Political bloggers were not kind to Chairman Yellen’s keynote speech at Jackson Hole. David Stockman called it “Keynesian blather.” Someone else called it an insult to America’s intelligence.
The Fed Chairman makes an easy target, especially if you don’t understand the technical terms. After all, who cares if you’re unemployed for cyclical reasons or structural ones?
Jeremiah prefers to assume people are generally competent for their jobs. We downloaded the speech here. Remember that this is a keynote speech, kicking off a symposium on the labor market. So, when Yellen refers to the unsolved mysteries of employment, that doesn’t mean she’s confused – she is introducing the topics.
Jeremiah was pleased to see that Yellen does not take the headline unemployment figure at face value. She acknowledged the growth in part time employment and the drop in labor force participation. Here are a few of the topics:
- Is labor force participation off because people have retired, or are they coming back? If people come back en masse, that will drive wages down.
- Is there “pent up wage deflation?” If so, wages may jump once it has run its course.
- Have the midlevel jobs gone, to Asia and automation, never to return?
You can see that these are all relevant to ordinary Americans, and relevant to Fed policy. The Fed needs to know whether there is still slack in the labor market, or if our current wretched economy is the new normal. The dual mandate requires the Fed to keep credit conditions easy as long as there is any chance it will help someone find work. This brings us to the Keynesian part.
Keynes reckoned that inflation could reduce unemployment, and this is why the Fed has a dual mandate instead of simply maintaining price stability. In fact, Keynes’ definition of full employment is the level at which inflation can’t help one more guy find work.
Men are involuntarily unemployed if, in the event of a small rise in [inflation], both the aggregate supply of labor willing to work for the current nominal wage and the aggregate demand for it at that wage would be greater than the existing volume of employment.
Lower wages will put more people to work – basic supply and demand – and the role of inflation is to give everyone a pay cut, by reducing the value of their nominal wage. This is a pretty incompetent way to create jobs, and it’s not even a good definition.
There is no magic formula for full employment, any more than there is a magic diet pill. Keynes didn’t have it and, when the symposium is over, Janet Yellen won’t have it either.
Labor is employed when entrepreneurs have profitable projects, capital to invest, and a stable political environment. As public policy, this means the rule of law and – a predictable tax and regulatory regime. Various surveys, including the Fed’s own Beige Book, have indicated this is what’s holding back the job market.
Keynes wrote a system of equilibrium equations, like the ideal gas law. In such a system, aggregate demand for goods cannot be more or less important, as a policy objective, than the aggregate demand for labor.
When companies are starved for workers, they compete by offering higher wages. You guessed it – full employment causes inflation.