View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

For release on delivery
1:30 p.m. EDT (12:30 p.m. CDT)
September 8, 2011

The U.S. Economic Outlook

Remarks by
Ben S. Bernanke
Chairman
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
at the
Economic Club of Minnesota 2011-2012 Season Inaugural Luncheon
Minneapolis, Minnesota

September 8, 2011

Good afternoon. I am delighted to be in the Twin Cities and would like to thank
the Economic Club of Minnesota for inviting me to kick off its 2011-2012 speaker series.
Today I will provide a brief overview of the U.S. economic outlook and conclude with a
few thoughts on monetary policy and on the longer-term prospects for our economy.
The Outlook for U.S. Economic Growth
In discussing the prospects for the economy and for policy in the near term, it
bears recalling briefly how we got here. The financial crisis that gripped global markets
in 2008 and 2009 was more severe than any since the Great Depression. Economic
policymakers around the world saw the mounting risks of a global financial meltdown in
the fall of 2008 and understood the extraordinarily dire economic consequences that such
an event could have. Governments and central banks consequently worked forcefully
and in close coordination to avert the looming collapse. The actions to stabilize the
financial system were accompanied, both in the United States and abroad, by substantial
monetary and fiscal stimulus. Despite these strong and concerted efforts, severe damage
to the global economy could not be avoided. The freezing of credit, the sharp drops in
asset prices, dysfunction in financial markets, and the resulting blows to confidence sent
global production and trade into free fall in late 2008 and early 2009.
It has been almost exactly three years since the beginning of the most intense
phase of the financial crisis, in the late summer and fall of 2008, and a bit more than two
years since the official beginning of the economic recovery, in June 2009, as determined
by the National Bureau of Economic Research’s Business Cycle Dating Committee.
Where do we stand? There have been some positive developments over the past few
years. In the financial sphere, our banking system and financial markets are significantly

-2stronger and more stable. Credit availability has improved for many borrowers, though it
remains tight in categories--such as small business lending--in which the balance sheets
and income prospects of potential borrowers remain impaired. Importantly, given the
sources of the crisis, structural reform is moving forward in the financial sector, with
ambitious domestic and international efforts under way to enhance financial regulation
and supervision, especially for the largest and systemically most important financial
institutions.
Nevertheless, it is clear that the recovery from the crisis has been much less
robust than we had hoped. From recent comprehensive revisions of government
economic data, we have learned that the recession was even deeper and the recovery
weaker than we had previously thought; indeed, aggregate output in the United States still
has not returned to the level that it had attained before the crisis. Importantly, economic
growth over the past two years has, for the most part, been at rates insufficient to achieve
sustained reductions in the unemployment rate, which has recently been fluctuating a bit
above 9 percent.
The pattern of sluggish economic growth was particularly evident in the first half
of this year, with real gross domestic product (GDP) estimated to have increased at an
annual rate of less than 1 percent, on average, in the first and second quarters. Some of
this weakness can be attributed to temporary factors, including the strains put on
consumer and business budgets by the run-ups earlier this year in the prices of oil and
other commodities and the effects of the disaster in Japan on global supply chains and
production. Accordingly, with commodity prices coming off their highs and
manufacturers’ problems with supply chains well along toward resolution, growth in the

-3second half looks likely to pick up. However, the incoming data suggest that other, more
persistent factors also have been holding back the recovery. Consequently, as noted in its
statement following the August meeting, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC)
now expects a somewhat slower pace of recovery over coming quarters than it did at the
time of the June meeting, with greater downside risks to the economic outlook.
One striking aspect of the recovery is the unusual weakness in household
spending. After contracting very sharply during the recession, consumer spending
expanded moderately through 2010, only to decelerate in the first half of 2011. The
temporary factors I mentioned earlier--the rise in commodity prices, which has hurt
households’ purchasing power, and the disruption in manufacturing following the
Japanese disaster, which reduced auto availability and hence sales--are partial
explanations for this deceleration. But households are struggling with other important
headwinds as well, including the persistently high level of unemployment, slow gains in
wages for those who remain employed, falling house prices, and debt burdens that remain
high for many, notwithstanding that households, in the aggregate, have been saving more
and borrowing less. Even taking into account the many financial pressures they face,
households seem exceptionally cautious. Indeed, readings on consumer confidence have
fallen substantially in recent months as people have become more pessimistic about both
economic conditions and their own financial prospects.
Compared with the household sector, the business sector generally presents a
more upbeat picture. Manufacturing production has risen nearly 15 percent since its
trough, driven importantly by growth in exports. Indeed, the U.S. trade deficit has
narrowed substantially relative to where it was before the crisis, reflecting in part the

-4improved competitiveness of U.S. goods and services. Business investment in equipment
and software has also continued to expand. Corporate balance sheets are healthy, and
although corporate bond markets have tightened somewhat of late, companies with access
to the bond markets have generally had little difficulty obtaining credit on favorable
terms. But problems are evident in the business sector as well: Business investment in
nonresidential structures, such as office buildings, factories, and shopping malls, has
remained at a low level, held back by elevated vacancy rates at existing properties and
difficulties, in some cases, in obtaining construction loans. Also, some business surveys,
including those conducted by the Federal Reserve System, point to weaker conditions
recently, with businesses reporting slower growth in production, new orders, and
employment.
Why has this recovery been so slow and erratic? Historically, recessions have
tended to sow the seeds of their own recoveries as reduced spending on investment,
housing, and consumer durables generates pent-up demand. As the business cycle
bottoms out and confidence returns, this pent-up demand, often augmented by the effects
of stimulative monetary and fiscal policies, is met through increased production and
hiring. Increased production in turn boosts business revenues and increased hiring raises
household incomes--providing further impetus to business and household spending.
Improving income prospects and balance sheets also make households and businesses
more creditworthy, and financial institutions become more willing to lend. Normally,
these developments create a virtuous circle of rising incomes and profits, moresupportive financial and credit conditions, and lower uncertainty, allowing the process of
recovery to develop momentum.

-5These restorative forces are at work today, and they will continue to promote
recovery over time. Unfortunately, the recession, besides being extraordinarily severe as
well as global in scope, was also unusual in being associated with both a very deep slump
in the housing market and a historic financial crisis. These two features of the downturn,
individually and in combination, have acted to slow the natural recovery process.
Notably, the housing sector has been a significant driver of recovery from most
recessions in the United States since World War II, but this time--with an overhang of
distressed and foreclosed properties, tight credit conditions for builders and potential
homebuyers, and ongoing concerns by both potential borrowers and lenders about
continued house price declines--the rate of new home construction has remained at less
than one-third of its pre-crisis peak. Depressed construction also has hurt providers of a
wide range of goods and services related to housing and homebuilding, such as the
household appliance and home furnishing industries. Moreover, even as tight credit for
builders and potential homebuyers has been one of the factors restraining the housing
recovery, the weak housing market has in turn adversely affected financial markets and
the flow of credit. For example, the sharp declines in house prices in some areas have
left many homeowners “underwater” on their mortgages, creating financial hardship for
households and, through their effects on rates of mortgage delinquency and default, stress
for financial institutions as well.
As I noted, the financial crisis of 2008 and 2009 played a central role in sparking
the global recession. A great deal has been and continues to be done to address the
causes and effects of the crisis, including extensive financial reforms. However, although
banking and financial conditions in the United States have improved significantly since

-6the depths of the crisis, financial stress continues to be a significant drag on the recovery,
both here and abroad. This drag has become particularly evident in recent months, as
bouts of sharp volatility and risk aversion in markets have reemerged in reaction to
concerns about European sovereign debts and related strains as well as developments
associated with the U.S. fiscal situation, including last month’s downgrade of the U.S.
long-term credit rating by one of the major ratings agencies and the recent controversy
surrounding the raising of the U.S. federal debt ceiling. It is difficult to judge how much
these events and the associated financial volatility have affected economic activity thus
far, but there seems little doubt that they have hurt household and business confidence,
and that they pose ongoing risks to growth.
While the weakness of the housing sector and continued financial volatility are
two key reasons for the frustratingly slow pace of the recovery, other factors also may
restrain growth in coming quarters. For example, state and local governments continue to
tighten their belts by cutting spending and reducing payrolls in the face of ongoing
budgetary pressures, and federal fiscal stimulus is being withdrawn. There is ample room
for debate about the appropriate size and role for the government in the longer term, but-in the absence of adequate demand from the private sector--a substantial fiscal
consolidation in the shorter term could add to the headwinds facing economic growth and
hiring.
The prospect of an increasing fiscal drag on the economy in the face of an already
sluggish recovery highlights one of the many difficult tradeoffs currently faced by fiscal
policymakers. As I have emphasized on previous occasions, without significant policy
changes to address the increasing fiscal burdens that will be associated with the aging of

-7the population and the ongoing rise in health-care costs, the finances of the federal
government will spiral out of control in coming decades, risking severe economic and
financial damage. But, while prompt and decisive action to put the federal government’s
finances on a sustainable trajectory is urgently needed, fiscal policymakers should not, as
a consequence, disregard the fragility of the economic recovery. Fortunately, the two
goals--achieving fiscal sustainability, which is the result of responsible policies set in
place for the longer term, and avoiding creation of fiscal headwinds for the recovery--are
not incompatible. Acting now to put in place a credible plan for reducing future deficits
over the long term, while being attentive to the implications of fiscal choices for the
recovery in the near term, can help serve both objectives.
The Outlook for Inflation
Let me turn now from the outlook for growth to the outlook for inflation. Prices
of many commodities, notably oil, increased sharply earlier this year. Higher gasoline
and food prices translated directly into increased inflation for consumers, and in some
cases producers of other goods and services were able to pass through their higher costs
to their customers as well. In addition, the global supply disruptions associated with the
disaster in Japan put upward pressure on motor vehicle prices. As a result of these
influences, inflation picked up significantly; over the first half of this year, the price
index for personal consumption expenditures rose at an annual rate of about 3-1/2
percent, compared with an average of less than 1-1/2 percent over the preceding two
years.
However, inflation is expected to moderate in the coming quarters as these
transitory influences wane. In particular, the prices of oil and many other commodities

-8have either leveled off or have come down from their highs. Meanwhile, the step-up in
automobile production should reduce pressure on car prices. Importantly, we see little
indication that the higher rate of inflation experienced so far this year has become
ingrained in the economy. Longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable
according to the indicators we monitor, such as the measure of households’ longer-term
expectations from the Thompson Reuters/University of Michigan survey, the 10-year
inflation projections of professional forecasters, and the five-year-forward measure of
inflation compensation derived from yields of inflation-protected Treasury securities. In
addition to the stability of longer-term inflation expectations, the substantial amount of
resource slack that exists in U.S. labor and product markets should continue to have a
moderating influence on inflationary pressures. Notably, because of ongoing weakness
in labor demand over the course of the recovery, nominal wage increases have been
roughly offset by productivity gains, leaving the level of unit labor costs close to where it
had stood at the onset of the recession. Given the large share of labor costs in the
production costs of most firms, subdued unit labor costs should be an important
restraining influence on inflation.
Monetary Policy
Although the FOMC expects a moderate recovery to continue and indeed to
strengthen over time, the Committee has responded to recent developments--as I have
already noted--by marking down its outlook for economic growth over coming quarters.
The Committee also continues to anticipate that inflation will moderate over time, to a
rate at or below the 2 percent or a bit less that most FOMC participants consider to be

-9consistent with the Committee’s dual mandate to promote maximum employment and
price stability.
Given this outlook, the Committee decided at its August meeting to provide more
specific forward guidance about its expectations for the future path of the federal funds
rate. In particular, the statement following the meeting indicated that economic
conditions--including low rates of resource utilization and a subdued outlook for inflation
over the medium run--are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds
rate at least through mid-2013. That is, in what the Committee judges to be the most
likely scenarios for resource utilization and inflation in the medium term, the target for
the federal funds rate would be held at its current low level for at least two more years.
In addition to refining our forward guidance, the Federal Reserve has a range of
tools that could be used to provide additional monetary stimulus. We discussed the
relative merits and costs of such tools at our August meeting. My FOMC colleagues and
I will continue to consider those and other pertinent issues, including, of course,
economic and financial developments, at our meeting in September and are prepared to
employ these tools as appropriate to promote a stronger economic recovery in a context
of price stability.
Conclusion
Let me conclude with just a few words on the longer-term prospects for our
economy. As monetary and fiscal policymakers consider the appropriate policies to
address the economy’s current weaknesses, it is important to acknowledge its enduring
strengths. Notwithstanding the trauma of the crisis and the recession, the U.S. economy
remains the largest in the world, with a highly diverse mix of industries and a degree of

- 10 international competitiveness that, if anything, has improved in recent years. Our
economy retains its traditional advantages of a strong market orientation, a robust
entrepreneurial culture, and flexible capital and labor markets. And our country remains
a technological leader, with many of the world's leading research universities and the
highest spending on research and development of any nation. Thus I do not expect the
long-run growth potential of the U.S. economy to be materially affected by the financial
crisis and the recession if--and I stress if--our country takes the necessary steps to secure
that outcome. Economic policymakers face a range of difficult decisions, and every
household and business must cope with the stresses and uncertainties that our current
situation presents. These are not easy tasks. I have no doubt, however, that those
challenges can be met, and that the fundamental strengths of our economy will ultimately
reassert themselves. The Federal Reserve will certainly do all that it can to help restore
high rates of growth and employment in a context of price stability.