By Alexander Friedman

Project Syndicate

Dec 16/2015.

NEW YORK – The US Federal Reserve has finally done it, raising interest rates for the first time in almost a decade. The ramifications for interest-rate spreads, emerging-market equities, and housing demand, among much else, are the subject of widespread debate. But, as markets learn to cope with a less accommodative monetary policy, there could be an important silver lining, which most people have ignored.

Income and wealth inequality in the United States has grown steadily since the global financial crisis erupted in 2008, but monetary-policy normalization could mark the beginning of the end of this trend. Indeed, it should serve to accelerate its reversal.

Consider a few dismal statistics reflecting the current state of affairs. Real (inflation-adjusted) median household income in the US is about the same as in 1979. A recent study by the Pew Research Center noted that Americans earned 4% less income in 2014 than they did in 2000, and for the first time in more than 40 years, middle-class Americans no longer constitute a majority of the population.

America’s 20 wealthiest people now own more wealth than the bottom half of the entire population The wealth gap between America’s high-income group and everyone else has never been more extreme; rich households account for more than one in five of the entire US population. Strikingly, one hour north of Wall Street, in Bridgeport, Connecticut, the Gini coefficient – a standard measurement of income distribution and inequality – is worse than in Zimbabwe.

Ironically, this trend was exacerbated by the policy response to the financial crisis. While the recession of 2007-2008 caused higher-income groups to suffer more than lower-income groups (because the former tend to derive relatively more of their income from more volatile sources of capital income, as opposed to labor income), the opposite has been true since 2009. Since then, about 95% of all income gains have gone to the top 1%.

The causes of rising income and wealth inequality are multiple and nuanced; but the unintended consequences of the recent unprecedented period of ultra-loose monetary policy deserves a chunk of the blame. Negative real interest rates and quantitative easing have enforced financial repression on holders of cash, hurting savers, while broadly boosting prices of riskier financial assets, most commonly held by the rich. When there is no yield in fixed income, even the most conservative pension funds pile into risk assets, driving prices higher and higher.

Corporations have benefited massively from these stimulus measures, but at the expense of the working population. Profit margins have expanded to record highs as companies have cut costs, delayed infrastructure investments, borrowed at ultra-low rates, and taken advantage of weak labor markets to avoid raising wages.

But are we now on the verge of a trend reversal? The S&P 500 has rallied 150% since its 2009 lows, and valuations look rich given weakening growth dynamics (the Shiller price/earnings ratio stands at 26, compared to 15 in 2009). Against this backdrop, the wealthiest Americans are unlikely to enjoy substantial further profits from their financial investments in the near term.

At the same time, we should see meaningful upward pressure on wages for the first time in many years. The unemployment rate has dropped to 5%, just above the Fed’s current median estimate for the non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment (NAIRU). While the true NAIRU level is probably lower, and we are likely witnessing a secular decline in the workforce participation rate, the US labor market should still tighten in 2016.

Indeed, the number of those “not in the labor force, currently want a job” category dropped 416,000, to just above 5.6 million, in November; historically, this kind of change has been closely associated with rising wage pressure. And the average hourly wages for all employees on private non-farm payrolls posted an annual increase of 2.5% in October, the biggest since 2009.

As the Fed slowly raises interest rates, those middle-class families holding their hard-earned savings at the bank will finally start realizing some return on their deposits. The long-term effects should not be underestimated, given the helpful impact of compound savings.

During the last tightening cycle between 2004 and 2006, households’ interest income rose 29%. Although this time, the gains presumably will be smaller and slower to arrive, owing to the likely pace and extent of Fed tightening, interest paid on savings will move household income in the right direction: up.

Of course, a multitude of political reforms, each with potential positive implications for welfare, could reduce the extent of inequality further. But the barriers to such measures – say, to make the tax system more progressive – are well known, especially against the backdrop of a presidential election campaign. This means that an increase in real wages for workers will have the most immediate impact, even if the downside is lower profit margins for corporate America.

The Fed’s decision to raise rates is a historic moment for financial markets and is already ushering in a period of increased volatility for asset prices worldwide. Although this may be challenging for investors, we should take comfort in the implications for the real economy.

The social contract in the US has frayed badly, and this is likely to play an important role in the upcoming presidential election, as voters express anger that the American Dream is increasingly out of reach. No economic recovery can sustain itself without rising wages and higher consumer spending power. The Fed may have just signaled that the beginning of this necessary dynamic, perhaps the key inflection point of the inequality trend, is finally here. And it may also have done its part to speed its arrival.

Alexander Friedman

Alexander Friedman, Group CEO of GAM Holding, was Global Chief Investment Officer of UBS Wealth Management, Chief Financial Officer of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and a White House fellow during the Clinton Administration. (From Project Syndicate).

GAM Holding AG (GAM is an independent, pure play asset management group), the Swiss money manager that split from Julius Baer Group Ltd., named Alexander S. Friedman, the former global chief investment officer at UBS AG, as its new chief executive officer in a push for growth.

Friedman, 43, who left Switzerland’s biggest bank in June after revamping its investment process, will replace David Solo on Sept. 8, the Zurich-based company said in a statement today. Solo, 49, is stepping down “at his own request,” it said.

GAM seeks to attract inflows into its investment-management business, as it targets increasing annual net new money by 5 percent to 10 percent of assets under management. The company reported a turnaround in August with net new inflows of 1.3 billion Swiss francs ($1.4 billion) in the first half after outflows a year earlier.

“David Solo’s resignation comes as a surprise,” Michael Kunz, a Zurich-based analyst with Zuercher Kantonalbank who as a market perform rating on the stock, wrote in a note to investors. “The announcement raises questions whether the turnaround at GAM perhaps was too slow or if Solo had private reasons.”

The shares dropped as much as 3.9 percent and were down 3.1 percent in Zurich trading at 3:28 p.m. to 17.35 Swiss francs, valuing the company at 2.89 billion francs. GAM has dropped 0.3 percent this year.

Solo joined the group through GAM 2004 and became CEO of the enlarged asset-management division of Julius Baer in 2006. Following the separation from Julius Baer, he continued as CEO of the operating entities GAM and Swiss & Global Asset Management. He became group CEO of GAM Holding AG in April 2013.

“Today’s leadership change is a very natural progression for the group,” Solo said in the statement. “In Alex, the board has appointed a thoughtful, experienced manager with the right skills to lead the company.”

Friedman built up the investment office at UBS to make advisory services more transparent and boost returns after clients pulled 228.8 billion francs in three years through 2010 amid the financial crisis and an attack on Swiss banking secrecy. UBS reclaimed the title of biggest wealth manager in 2012 and last year attracted a net 53.5 billion francs in assets, the most since 2007.

“With the fundamental restructuring of the company now completed under David’s tenure, the next step in realizing our strategy will focus on increasing our recognition and market penetration in order to achieve the scale commensurate with the group’s potential,” Chairman Johannes De Gier said in the statement.

(From Bloomberg)

*  *  *

Vietnamese text, please click here
Read related feature: please click here

More on English topic, please click here
Main homepage: www.nuiansongtra.com