CPD IN THE NEWS

The shocking appearance of activists at the usually quiet retreat is a sign of a growing battle over when and whether the Fed should raise interest rates. That crucial decision is making the central bank even more of a political target for populist anger. With critics like Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Rand Paul taking sharper swipes at the Fed, protesters are becoming emboldened.

Both liberal and conservative critics of the bank have organized "counter conferences" on monetary policy held at the same time and place -- the first time in more than 30 years that anyone has scheduled events competing with the symposium hosted annually by the Kansas City Fed.

“The economy has not fully recovered and interest rates should not be raised when racial disparities exist,” said Shawn Sebastian, a policy advocate for the Fed Up Coalition of the Center for Popular Democracy, pointing to continued higher-than-average unemployment rates for black Americans.

And the crowded juxtaposition of the bankers and activists in a small resort area makes for some awkward encounters.

Sebastian spotted Richmond Fed President Jeffrey Lacker at the check-in desk at the Jackson Lodge this week and went right up to him.

“I gave him our agenda and invited him, personally, to come to our conference,” Sebastian said. “He handed the agenda back to me and said he had seen it and was, ‘well prepared for this kind of thing.'”

As Fed officials hear from central bankers from Switzerland and Chile Friday, they are doing so practically next door to a workshop called “Do Black Lives Matter to the Fed?” sponsored by Sebastian's group, which wants rates to stay low until wage growth and unemployment improve, especially for minorities. Meanwhile, a conservative group, the American Principle Project, is holding a separate conference several miles away that includes speakers pushing for tighter monetary policy and higher interest rates, as well a return to the gold standard.

The atmosphere is very different than when the Kansas City Fed started holding the retreat in Jackson Hole in 1982, back when fly-fishing enthusiast Paul Volcker was in charge of the central bank. The symposium has always been held in late August and billed as an exclusive, invitation-only affair in the middle of a national park. Over the years, it's grown to be one of the more high-profile Fed events, even being called the Davos for central banks.

The head of the Fed usually attends, although Chair Janet Yellen is skipping this year. The event tends to be covered by the media because, in past years, Fed chiefs like Ben Bernanke and Alan Greenspan have used the occasion to broadcast significant monetary-policy shifts.

The event is fairly cloaked in secrecy. Its dates weren't announced until early this spring.

“When I first started asking about it, back in November, they were very secretive. I had to go and ask the lodge what weekends were available and from that, I was able to determine the right weekend,” said Steve Lonegan, policy director for the American Principle Project, which was prohibited by lodge staff from holding a conference at the same place as the Fed symposium. His group is down the road at the Hotel Terra and Diamond Cross Ranch.

“I was told by the lodge staff that the Fed had the whole building, because of security purposes," he said.

A spokesman for the Kansas City Fed acknowledged this was the first year their symposium was taking place alongside competing monetary conferences. But he declined to comment further about the other groups.

Both organizations confirmed they’ve had opportunities over the past several months to sit down and talk about their top priorities face-to-face with Yellen.

But they said holding a conference at the same time as the Jackson Hole event seemed like the ideal way to get even more attention to their cause, with the added bonus that their own conference-goers might also run into central bank policymakers at the park. Both groups had invited Fed officials to their conference and hoped to get crossover attendees.

At one point this week, a group of about 100 Fed Up conference-goers outside the Jackson Hole Lodge chanted: “Don’t raise interest rates! Don’t raise interest rates!”

Meanwhile, central bankers flying into the Jackson Hole Airport -- basically the main entry to the area for conference-goers -- may have passed the American Principle Project's table advertising its event highlighting the problems of loose monetary policy.

“The goal of our conference is to challenge the Fed’s monetary policy and educate the American people on the widening income gap driven by the failed policies of the Federal Reserve system,” said Lonegan, whose conference includes speakers like Rep. Scott Garrett, a New Jersey Republican, and the outspoken broker and Euro Pacific Capital CEO Peter Schiff. Schiff’s session is called, “Monetary Roach Motel — No Exit from the Fed’s Stimulus.” There’s a panel on international monetary reform, which includes members of British Parliament, and a few speakers who want a return to the gold standard.

The APP had originally signed on former Fed chief Alan Greenspan as their main speaker. Greenspan pulled out, Lonegan said, so now former Sen. Jim DeMint, president of the Heritage Foundation, is the keynote speaker.

“It’s not easy to put together a counter conference to the most powerful organization on the planet earth,” Lonegan said. “You have to have speakers who have the guts to put their names out there.”

Source: Politico

Today, Center for Popular Democracy Action releases the first major report on New York wage theft since 2009. The report, By a Thousand Cuts: The Complex Face of Wage Theft in New York, identifies 11 ‘bad actors’, which are employers with a history of wage theft that is either particularly egregious or that exemplifies a broader trend in key New York sectors.

The companies highlighted in the report have a history of committing various wage theft violations, such as denying benefits, failing to pay overtime or minimum wage, making illegal deductions from pay checks, telling workers to work off the clock, and misclassifying workers as freelancers or independent contractors to avoid paying benefits.

 Despite passage of the Wage Theft Prevention Act of 2010, which gives New York the strongest laws in the nation, an estimated 2.1 million New Yorkers are still victims of wage theft annually, cheated out of a cumulative $3.2 billion in wages and benefits they are owed. The report contains never-before-released testimonies from impacted workers.

Protesters from The New York Coalition against Wage Theft gathered at 11 a.m. in front of a worksite run by asbestos removal company New York Insulation Inc., one of the bad actors identified in the report.

 “New Yorkers are being cheated out of their hard earned wages, and it has to stop now,” said New York City Comptroller Scott M. Stringer. “The bottom line is that an honest day’s work deserves an honest day’s pay –and if a company cheats workers out of their wages, we will catch them and they will pay. I commend Make the Road New York and the Center for Popular Democracy for issuing this new report and continuing the fight against wage theft.”

 “Despite good laws on the books, wage theft continues at epidemic proportions impacting millions of workers each year. It is, in effect, a massive crime wave that costs New Yorkers billions and exacerbates poverty and inequity in our state,” says Meg Fosque, low-wage organizing director at Make the Road.

 “Wage theft is a pervasive crime, rather than the practice of a few unscrupulous employers. And, companies build business strategies on the bet that they will never be called to account for stealing their employees’ wages and undercutting high-road businesses. We need robust and resourced enforcement efforts to protect workers’livelihoods and the ability of fair employers to do business,” says Connie Razza, Director of Strategic Research at the Center for Popular Democracy.

 "The depth and breadth of the wage theft problem is crippling our economy. The construction industry, tax payers, and workers all equally feel the pain of wage theft. This is not a victimless crime. When responsible contractors operating within the laws of New York State are put at a disadvantage against those ignoring these same laws, we must all unite to fix this problem," says Patrick J. Purcell, Executive Director with Greater New York LECET. 

###

www.populardemocracy.org The Center for Popular Democracy promotes equity, opportunity, and a dynamic democracy in partnership with innovative base-building organizations, organizing networks and alliances, and progressive unions across the country. CPD builds the strength and capacity of democratic organizations to envision and advance a pro-worker, pro-immigrant, racial justice agenda.

El ex informático del banco suizo HSBC, Hervé Falciani, que destapó los nombres de presuntos evasores fiscales en bancos helvéticos, ha celebrado que siete directivos del Banco Santander estén citados a declarar en la Audiencia Nacional por un delito de blanqueo de capitales, ya que, según ha dicho, "cada día hay ejemplos similares en otros países".

Lea el artículo completo aquí.

Jared Bernstein Blog - March 3, 2015 - As a tireless (some would say tiresome) advocate for full employment and the benefits it yields for working people, you can imagine how I was thrown by this NYT headline over a piece by economics reporter Bin Appelbaum:

Black jobless rates remain high, but Fed can’t do much to help.

“Shots fired!” as the kids say.

I find this hard to believe in the following sense. Black unemployment has averaged almost twice that of overall unemployment since the monthly data begin in 1972 (avg: 1.9, with standard deviation of 0.15, so not a ton of variation around that mean). Crudely, that implies that if overall unemployment fell from 6% to 5%, the black rate might fall more in percentage point terms, from 12% to 10%.

Next, if the Fed can push down the overall unemployment rate, which is certainly within its purview and, at a time like this, its job description, then the headline seems off.

Now, there are important nuances in play here.

First, these relationships are not always so clean. Over the long, strong recovery of the 1990s, black unemployment fell 4.5 points compared to 2.1 points for whites (and 2.5 points overall). Over the 1980s recovery, black unemployment—which was about 20% at the end of the deep early 1980s recession—fell 8.5 points compared to 4.7 for whites.

Those comparatively big declines show the disproportionate benefits that blacks reap from lower unemployment and, conditional on the Fed’s ability to lower unemployment, they belie the NYT headline. I could make similar claims based on wages and incomes, but I’m bound by secrecy for now (more on that in a moment).

However, more recently, that relationship isn’t generating such impressive results. Over this recovery, black and white unemployment have declined by similar amounts (4.5 points for blacks; 3.8 for whites). And, as Appelbaum points out, real median wages have fallen twice as much for blacks as for whites.

But that’s kinda the point: until recently this has been a uniquely weak recovery, and as such, tells us little yet about the extent to which full employment will lift the relative economic fortunes of black workers.

If we get to and stay at full employment, I’m confident it will work as it has in the past, based both on the history briefly cited above and on some truly exciting results from a new paper we’ve commissioned for our full employment project on the benefits of full employment to black workers, written by the economist Valarie Wilson from the Economic Policy Institute.

Valerie will be highlighting the results at an event we’re holding in DC on March 30th so far be it from me to steal her thunder. But she’s got some panel data regressions (which provide lots more observations and variance than the simple time series comparisons noted above) showing the impact of lower unemployment on black compared to white median wages, and man…all’s I can say is I’m employing great restraint not to just print them right here and now!

Here’s another point worth considering. Various economists on team full employment have been trying to get the Fed to hold off on its interest rate liftoff, but Appelbaum writes: “It’s not obvious, however, that holding down borrowing costs for a little longer would be an effective way to address the underlying problem. Indeed, the problem is a good illustration of the limits of monetary policy.”

That may be true in the following sense: if the Fed raises rates a little bit in 2015q4 instead of 2015q3, I doubt it will matter that much to anyone in the real economy (though financial markets would make a huge deal out of it). Similarly, if they hold to a 5.4% full employment rate and a firm 2% inflation ceiling that mustn’t be breached, or if they shift from being data driven to shooting at the phantom menace of inflation that’s allegedly hiding out of sight from the data just around the corner—well then, yeah, they won’t much help those who depend on lasting full employment to catch a break.

He’s also got a point re underlying problems. Even full employment may not be enough to reach the millions of workers with criminal records who face uniquely high barriers to the job market. I’ve written about fair-hiring policies to reach these workers, and so has Appelbaum.

But check this out: I mentioned our March 30 event. Well, another speaker on the panel that morning will be the guy from whom I learned all I know about fair-hiring, Maurice Emsellem from the National Employment Law Project.

I know what you’re thinking: what about macro, what about Fed policy? How can you call yourself a full employment maven and leave that out? Did I forget to mention our keynote speaker? A fella named Bernanke…Ben Bernanke. Here’s the flyer. Be there and be square.

Source