Center for Business and Economic Research - Ball State University


CBER Data Center
Projects and PublicationsEconomic IndicatorsWeekly CommentaryCommunity Asset InventoryManufacturing Scorecard

About

Commentaries are published weekly and distributed through the Indianapolis Business Journal and many other print and online publications. Disclaimer

RSS Feed

Disclaimer

The views expressed in these commentaries do not reflect those of Ball State University or the Center for Business and Economic Research.

Recent

Two Key Economic Lessons in One BillHoosiers face trade-offs and opportunity costs in the wake of SEA1.

Time to Fix Economic Development PolicyAllocating tax dollars to land development won’t cause economic growth.

The Unanticipated Effects of SB1Businesses, governments and households may all feel the effects.

The Stupidest of PoliciesThis whipsawing of tariff rates has unnerved financial markets, which on Wednesday, were toying with a liquidity crisis.

View archives

Top Tags

jobs and employment 261
economics 201
state and local government 188
education 186
economic development 171
indiana 171
budget and spending 145
taxes 144
law and public policy 142
workforce and human capital 139
Browse all tags
Reporter / Admin Login

November 29, 2015

Nader vs Yellen: Round 1

Ralph Nader, the scion of fuming consumer advocacy, recently penned an open letter to Janet Yellen, chair of the Federal Reserve. In it, Nader suggested that Yellen should ‘sit down’ with her economist husband for some advice. Knowing how well that note would’ve been received at the Hicks household, it is hard to imagine what outcome he expected. It seems though he wants her to increase interest rates to help household savers. Still, other than assessing Nader’s perennially poor analytical skills, there are three good economics lessons embedded in this exchange.

Firstly, Nader is rightfully concerned that savers have suffered from a lengthy period of low interest rates on bank deposits. What he seems not to grasp is that nearly all of us are both borrowers and savers. So, low deposit interest rates will be, for most families, offset by lower rates on mortgage interest, credit card and other consumer debt rates. There is no clear class of people exclusively damaged by low interest rates.

Second, interest rates are the price of capital investments. They reflect the value borrowers place upon the items they purchase, most particularly productive capital and equipment. They are not the whimsical beast of a governmentally sanctioned financial system, but are determined primarily by market forces. Since the early days of the Great Recession, all interest rates have been low. This reflects the low rate of return borrowers expect from new capital and equipment, which results in less borrowing. Nader may not be familiar with the technical name economists have given this phenomenon. We call it a recession.

Finally, the immediate goal of the monetary policy in a recession is to reduce non-market interest rates in order to encourage an increase in borrowing. To do so, the Fed reduces the rate it charges banks to borrow funds, which in turn will reduce the market interest rates they charge their customers. Quite simply, the extra supply of dollars are intended reduce the market interest rate for borrowed funds.

The larger goal attached to the Fed’s effort to lower interest rates is to move the economy from recession to recovery. The lower interest rates boost purchases of productive capital such as new machinery, along with consumer goods like automobiles. The fancy economic name for this increased borrowing at lower interest rates is the law of demand.

There is reasonable disagreement over the timing, magnitude and impact of the Fed’s monetary policies. There are also reasonable questions about the role monetary policy may have played in fostering bubbles in the dot-com period of the ‘90s, housing in the ‘00s and today's stock market. What is not at issue is the intent and expressed goals of those policies to improve economic performance for savers and borrowers alike; they are more often than not the same person. This last point is the substance of Janet Yellen’s reply.

The only question this leaves me with is why Ralph Nader, with his apparently facile grasp of economic policy coupled with his ineffectual communication style, is not again a candidate for president?

Link to this commentary: https://commentaries.cberdata.org/814/nader-vs-yellen-round-1

Tags: money supply, prices and inflation, federal reserve


About the Author

Michael Hicks cberdirector@bsu.edu

Michael J. Hicks, PhD, is the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and the George and Frances Ball distinguished professor of economics in the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. Note: The views expressed here are solely those of the author, and do not represent those of funders, associations, any entity of Ball State University, or its governing body.

© Center for Business and Economic Research, Ball State University

About Ball State CBER Data Center

Ball State CBER Data Center is one-stop shop for economic data including demographics, education, health, and social capital. Our easy-to-use, visual web tools offer data collection and analysis for grant writers, economic developers, policy makers, and the general public.

Ball State CBER Data Center (cberdata.org) is a product of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University. CBER's mission is to conduct relevant and timely public policy research on a wide range of economic issues affecting the state and nation. Learn more.

Terms of Service

Center for Business and Economic Research

Ball State University • Whitinger Business Building, room 149
2000 W. University Ave.
Muncie, IN 47306-0360
Phone:
765-285-5926
Email:
cber@bsu.edu
Website:
www.bsu.edu/cber
Facebook:
www.facebook.com/BallStateCBER
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/BallStateCBER
Close