debt servicing. the theory was to expand government financing and then the economy could growul
you could pay that off because of gdp but growth is less. the particular story and part of that mechanism. >> as you sit in the policy-making job of these international issues on of bloomberg screen? >> if you look at the fence statements and the policy and day enter those very rarely in the external world was in the most general of terms., blah,
at external the dollar is strengthened they did not add up very much. so the chinese events have an impact. there is a very interesting historical fact. at the end of world war to the united states economy accounted for half of the world gdp. this is truly astounding. and now accounts 23% i don't think importance of the united states economy or will the economy has declined because of the capital markets there werelo no market flows of capital in world war two it is massive know what we do hear a fax the whole world.
we did not know that before. better relative in south africa who said please explain what you do sitting in office in washington has such a big influence on us? i tried. i am not sure i succeeded. that influence is very big now depends on the other side of the monetary policy. we think about it in the and , we go back to the law that we taking into account our policies are aimed at the united states.imes tha sometimes that means we have to take account what happens abroad as a result that a