It seems to me that there is an increasing disconnect between the decisions of the Fed Open Market Committee (FOMC) and the economists that feed it with information. For example, the FOMC continues to talk about how it has to ensure inflation expectations remain well-anchored while its economists publish
Matches up with my pet theory that the Fed and people in general have preordained results and then find the data to support it. The worst is when folks say that they are only looking at the data, which means they are dealing with an unconscious bias, making it harder to correct for. Remember the transitory phase when all the Fed guys were so sure of it and had their fancy charts, graphs and footnotes supporting it. We all fight the last war, whether we realize it or not (recency bias).
"In fact, what drove the jobless recovery was globalisation where jobs lost in the US were created in China and other emerging markets."
Any evidence for this assertion?, as far as I am aware the jobs lost to China were in the period between Chinas entrance in to the WTO and the GFC and were mainly manufacturing/industrial jobs
Matches up with my pet theory that the Fed and people in general have preordained results and then find the data to support it. The worst is when folks say that they are only looking at the data, which means they are dealing with an unconscious bias, making it harder to correct for. Remember the transitory phase when all the Fed guys were so sure of it and had their fancy charts, graphs and footnotes supporting it. We all fight the last war, whether we realize it or not (recency bias).
"In fact, what drove the jobless recovery was globalisation where jobs lost in the US were created in China and other emerging markets."
Any evidence for this assertion?, as far as I am aware the jobs lost to China were in the period between Chinas entrance in to the WTO and the GFC and were mainly manufacturing/industrial jobs