Bernanke’s Next Easing May Not Aid Jobless

[xchrom]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-02/fed-s-next-stimulus-may-do-little-for-14-million-jobless-economists-say.html

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke will probably try to spur economic growth this month by cutting near-record-low borrowing costs, economists said. His new stimulus may not aid the 14 million Americans without work.

Hiring stalled in August in the worst month for U.S. employment in almost a year, the Labor Department said yesterday. The unemployment rate remained stuck at 9.1 percent.

The Fed may decide at its Sept. 20-21 meeting to replace short-term Treasury securities in its $1.65 trillion portfolio with long-term bonds in a bid to lower rates on everything from mortgages to car loans, said economists at Wells Fargo & Co., T. Rowe Price Associates Inc., Barclay’s Capital Inc. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. The Fed’s influence on the economy will probably be muted as sagging consumer confidence, depressed home values and 6 million workers unemployed for six months or more weigh on demand.

“The problem is that rates have been low for three years now and that isn’t spurring people to buy,” said John Silvia, chief economist at Wells Fargo in Charlotte, N.C. “Companies won’t hire unless demand is there. The Fed can lower the cost of credit, but it can’t force companies to create jobs.”

[leveymg]

1. The Fed could force companies to create jobs

It could do that as a condition of access to the overnight lending and discount windows where major banks borrow funds. Access to funds could be made contingent on lending to companies to expand domestic employment. The Fed has the power under its charter to stimulate employment as well as to control inflation and interest rates. The current leadership just chooses not to do so.

Bernanke has to go, along with Geithner.

[durablend]

2. But that would be "anti-business"

So that's out altogether.

[Fumesucker]

3. The politicians aren't jobless.. The CEOs aren't jobless..

Where's the problem? :shrug:

[geckosfeet]

4. If people have no jobs (read that as income) then they can't buy anything.

How fucking hard is that to understand? What's wrong with these arm chair economists? (Apologies to the real economic community)

rates have been low for three years now and that isn’t spurring people to buy,

Bernanke’s Next Easing May Not Aid Jobless

Blaming people for not buying when they have no income is borderline insanity. How clueless are our leaders? It does not matter if interest rates are 000.00 or even negative for that matter, if you have not got the principal YOU CAN'T BUY. Banks won't even talk to you.

[MadHound]

5. Like any of Bernanke's actions were intended to aid the unemployed

Please, Bernanke and the Fed are only concerned with Corporate America, not actual humans.