Connect with us

Business

Fed speeches reveal split that puts rate cut in jeopardy: persistent inflation vs ‘low-hire, low-fire’ labor market

Published

on



What was once seen as a near-certain cut in interest rates next month now looks more like a coin flip as Federal Reserve officials sharply disagree over the economy’s health and whether stubborn inflation or weak hiring represent a bigger threat.

In several speeches in the past week, some policymakers have registered greater concern over persistent inflation in an echo of the “affordability” concerns that played a large role in elections earlier this month.

At the same time, another camp is much more concerned about meager hiring and the threat that the “low-hire, low-fire“ job market could worsen into one where layoffs become more widespread.

The turmoil on the Fed’s 19-member interest-rate setting committee reflects a deeply uncertain economic outlook brought about by multiple factors, including tariffs, artificial intelligence, and changes in immigration and tax policies.

“It’s reflective of a ton of uncertainty,” said Luke Tilley, chief economist at M&T Bank. “It’s not surprising at all that there’s a wide divergence of opinions.”

Fewer rate cuts by the Fed could leave borrowing costs for homes and cars elevated. More expensive mortgages and auto loans contribute to the widespread view, according to polls, that the cost of living is too high.

Some Fed watchers say that an unusually high number of dissents are possible at the December 9-10 meeting, regardless of whether the central bank reduces rates or not. Krishna Guha, an analyst at Evercore ISI, said a decision to cut could lead to as many as four or five dissents, while a decision to keep rates unchanged could produce three.

Four dissenting votes would be highly unusual, given the Fed’s history of seeking consensus. The last time four officials dissented was in 1992, under then-Chair Alan Greenspan.

Fed governor Christopher Waller on Monday noted that critics of the Fed often accuse it of “group think,” since many of its decisions are made unanimously.

“People who are accusing us of this, get ready,” Waller said Monday in remarks in London. “You might see the least group think you’ve seen … in a long time.”

The differences have been exacerbated by the government shutdown’s interruption of economic data, a particular challenge for a Fed that Chair Jerome Powell has often described as “data dependent.” The government’s last jobs report was for August, and inflation for September.

September jobs data will finally be published Thursday, and are expected to show a small gain of 50,000 jobs that month and an unchanged unemployment rate at a still-low 4.3%.

For now, Wall Street investors put the odds of a December rate cut at 50-50, according to CME Fedwatch, down sharply from nearly 94% a month ago. The decline has contributed to the stock market’s drops this week.

After cutting their key rate in September for the first time this year, Fed policymakers signaled they expected to cut twice more, in October and December.

But after implementing a second reduction Oct. 29, Powell poured cold water on the prospects of another cut, describing it as “not a foregone conclusion — far from it.”

And speeches last week by a raft of regional Fed officials pushed the market odds of a December cut even lower. Susan Collins, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, said, “in all of my conversations with contacts across New England, I hear concerns about elevated prices.”

Collins said that keeping the Fed’s key rate at its current level of about 3.9% would help bring inflation down. The economy “has been holding up quite well” even with interest rates where they are, she added.

Several other regional presidents voiced similar concerns, including Raphael Bostic of the Atlanta Fed, Alberto Musalem of the St. Louis Fed, and Jeffrey Schmid at the Kansas City Fed. Musalem, Collins, and Schmid are among the 12 officials who vote on policy this year. Schmid dissented in October in favor of keeping rates unchanged.

“When I talk to contacts in my district, I hear continued concern over the pace of price increases,” Schmid said Friday. “Some of this has to do with the effect of tariffs on input prices, but it is not just tariffs — or even primarily tariffs — that has people worried. I hear concerns about rising health care costs and insurance premiums, and I hear a lot about electricity.”

On Monday, however, Waller argued that sluggish hiring is a bigger concern, and renewed his call for a rate cut next month.

“The labor market is still weak and near stall speed,” he said. “Inflation through September continued to show relatively small effects from tariffs and support the hypothesis that tariffs … are not a persistent source of inflation.”

Waller also dismissed the concern — voiced by Schmid and others — that the Fed should keep rates elevated because inflation has topped the Fed’s 2% target for five years. So far that hasn’t led the public to worry that inflation will stay elevated for an extended period, Waller noted.

“You can’t just sort of say it’s been above target for five years, so I’m not going to cut,” he added. “You got to give us better answers than that.”

There could be consensus for an interest rate cut if, say, new data for October and November show the economy shedding jobs, according to Esther George, the former president of the Kansas City Fed.

It’s also worth noting that many economists had expected multiple dissents in September, but instead only Stephen Miran, a governor appointed that month by President Donald Trump, voted against the rate cut decision, in favor of an even bigger reduction.

“Registering a dissent is a hard decision, and I think you’re going to find people that are speaking today that wouldn’t follow through with a vote in that direction,” she said. “I think you’re going to find enough consensus, whichever way they go.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

The job market is so bad, people in their 40s are resorting to going back to school instead of looking for work

Published

on



This year’s job market has been bleak, to say the least. Layoffs hit the highest level in 14 years, job openings are barely budging, and quits figures are plummeting. It’s no wonder people feel stuck and discouraged—especially as many candidates have been on the job hunt for a year.

But some mid-career professionals are working with the cards they’ve been dealt by going back to school. Many are turning to data analytics, cybersecurity, AI-focused courses, health care, MBA programs, or trade certifications for an “immediate impact on their careers,” Metaintro CEO Lacey Kaelani told Fortune.

Metaintro is a job-search engine with 2 million active users that runs on open-source data processing more than 600 million jobs in real time.

“We absolutely see this trend [of adults going back to school] accelerating,” Kaelani said. “In combination with layoffs over the recent years plus the rise of required AI skills, experience is no longer enough.”

Kelsey Szamet, an employment attorney with Kingsley Szamet Employment Lawyers, said she’s noticed people over the age of 40 to go back to grad school or earn certifications.

While it’s not necessarily a completely new phenomenon, it’s becoming more frequently now that the job market is the pits. 

Still, Szamet he sees “very consistent” reasons for people considering higher education at a later stage in life. Some believe they’ve “plateaued” in their career and education is the only option. Others have been affected by layoffs, and there are some “who have simply become burned out with work and want a meaningful profession,” she told Fortune

“Then, too, come life circumstances. Some people have fewer responsibilities, better financial security, or a sense they will never make a change if they put it off now,” she said, adding she’s seeing more people pivot out of “dying industries,” those whose salaries have stagnated, or those who have job-security fears.  

According to Hanover Research, the top master’s degrees on the rise include artificial intelligence, mechatronics, robotics, automation engineering, research methodology, quantitative methods, as well as construction engineering technology. 

The cost of going back to school

Sometimes going back to school can also just feel like delaying the inevitable: student loans and other living costs. 

While grad school can certainly offer the opportunity to level-up your career once you’ve completed a program, it comes with financial and personal sacrifices, like time. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, one year of grad school, on average, costs about $43,000 in tuition. That’s nearly 70% the average salary in the U.S.

“Going to school can be very beneficial, but it can be very costly too,” Szamet said. And, when people are older and going back to school, they should consider “the cost of education and how stressful it can be to juggle work and family responsibilities with education.” Overall, “one ought to assess if it will be a good investment,” she added. 

That’s why it’s important to do your homework. Some degree programs have a better return-on-investment than others. According to an ROI analysis by the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity, the median master’s degree increases lifetime earnings by $83,000, but some master’s degrees are worth more than $1 million. Computer science, engineering, and nursing are some of the highest-ROI master’s programs, with average ROIs of about $500,000, according to the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity analysis. 

Still, 40% of master’s degrees actually “have no net financial value at all,” according to the report.  

“In today’s job market, going back to school only works when it’s strategic and targeted [like a] specific technical certification in a high-demand field), but fails when it’s vague,” Kaelani emphasized. “It’s no longer ‘more education equals a better job.’”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Female libido pill gets expanded approval for menopause by FDA

Published

on



U.S. health officials have expanded approval of a much-debated drug aimed at boosting female libido, saying the once-a-day pill can now be taken by postmenopausal women up to 65 years old.

The announcement Monday from the Food and Drug Administration broadens the drug’s use to older women who have gone through menopause. The pill, Addyi, was first approved 10 years ago for premenopausal women who report emotional stress due to low sex drive.

Addyi, marketed by Sprout Pharmaceuticals, was initially expected to become a blockbuster drug, filling an important niche in women’s health. But the drug came with unpleasant side effects including dizziness and nausea, and it carries a safety warning about the dangers of combining it with alcohol.

The boxed warning cautions that drinking while consuming the pill can cause dangerously low blood pressure and fainting. If patients have several drinks, the label recommends waiting a few hours before taking the drug, or skipping one dose.

Sales of Addyi, which acts on brain chemicals that affect mood and appetite, fell short of Wall Street’s initial expectations. In 2019, the FDA approved a second drug for low female libido, an on-demand injection that acts on a different set of neurological chemicals.

Sprout CEO Cindy Eckert said in a statement the approval “reflects a decade of persistent work with the FDA to fundamentally change how women’s sexual health is understood and prioritized.” The company, based in Raleigh, North Carolina, announced the FDA update in a press release Monday.

The medical condition for a troublingly low sexual appetite, called hypoactive sexual desire disorder, has been recognized since the 1990s and is thought to affect a significant portion of American women, according to surveys. After the blockbuster success of Viagra for men in the 1990s, drugmakers began pouring money into research and potential therapies for sexual dysfunction in women.

But diagnosing the condition is complicated because of how many factors can affect libido, especially after menopause, when falling hormone levels trigger a number of biological changes and medical symptoms. Doctors are supposed to rule out a number of other issues, including relationship problems, medical conditions, depression and other mental disorders, before prescribing medication.

The diagnosis is not universally accepted, and some psychologists argue that low sex drive should not be considered a medical problem.

The FDA rejected Addyi twice prior to its 2015 approval, citing the drug’s modest effectiveness and worrisome side effects. The approval came after a lobbying campaign by the company and its supporters, Even the Score, which framed the lack of options for female libido as a women’s rights issue.

___

This story has been updated to correct the age range of the FDA approval update. The agency approved the drug for postmenopausal women up to age 65, not older than 65.

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Gavin Newsom hires former CDC officials to work as public health consultants for state of California

Published

on



Two former senior officials from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, including one fired by the Trump administration, will join California as public health consultants, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Monday.

California joined Washington and Oregon — two other states with Democratic governors — to launch an alliance in September to establish their own public health guidance and vaccine recommendations, as the Trump administration makes sweeping changes to vaccine and health policy.

Susan Monarez was fired as the CDC’s director and Dr. Debra Houry resigned as the agency’s chief medical officer and deputy director over disputes about changes at the agency. The two will work with California’s public health department to help build trust in “science-driven decision-making,” Newsom’s office said.

“By bringing on expert scientific leaders to partner in this launch,” Newsom said in a statement, “we’re strengthening collaboration and laying the groundwork for a modern public health infrastructure that will offer trust and stability in scientific data not just across California, but nationally and globally.”

California has increasingly positioned itself as a counterweight to federal health policy, and Newsom has amped up his criticisms of President Donald Trump and challenged the Republican’s policies in court. The governor’s final term ends in just over a year and he’s gearing up for a possible presidential run in 2028.

California state Sen. Tony Strickland, a Republican, said the new initiative is an example of Newsom prioritizing his national political ambitions over the state.

“California has serious problems, and we need serious solutions from a serious leader,” Strickland said in a statement.

The White House and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services did not respond to emails seeking comment on the hirings.

Trump and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. have repeated falsehoods about vaccines, and the administration has given health recommendations this year that experts say were not backed by science.

Trump in September urged pregnant women not to take Tylenol, saying it could pose a risk of autism to their babies, remarks medical experts said were irresponsible. The CDC website was changed last month to contradict the longtime scientific conclusion that vaccines do not cause autism. A federal vaccine advisory panel voted earlier this month to reverse decades-old guidance recommending that all U.S. babies get immunized against the liver infection hepatitis B on the day they’re born. The vaccine is credited with preventing thousands of illnesses.

Monarez, a former director of a federal biomedical research agency, was named acting director of the CDC in January. Trump later nominated her to to serve as director. She was confirmed by the Senate in July, making her the first nonphysician to serve in the role. But she was fired by the Trump administration in August after less than a month in the post.

Kennedy has said Monarez was fired after she told him she was untrustworthy. But Monarez said that was false in congressional testimony and that she was fired after refusing to endorse new vaccine recommendations that weren’t backed by science.

Houry, who spent more than a decade at the CDC, was among a handful of top officials at the agency who resigned around the time Monarez was fired. Houry said in August she was concerned about the rise of vaccine misinformation during the Trump administration, as well as planned budget cuts, reorganization and firings at the CDC.

She said she’s excited to join California’s new initiative.

“California will advance practical, scalable solutions that strengthen public health within the state and across states —showing how states can modernize data, share capacity, and work together more efficiently, while remaining focused on protecting people and communities,” Houry said in a statement.

___

Associated Press writer Trân Nguyễn contributed.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.