TIME Treasury

U.S. Sells Off Last Major TARP Investment, 6 Years On

U.S. taxpayers made around $2.4 billion in the Ally investment

The U.S. has finally sold off its remaining major investment in the Troubled Asset Relief Program, six years after beginning to bail out auto companies, banks and financial institutions in the depths of the Great Recession.

The Treasury Department announced Friday that it will sell its remaining stake in Ally, the former financing division of General Motors, capping the end of its last major TARP investment and the auto rescue program.

Treasury touted that selling the nearly 55 million shares netted $1.3 billion for taxpayers, and $19.6 billion overall after spending $17.2 billion on Ally. However, the government’s overall losses on the $85 billion auto industry bailout were about $10 billion, the Detroit News reports.

After former President George W. Bush signed TARP into law in October 2008, the U.S. poured hundreds of billions of dollars to stabilize banking institutions, AIG, the auto industry and families facing foreclosure.

“The Auto Industry Financing Program helped save the auto industry, more than one million jobs, and prevent a second Great Depression,” said Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew.

“Thanks to President Obama’s leadership, our economy has rebounded from the depths of the financial crisis and is now creating jobs at the fastest pace since the 1990s. There is more work to do, but as we exit the last major financial investment, it’s important to take stock of the progress we have made, and the critical role TARP and the Auto Industry Financing Program played in getting us to this point.”

TIME Innovation

Five Best Ideas of the Day: December 15

The Aspen Institute is an educational and policy studies organization based in Washington, D.C.

1. To head off surging antimicrobial resistance — which could claim 10 million lives a year by 2050 — we need new drugs and better rules for using the ones we have.

By Fergus Walsh at BBC Health

2. Russia has squandered its soft power.

By Joseph S. Nye in the Journal of Turkish Weekly

3. A resurfaced idea from decades ago could finally unlock nuclear power’s potential to fight climate change.

By Josh Freed in the Brookings Essay

4. To take advantage of the power of diaspora communities to spur development at home, host nations must avoid a ‘one size fits all’ approach.

By by Jacob Townsend and Zdena Middernacht at The World Bank

5. The great recession is over but young and minority Americans are worse off than before.

By Matt Connoly in Mic

The Aspen Institute is an educational and policy studies organization based in Washington, D.C.

TIME Ideas hosts the world's leading voices, providing commentary and expertise on the most compelling events in news, society, and culture. We welcome outside contributions. To submit a piece, email ideas@time.com.

TIME Economy

Wealth Gap Widens Between Whites and Minorities

The gap between white and black household wealth is the highest since 1989

The wealth disparity of U.S. households has widened dramatically along racial and ethnic lines during the recovery from the economic recession, according to a new report.

In 2007, at the start of the recession, white households in the U.S. had a net worth 10 times that of black households. But in 2013, white households were 13 times richer, according to the Pew Research Report out Friday. White households were eight times richer than Hispanic households in 2007 but 10 times richer in 2013.

FT_14.12.11_wealthGapRatios

Researchers note that while wealth of non-Hispanic white households increased a small amount between 2010 and 2013—2.4%—the wealth of Hispanic and black households actually fell dramatically, 14% for Hispanic households and 34% for black households.

Other racial and ethnic minorities were not broken out for analysis in the data compiled by Pew.

TIME Demographics

4 Ways Millennials Have It Worse Than Their Parents

millenial money
Adrian Samson—Getty Images

The latest Census numbers show Americans aged 18 to 34 struggling worse than their parents did in the '80s

Millennials make less money, are more likely to live in poverty and have lower rates of employment than their parents did at their ages 20 and 30 years ago.

That’s the bleak assessment from the U.S. Census Bureau’s latest American Community Survey numbers Thursday, which paint a financially disheartening portrait of Americans aged 18 to 34 who are still trying to rebound from the Great Recession.

The survey largely shows that millennials are worse off than the same age group in 1980, 1990 and 2000 when looking at almost every major economic indicator:

1. Median income
Millennials earned roughly $33,883 a year on average between 2009 and 2013 compared with $35,845 in 1980 and $37,355 in 2000 (all in 2013 inflation-adjusted dollars).

(MORE: American Women are Waiting to Have Kids)

2. Leaving home
More than 30% of millennials live with at least one parent compared to about 23% in 1980, largely because they can’t get a job.

3. Employment
Only about 65% of millennials are currently working compared with more than 70% in 1990

4. Poverty
Almost 20% live in poverty compared with about 14% in 1980.

But it’s not all bad news. The new Census numbers show that young Americans are much more diverse and educated than previous generations. About 22% have a bachelor’s degree or higher (up from 16% in 1980), and a quarter have grown up speaking a language other than English at home (up from 10% in 1980).

And possibly the most interesting statistic in the new numbers? A little over 2% of those aged 18 to 34 are veterans, compared with almost 10% in 1980.

Read next: Millennials Are Mooches…and Other Money Myths

TIME Japan

Japan Sinks Into Recession (Again)

A man holding a shopping bag walks on a street at Tokyo's Ginza shopping district
A man holding a shopping bag walks on a street at Tokyo's Ginza shopping district on Nov. 16, 2014 Yuya Shino—Reuters

An unexpected contraction in quarterly GDP shows that Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s radical economic program is badly broken

If anyone is still holding out hope that Abenomics — the unorthodox slate of economic policies named after their inspiration, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe — could rescue Japan from its two-decade slump, the news on Monday should dash it. The troubled economy surprised analysts by (once again) tumbling into recession. GDP in the quarter ended September shrank by an annualized 1.6% — far, far worse than the consensus forecasts. That followed a disastrous 7.3% contraction in the previous quarter. Speculation in Japan is that the bad results will push Abe to call a snap election only two years after taking office.

What’s going on in Japan is important for all of us. Since the economy is still the world’s third largest (after the U.S. and China), a healthy Japan could provide a much needed pillar to growth in a struggling global economy.

The current downturn is being blamed on a hike in the consumption tax, implemented in April to try to stabilize the government’s feeble finances, which slammed consumer spending. It is now expected that Abe will delay a further increase in that tax scheduled for next October. But the real causes lie much deeper — in the failings of Abe’s economic agenda.

The idea behind Abenomics was to boost the economy with massive stimulus from the Bank of Japan (BOJ) and the government combined with structural reform of the economy, or what has been called the third arrow. The problem is that we got the first two arrows, but not the third. While the BOJ kept its printing presses rolling, dramatically weakening the value of the yen, badly needed deregulation and market-opening has come extremely slowly. Some critical changes, like a loosening of labor laws, seem to be off the menu entirely. The result is that the actual potential of the economy has not been enhanced. Meanwhile, the welfare of the average Japanese family hasn’t improved either. Wages haven’t advanced much, while prices have increased.

If Japan’s situation proves anything, it is the limits of central bank policy to fix economies. Despite a torrent of cash infused into the economy through the BOJ’s “quantitative easing” or QE, Japan’s economy remains mired in slow growth and stagnant household welfare. That’s why it is hard to imagine that the BOJ’s October decision to increase its QE program will make a major difference. So that’s the takeaway for policymakers in the U.S. and especially a stumbling Europe: If you’re going to rely too much on central bankers to revive growth, you’re going to fail.

The question facing Abe is whether he can press ahead more quickly with important reforms, either in his current administration or after a fresh election, which his party will still mostly likely win. Based on his recent track record, we don’t have reason to be confident. But maybe one day Japan will give us a surprise — in a good way.

Read next: It May Be Too Late for Japan’s PM to Fix the World’s Third Largest Economy

MONEY Shopping

Target Is Closing Another 11 Stores

woman with shopping cart and wallet
iStock

On Tuesday, Target announced it will be closing 11 U.S. stores, making a total of 19 closures in less than 12 months.

In the aftermath of last year’s monumental data breach of customer credit card information—not to mention years of underwhelming sales at some retail locations—Target decided to close eight stores in May, including two stores in the Las Vegas area and two stores in Ohio. This week, Target announced it will be closing 11 more stores in the U.S., including two Chicago-area locations and three Targets in Michigan.

The 11 stores will be shut down by February 1, 2015. “The decision to close a Target store is only made after careful consideration of the long-term financial performance of a particular location,” a company statement accompanying the announcement explained. “In most cases, a store is closed as a result of seeing several years of decreasing profitability,” a Target spokesperson added in an email to (Minneapolis) StarTribune.

There are roughly 1,800 Target stores in the U.S., and the number of planned closures pales in comparisons to the likes of troubled chains such as RadioShack and Sears. Yet it’s worth noting that that Target’s reputation among shoppers and the retail industry as a whole has declined greatly since the pre-recession years, when the cheap-chic darling was belovedly known as “Tarjhay.”

Over the summer, Target hired a new CEO, Brian Cornell, a former CEO at PepsiCO Americas Foods, with the hopes that new leadership could help the company rebound from its troubling slump, as well as the embarrassing and costly data breach that potentially compromised the information of well over 100 million customers. More recently, Target introduced its plans for the 2014 winter holiday season, which include a special offer of free shipping with no minimum purchase required on all orders placed at target.com through December 20.

Read next: It Doesn’t Matter if Alex From Target Is Real or Fake

TIME Research

A Lot of Men Got Vasectomies During the Recession

vasectomy
Getty Images

Up to an additional 150,000 to 180,000 per year between 2007 and 2009

The recession was accompanied by a sharp increase in the number of American men who underwent vasectomies, according to research presented Monday, though it’s unclear if economic woes actually led to more procedures.

Researchers from Weill Cornell Medical College looked at survey data from the National Survey for Family Growth, which interviewed more than 10,000 men between 2006 and 2010, according to the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. They wanted to get a sense of how the economic downturn from 2007 to 2009 affected men’s decisions about having kids.

Before the recession, 3.9% of men reported having a vasectomy, but 4.4% reported having one afterward, which the researchers calculated to mean an additional 150,000 to 180,000 vasectomies during each year of the recession.

The researchers also found after the recession that men were less likely to be employed full-time, and more likely to have lower incomes and be without health insurance. Nothing changed when it came to men’s desire to have children, but those who were interviewed after the recession were more likely to want fewer children.

It’s important to note that the study, which is being presented at the American Society for Reproductive Medicine’s 70th Annual Meeting, does not prove causation, meaning it’s unclear whether men were undergoing surgery for financial reasons. Though the researchers do conclude that their findings suggest Americans may be factoring economics into family planning—which is not necessarily a new trend.

MONEY The Economy

Why the Fed Should Stop Talking About Raising Interest Rates

Some central bankers have called for raising rates sooner rather than later. Recent economic data — and the huge stock market sell-off — should dampen those calls.

There have been two presidential inaugurations and six Super Bowl champions since interest rates were effectively lowered to 0%. Recently, some Federal Reserve officials have said they expect to raise rates by the middle of next year thanks to a decently expanding economy and stronger job growth.

Some central bankers, though, think the middle of 2015 is too late and have been pushing to increase borrowing costs sooner. Esther George, President of the Kansas City Fed, said as much in a speech earlier this month, and two members of the Federal Open Market Committee voted bristled against easy monetary policy in their most recent meeting.

But with developed economies around the world showing dismal growth and less-than-stellar economic metrics here at home — punctuated by a rapidly declining stock prices (the stock market is, after all, a reflection of the market’s forecast for the economy six to nine months down the road) — it might be time for these inflation hawks to quiet down.

“Until we see wages expanding faster than the rate of inflation, and significantly so, we won’t see much in the way of inflation pressure,” says Mike Schenk, Vice President of Economics & Statistics for the Credit Union National Association. “Why raise rates if you don’t have inflation?”

Inflation Hawks

Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher voted against the most recent monetary action policy, according to minutes of the meeting, due to, among other factors, the “continued strength of the real economy” and “the improved outlook for labor utilization.”

Earlier this month, Philadelphia Fed President Charles Plosser said that he’s “not too concerned” about inflation growth below the Fed’s 2% target and joined Fisher in voting against the Fed policy because he disagreed with the guidance that said rates will stay at zero for “a considerable time after” the Fed ends its unconventional bond-buying program later this month.

George, meanwhile in a speech earlier this month, said Fed officials should begin talking seriously about raising rates since “starting this process sooner rather than later is important. If we continue to wait — if we continue to wait to see full employment, to see inflation running beyond the 2% target — then we risk having to move faster and steeper with interest rates in a way that is destabilizing to the economy in the long term,” according to the Wall Street Journal.

Jobs

The jobs environment has been improving in recent months. The economy added almost 250,000 jobs in September and the unemployment number fell to a post-recession low of 5.9%. But the unemployment number doesn’t tell the whole story.

If you look at another metric that takes into account workers who only recently gave up looking for a job and part-time employees who want to work 40 hours a week, the situation is much worse. Before the recession, this broader unemployment rate sat at around 8%. It’s now at almost 12%. There are still about three million workers who’ve been unemployed for longer than 27 weeks, up from around 1.3 million at the end of 2007.

Inflation

Right now, and for some time, there has been very little inflation. Prices grew 1.7% over the past year in August, per the Bureau of Labor Statistics’s Consumer Price Index. Even the Fed’s preferred inflation tracker, the PCE deflator, showed prices gain 1.5% compared to 12 months ago.

Wage growth is likewise stalled. Taking into account wages and benefits, workers have only seen a 1.8% raise. It’s just difficult to have inflation in a low interest rate environment without wage growth.

St. Louis Fed President James Bullard recently said that the Fed should consider postponing the end of its bond-buying program. “Inflation expectations are declining in the U.S.,” he said in an interview yesterday with Bloomberg News. “That’s an important consideration for a central bank. And for that reason I think that a logical policy response at this juncture may be to delay the end of the QE.”

Europe

European economic woes aren’t helping. Germany, Europe’s largest economy, recently cut it’s growth forecast, now only expects to grow by 1.2% in 2014 and 2015. Sweden and Spain saw prices actually decline in August, and now there’s fear that the euro zone will endure a so-called triple-dip recession. The relative prowess of the American economy compared to Europe’s has strengthened the U.S. dollar, thus making our exports less competitive.

Look, the U.S. economy isn’t about to go off a cliff. Not only did we see growth of 4.6% last quarter, but employers are adding jobs at a decent clip and the number of workers filing first-time jobless claims fell to the lowest level since 2000, per the Labor Department.

But with low inflation and European struggles to achieve anything close to robust growth, raising interest rates anytime soon doesn’t appear likely.

TIME energy

Low Oil Prices Raise the Risk of Recession in Russia

Russia oil
Russia will look to tap Arctic resources of oil and gas Photo by Dmitry Korotayev/Kommersant Photo via Getty Images

Oil prices dipped to around $92 per barrel in early October

This post originally appeared on OilPrice.com.

Falling oil prices are inflicting deeper economic pain on Russia’s economy, which is already reeling from EU and U.S. sanctions.

Russia is currently considering its budget for 2015-2017, and based on the numbers, the Kremlin is planning for leaner times. With oil revenue accounting for around half of the country’s budget, any dip in prices has a ripple effect.

And in recent years, Russia’s economy has become more dependent on oil to meet its budget commitments. Excluding oil revenue, Russia has run a budget deficit that hit 10.3 percent in 2013, the highest level in three years.

In other words, the government needs oil revenues to plug budget holes, and that need is growing.

Related: Will Ukraine Commit Economic Suicide?

Russia occupies a strong economic position when oil prices are high, but for every $1 decline in the price per barrel of oil, Russia loses $2.1 billion in revenue on an annualized basis. Slumping oil prices in recent months could see revenues to the state decline by $30 to $40 billion.

The Russian economy may only expand 0.4 percent this year, and just 1 percent in 2015. But even that meager growth rate is not a certainty. Russia is increasingly facing the possibility of recession, according to a Bloomberg survey of economists.

Oil prices dipped to around $92 per barrel in early October. While that won’t plunge Russia into an immediate economic crisis, the government needs oil prices to stay around $105 in order to balance the budget. Thus, if oil prices don’t rebound soon, problems will only grow worse for the Kremlin.

The upcoming budget plans for the possibility of persistent inflation, a weakening ruble, and the potential need for the state to dip into cash reserves in order to finance its budget. What is worse, even this negative outlook is based on highly optimistic assumptions – it assumes oil prices of around $100 per barrel.

“It is quite optimistic given where oil prices are at now and given how much the Russian budget depends on oil revenues,” Liza Ermolenko, an analyst at Capital Economics, told The Moscow Times. “For the next year, it’s more likely that the oil prices will be lower than what they are penciling in.”

Running a deficit will be tricky because western sanctions have restricted access to financial markets. Major Russian companies targeted by the U.S. and Europe are unable to take out long-term loans. As a result, they are turning to the Russian state for funds. That has worked so far, but a Bloomberg report outlines an emerging fight within the Russian elite over a dwindling pile of money.

The mid-September arrest of Vladimir Evtushenkov, the head of oil company OAO Bashneft, was a sign that the situation is starting to deteriorate. He is the richest Russian arrested since Mikhail Khodorkovsky was thrown in jail in 2005 and whose oil company, Yukos, was taken over by the state. Evtushenkov, an ally of Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, is thought to have been arrested because of a growing rift in Russia’s elite that is at least partially due to the troubled economy.

Related: Europe Seeks To Undermine Russian Energy Influence

“This is creating a dire financial situation, particularly for state companies friendly to Putin, which are now vying for shrinking state resources,” Yevgeny Yasin, a former Russian economy minister, told Bloomberg. Russian President Vladimir Putin and his allies are hunting for more assets as the economy worsens, according to the same article.

Oil prices could remain low for a while. Reuters reports that the Russian central bank is beginning to plan for a disaster scenario in which oil prices drop to $60 per barrel. Such a scenario would precipitate a dramatic weakening of the ruble, forcing the central bank into action.

But there is no easy way out. The Russian economy is far too dependent on the global price of oil, a volatile benchmark largely out of the Kremlin’s control.

More Top reads From Oilprice.com:

TIME Workplace & Careers

1 in 5 U.S. Workers Say They Were Laid Off in Last 5 Years: Poll

New York Job Fair Offers Services For Chronically Unemployed
People stand in a line that stretched around the block to enter a job fair held at the Jewish Community Center (JCC), on March 21, 2012 in New York City. John Moore—Getty Images

Total of 30 million say they received pink slips since 2009

One in five American workers say they have lost their jobs at some point within the last five years, according to a new survey that reveals that the recession, which technically ended in 2009, has continued to rattle the labor market.

The survey findings, released by Rutgers University’s John J. Heldrch Center for Workforce Development, exposes the lingering costs of lay-offs, both for those who cannot find work and those who have. Nearly 4 out of 10 laid-off workers say they spent more than seven months searching for a new job and nearly half of those who managed to find work said their new job was a step lower on the payscale.

Regardless of employment status, two-thirds of all adults in the survey say the recession negatively impacted their own standard of living, but the workers that took the hardest hits to income and savings were those who had been unemployed for a period longer than 6 months, whose struggles the authors called “among the most persistent, negative effects of the Great Recession.”

 

Your browser, Internet Explorer 8 or below, is out of date. It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites.

Learn how to update your browser