The Federal Reserve Bank of New York works to promote sound and well-functioning financial systems and markets through its provision of industry and payment services, advancement of infrastructure reform in key markets and training and educational support to international institutions.
The New York Fed engages with individuals, households and businesses in the Second District and maintains an active dialogue in the region. The Bank gathers and shares regional economic intelligence to inform our community and policy makers, and promotes sound financial and economic decisions through community development and education programs.
The Federal Reserve System is getting ready to celebrate
its 100th birthday. The quiz show Jeopardy! recently paid tribute to this milestone by having as
one of its “Teen Tournament Jeopardy!”
categories “Happy 100th Birthday, Federal Reserve!” Barrett Block,
a high-school senior, won
the game. You can play the same game the
teen contestants played (scroll down to the “Double Jeopardy!” round) on a fan-created site called J! Archive.
On the site, which by the way isn’t affiliated with Jeopardy!, you can travel back through the past thirty years and
test your knowledge on Jeopardy!
questions on specific topics like finance, economics, money, and the Federal
Stefania Albanesi, Victoria Gregory, Christina Patterson, and Ayşegül Şahin
More than three years after the end of the Great Recession, the labor market still remains weak, with the unemployment rate at 7.7 percent and payroll employment 3 million less than its pre-recession level. One possibility is that this weakness is a reflection of ongoing trends in the labor market that were exacerbated during the recession. Since the 1980s, employment has become increasingly concentrated among the highest- and lowest-skilled jobs in the occupational distribution, due to the disappearance of jobs focused on routine tasks. This phenomenon is called job polarization (see Autor et al. , Acemoglu and Autor , Jaimovic and Siu , and Abel and Deitz ).
An assiduous follower of the national house price charts that the New York Fed maintains on its web page may have noticed that we appear to be rewriting history as we update the charts every month. For example, last month we reported that the median twelve-month house price change across all counties for December 2012 was 3.68 percent. However, this month, we indicate that this same median change for December 2012 was instead 3.45 percent. Why the change? Was the earlier reported number a mistake that we simply corrected this month? If not, what explains the revision to the initial report?
An oil-price spike is often used as the textbook example of a supply shock. However, rapidly rising oil prices can also reflect a demand shock. Recognizing the difference is important for central bankers. A supply-driven increase in the price of oil can result in higher unemployment and inflation, leaving central bankers with the difficult decision to loosen policy, tighten policy, or not respond at all. A demand-driven increase reflecting global growth may support the case for tighter policy. In this post, we describe an approach for decomposing oil price changes into supply and demand shocks using financial market data.
Jaison R. Abel, Jason Bram, Richard Deitz, and
October, Superstorm Sandy caused widespread destruction and massive disruptions
to the regional economy, not to mention the lives of millions of residents. More
than three months later, many people remain displaced, and some are still struggling
to rebuild their homes, businesses, and lives. Despite these setbacks, the
process of economic recovery in the region appears to be well underway, boosted
by the beginning of the cleanup and restoration process. In this post, we take
an initial look at the adverse impact Sandy has had on the region’s jobs,
describing the nature and extent of the employment downturn and the subsequent rebound
following the storm.
On November 17, 1914, the New York Times reported on Treasury
Secretary W. G. McAdoo’s involvement in the
authorization of the Federal Reserve System’s operations, including a notice to member Banks, telegrams, and new Reserve notes. Appearing
with the article is a copy of the receipt for the first Reserve payment.
The summer of 2011 was an unsettling period for financial markets. In the United States, Congress was unable to agree to terms for raising the debt ceiling until August, creating considerable uncertainty over whether the government would be forced to default on its debt. In Europe, the borrowing costs of some peripheral countries increased dramatically, raising questions about the health of some of the largest banks. In this post, we analyze data recently made public by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to see how the U.S. money market mutual fund (MMF) industry reacted to these stresses. We conclude that MMFs appeared to be more concerned with the European debt crisis because they increased their holdings of U.S. Treasuries and other government securities while decreasing their holdings of financial securities issued by European banks over that period.
Note: This post draws on many sources contemporary with the events described, including various Treasury and Federal Reserve publications and news articles from the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times. These sources are fully documented in the PDF version of the post.
In the second half of 1953, the United States, for the first time, risked exceeding the statutory limit on Treasury debt. How did Congress, the White House, and Treasury officials deal with the looming crisis? As related in this post, they responded by deferring and reducing expenditures, by monetizing “free” gold that remained from the devaluation of the dollar in 1934, and ultimately by raising the debt ceiling.
One would be hard-pressed to find a discussion about the
timing of retirement these days that doesn’t mention finances. That makes it more
than a little surprising to find two examples from the mid-twentieth century
that broach the question of retirement age, yet are entirely silent about
Liberty Street Economics invites you to comment on a post.
We encourage you to submit comments, queries and suggestions on our blog entries. We will post them below the entry, subject to the following guidelines:
Please be brief: Comments are limited to 1500 characters.
Please be quick: Comments submitted more than 1 week after the blog entry appears will not be posted.
Please try to submit before COB on Friday: Comments submitted after that will not be posted until Monday morning.
Please be on-topic and patient: Comments are moderated and will not appear until they have been reviewed to ensure that they are substantive and clearly related to the topic of the post. The moderator will not post comments that are abusive, harassing, or threatening; obscene or vulgar; or commercial in nature; as well as comments that constitute a personal attack. We reserve the right not to post a comment; no notice will be given regarding whether a submission will or will not be posted.
The LSE editors ask authors submitting a post to the blog to confirm that they have no conflicts of interest as defined by the American Economic Association in its Disclosure Policy. If an author has sources of financial support or other interests that could be perceived as influencing the research presented in the post, we disclose that fact in a statement prepared by the author and appended to the author information at the end of the post. If the author has no such interests to disclose, no statement is provided. Note, however, that we do indicate in all cases if a data vendor or other party has a right to review a post.