View original document

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

Public Service That Makes a Difference®

Ethics and Economics Making Cyclical
Downturns Less Severe
By Eric S. Rosengren
June 27, 2018

Full-text Speech (pdf)
Figures (pdf)

Figures and Comments (pdf)

more

Ethics and Economics: Making Cyclical Downturns Less Severe

Watch later

Share

Our latest information
on COVID-19

Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren said today the costs of high
unemployment are disproportionately borne by those that can least afford
them, and a variety of actions could be taken by policymakers to make
periods of high unemployment less likely.
This ethical dimension of economics “is not just about thoughts or feelings,”
Rosengren said, while exploring ways to manifest such ethical decisions in
“very tangible” policymaking: state and local government spending; bank
regulatory policy; and monetary policy.
“The sad reality is that unemployment disproportionately affects minorities,
the less educated, and children whose families are experiencing
unemployment,” Rosengren said, acknowledging that the costs to both the
entire economy and to parts of our population are significant.
“In my view, if policies could mitigate the severity of economic slowdowns,
some of those costs could be avoided – and taking actions now, when the
economy is strong, could be particularly important to lessening the severity
of a hypothetical future downturn and its impact on individuals.”
In exploring state and local government financing, Rosengren said it should
be designed to buffer the economy during recessions, or at a minimum
“should not reduce the stimulative effects of spending when the economy is
most troubled.”
State and local governments likely reduce spending in recessions for good
reasons, he said, but a number of steps can be taken that would lessen the
problematic impact. “Ideally, a time like now – when the national economy
is growing and employment is robust – would be an opportunity, it seems to
me, to prepare for the next downturn,” Rosengren said. “This would
perhaps include shoring up state finances, reducing unfunded pension
liabilities, and significantly increasing ‘rainy day’ funds. I am not suggesting
it would be easy, even in these economic times. But progress could be
made.”
Banking regulation can also amplify the business cycle, and policymakers

can look for ways to lessen these effects, Rosengren said. For example,
lenders’ losses on loans tend to increase significantly during economic
downturns. When their capital-to-assets ratio gets too low, banks can
choose to either raise their capital level, or shrink assets, to restore the
ratio. Loans are key assets for banks, so restoring the capital-to-assets ratio
can mean less lending at just the time the economy may need stimulus.
Given the overall health of the economy and the relatively rich asset
valuations now prevailing, it is Rosengren’s view that this would be the ideal
time to build up capital buffers in the U.S., which he says could help
address the incentive that banks will have to pull back on lending to shrink
assets in a future economic downturn.
Turning to monetary policy, Rosengren said it is appropriate to consider
ways to avoid hitting zero with short-term interest rates. One possibility, he
said, is to consider more flexibility with the inflation target, perhaps focusing
more on an inflation range than a specific number. “One might allow the
inflation target to rise within the range during periods of low real rates, thus
providing more room for the funds rate to fall during an economic
downturn.” He also noted that a policy path that does not overshoot the
sustainable unemployment rate likely increases the probability of a longer
recession-free period.
“The costs of economic downturns – and the uneven distribution of their
impact – are, in fact, ethical issues,” Rosengren concluded. “Policymakers
could continue and perhaps expand their efforts to make cyclical downturns
– and resulting periods of high unemployment – less severe.”
Rosengren was speaking at the Fourth Annual O. John Olcay Lecture on
Ethics and Economics at the Peterson Institute for International Economics,
in Washington, D.C.

collapse all

About the Authors

expand all

Eric S. Rosengren
Eric S. Rosengren is President & Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of
Boston.

Resources
Keywords
Ethics and economics , monetary policy , Inflation range , fiscal policy , State and local spending ,
Countercyclical , Policy tools , Financial Shock , Economic recovery , Bank regulatory policy
Related Content
Boston Fed president explores ethics and economics and ways to make downturns less severe
Top takeaways from President Rosengren’s June 27 talk
President Rosengren to speak about the U.S. economy
Monetary, Fiscal, and Financial Stability Policy Tools: Are We Equipped for the Next Recession?
Monetary, Fiscal, and Financial Stability Policy Tools: Are We Equipped for the Next Recession?

Do you lead a Community Development Financial Institution? Share your
story in the #COVID19 CDFI Survey to help policymakers understand how
your organization and community are faring and how policies and other
initiatives may help. https://bit.ly/3jv1mR8

About Us

Reserve Bank Services

Leadership & Organization

Cash Services

Doing Business With Us

Wholesale Payments

Contact Us

Careers

Visitor Information & Directions
600 Atlantic Avenue

Boston, MA 02210-2204
map
(617) 973-3000

Get email updates from the
BostonFed
Terms of Use & Privacy

Data Privacy

Site Accessibility

Feedback

© Federal Reserve Bank of Boston