The Federal Reserve has raised interest rates

8,837
4,738
Joined
Jul 18, 2012
[h1]Finally! Fed raises interest rates [/h1]

by Patrick Gillespie     @CNNMoneyDecember 16, 2015: 3:23 PM ET
[h2]America's first interest rate hike in nearly a decade is here.[/h2]
The Federal Reserve raised its key interest rate on Wednesday from a range of 0% to 0.25% to a range of 0.25% to 0.5%.

The rate hike is a small one, but it will affect millions of Americans, including investors, home buyers and savers. Savers  should eventually see a little more interest on their deposits at the bank, but big banks  didn't make any increases  Wednesday. Mortgage rates will gradually rise. 

The move was widely expected. It is a sign of how much the economy has healed since the Great Recession. The central bank believes the U.S. economy is strong now and no longer needs crutches and that the move "marks the end of an extraordinary period" of low rates designed to boost the recovery from the Great Recession. 

"I feel confident about the fundamentals driving the U.S. economy, the health of U.S. households, and domestic spending," Fed chief Janet Yellen said during a press conference. "There are pressures on some sectors of the economy, particularly manufacturing, and the energy sector...but the underlying health of the U.S. economy I consider to be quite sound." 

The Fed telegraphed it will be patient with future rate increases so as not to kill the economic recovery. The central bank's statement said the economy will only merit "gradual increases" in rates, which are likely to remain low "for some time." Yellen repeatedly said during the press conference that future rate hikes will be "gradual." 

Stocks rallied with the Dow rising 224 points  after the announcement and Yellen's press conference. 

Investors were pleased to see that the Fed expects "only gradual increases" in rates next year and that the committee explicitly said it would take into account "readings on financial and international developments." 

The Fed put interest rates near zero during the financial crisis in December 2008 to help stimulate the economy and boost the collapsed housing market. 

But the economy is no longer in crisis. In fact it is a lot healthier -- unemployment now is at 5%, half of the 10% rate it hit in 2009 during the worst of the jobs crisis. 

Over 12 million jobs  have been added since the recession ended. Wages -- which have barely grown during the recovery -- have also started to pick up recently. 

On Wednesday, the Fed's committee improved its economic outlook. Compared to its last forecast in September, the Fed raised its expectations for growth next year to 2.4%, up from 2.3%. It also lowered its projection for unemployment in 2016 to 4.7%, down from 4.8%. 

The Fed still has low expectations for inflation. The central bank has two goals: low unemployment and stable inflation. The Fed's target for inflation is 2%, but right now it's close to zero. The Fed sees inflation inching up in the years to come, but not hitting 2% until 2018. 

Known as "liftoff," the Fed's action is expected to be the first of more rate increases that will probably come in 2016. The last rate hike was June 2006.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/12/16/news/economy/federal-reserve-interest-rate-hike/index.html

ohwell.gif
 now we see if we can handle it
 
Last edited:
They did wait till kinda the last minute, but they made good on the words to raise the rate in 2015.

But this is not a huge deal, everyone was expecting this for a hot minute
 
I'm not sure what to make of it. I've been seeing some storm clouds on the horizon so I think they'll either stay here for a while longer or drop back down if we go into another recession.
 
so will existing auto loans rise? I just signed a loan agreement this past Saturday for a really good rate. Hope bank doesnt jack it up.
 
Last edited:
so will existing auto loans rise? I just signed a loan agreement this past Saturday for a really good rate. Hope bank doesnt jack it up.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...e-prime-rate-350-forget-increase-deposit-rate
the rates on mortgages, auto loans or college tuition aren't expected to jump anytime soon, according to AP, although in time those will rise as well unless the long-end of the curve flattens even more than the 25 bps increase on the short end.
 
Last edited:
Inflation is not the problem. The labor market is still in shambles. Labor force participation is still low so the 5% figure does not mean full employment. Wages continue to be stagnant. The quit rate for workers is at only 2% which is a figure consistent with a recession and not a "healthy" economy. Most of the new jobs that have been added since 2010, are low paying and/or very insecure.

The Fed said that 2% inflation is its target but in reality, that target is more like a ceiling so the trigger rate (the level of inflation where the Fed raises rates) is closer to 1%. This means that workers will never, ever get ahead. As soon as wages show any signs that they might rise, the Fed slams the brakes on the Economy, all in the name of crusade against almost non existent inflation.

There is much to dislike about Alan Greenspan but in the late 1990's, he did workers a solid. He saw that inflation was fairly low and he kept rates low. The result was that real wages actually grew from 1998 to 2000. Since about 1975, the norm is for wages to be stagnant so Greenspan's policies were some what radical and very effective at keeping inflation down and creating a strong labor market. Sadly, incompetence, cronyism and outright malice has defined the Fed and most major institutions of political economy.

Folks need to remember that the top policy goal of the business and political elite is to keep wages low. High unemployment and/or stagnant wages are a feature, not a bug, for the ruling class. Janet Yellen is clearly fulfilling her duty in keeping workers down and corporate profits up.
 
Inflation is not the problem. The labor market is still in shambles. Labor force participation is still low so the 5% figure does not mean full employment. Wages continue to be stagnant. The quit rate for workers is at only 2% which is a figure consistent with a recession and not a "healthy" economy. Most of the new jobs that have been added since 2010, are low paying and/or very insecure.

The Fed said that 2% inflation is its target but in reality, that target is more like a ceiling so the trigger rate (the level of inflation where the Fed raises rates) is closer to 1%. This means that workers will never, ever get ahead. As soon as wages show any signs that they might rise, the Fed slams the brakes on the Economy, all in the name of crusade against almost non existent inflation.

There is much to dislike about Alan Greenspan but in the late 1990's, he did workers a solid. He saw that inflation was fairly low and he kept rates low. The result was that real wages actually grew from 1998 to 2000. Since about 1975, the norm is for wages to be stagnant so Greenspan's policies were some what radical and very effective at keeping inflation down and creating a strong labor market. Sadly, incompetence, cronyism and outright malice has defined the Fed and most major institutions of political economy.

Folks need to remember that the top policy goal of the business and political elite is to keep wages low. High unemployment and/or stagnant wages are a feature, not a bug, for the ruling class. Janet Yellen is clearly fulfilling her duty in keeping workers down and corporate profits up.
I"m not sure we can really point to the '98-2000 period as an example since he defined that as a period of irrational exuberance too.

IMO, the reason for stagnant wages almost directly correlates to the drop in education. Shortly before then, SAT scores peaked and have been dropping for the 40 years since. Combine that with the rest of the world catching up in industrial production after WWII and it's difficult to justify wages staying at the same levels as they were during the post war period when our education system has been falling more and more behind.
 
I"m not sure we can really point to the '98-2000 period as an example since he defined that as a period of irrational exuberance too.

IMO, the reason for stagnant wages almost directly correlates to the drop in education. Shortly before then, SAT scores peaked and have been dropping for the 40 years since. Combine that with the rest of the world catching up in industrial production after WWII and it's difficult to justify wages staying at the same levels as they were during the post war period when our education system has been falling more and more behind.



I don't mean to be too glib but I doubt that a failure to know that "regatta is to oarsmen as runner is to marathon" is the main reason why college graduates in 2015 make less money than high school graduates in 1975. Furthermore, the American public is more educated. Far more people graduate and attend college than they did in 1975 and that means that far more people are taking the SAT and that means that scores will fall even as the level of education is rising.


The fact is that the relationship between labor and capital has become too one sided in favor of capital. Everyone talks about declining wages and benefits but as you know, total compensation for workers can be expressed in other ways. In the mid 20th Century, employers knew that potential hires would not be perfect workers right away so they paid for quite a bit of job specific training.

The social contract then was that if you had a certain level of educational attainment, your employer would take it from there and guide you the rest of the way. It represented a sharing of risk in investing for human capital. In 1975, the social contract was that the state would pay all or most of the financial cost of college, the student would invest his or her time and effort and the employer would use resources to synchronize your human capital to its needs. Today the social contract is to demand that 17 year olds be the shrewdest investors in the world and predict the labor market five years in the future and do so while taking on undischarged debt. We would never make a hedge fund manager invest under those conditions but we ask that of millions of high school seniors do just that every year.


I also have to ask; if the American worker is so dumb, how is that GDP has continued to steadily rise over the last 40 years and wages have not? You can say technology but that technology has to be used by these simpletons. Every kid could get 2400 on the SAT's and the labor market would still be bad. It is about Union busting, plutocracy, money in politics and a Fed that is committed to low wages. Political economy, macro economics and law are the drivers of inequality, not a lack of moral and intellectual fortitude on the part of workers.
 
Very well put ^^^

Productivity has gone up, yet wages have remained stagnant

The American worker is busing his ***, yet getting very little rewards from their works.

View media item 1832265

-From union busting, free trade agreements, tax breaks, and indulging them in their rent seeking behavior time and time again. And if they screw up, all of a sudden loses it dislike for socialism is forgotten, and bailouts.

The reason for wages being so low are for a lot of reason, most of which should not be blamed on the American worker. For decades will have instituted policies to help firms, especially large corporations, at the expense of workers.


------Lastly I find it kinda funny someone would place the blame on education. The same policy makes that have been looking out for the firm's interest, are the same ones that have been shooting down ideas to overhaul the education system.

State lotteries that where once marketed to help fund education, were used in reality to give companies tax breaks.

The same will probably happen with marijuana in many states too.

Universal pre-K which has too have long last positive effects on kids, especially those in lower income brackets, are deemed too expensive, and we can't do it. Funding college education, too expensive can't do it. Greatly subsidizing it, nope. How about community college and trade school, nah.

Also with integration of schools also came the attitude that spending on education was wasteful. The south had some of the best school systems in the country, once they were integrated, policy makes decided to throw the baby out with the bath water. And just look at where they are now.

When people talk about a voucher system and charter schools, while there are some success stories, the problem of inequality rears its ugly head once again. Just like with our criminal justice and healthcare systems, private companies have proven that while they may be more efficient, the fail time and time again to equitable.

And I don't blame them, there are not in the business of doing good, they are in the business of making money.

That's the governments job, and for decades it has been failing at that.

-And I will not even touch on the irony of comparing our school system to other countries, and ignoring all the other things driving those outcome.
 
The years between 2008 and 2015 should be remembered for, among other things, how anti-deficit spending ideology triumphed over sensible debt financing to rebuild public infrastructure. 

What a waste. 
 
The years between 2008 and 2015 should be remembered for, among other things, how anti-deficit spending ideology triumphed over sensible debt financing to rebuild public infrastructure. 


What a waste. 

Deficits only don't matter when the rich need tax cuts, there is an unnecessary war to fight........... or a Republican is president
 
The years between 2008 and 2015 should be remembered for, among other things, how anti-deficit spending ideology triumphed over sensible debt financing to rebuild public infrastructure. 


What a waste. 

What I thought was pretty hilarious was Trump (at the debate) talking about how we should have used the $4B we spent on Bush wars on this. Teflon Trump.
 
Dow 20K Pls


Yellen & Co had to raise the interest rates anyway. No optimism since 08
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom