How Did The 2008 Recession Affect The World?

When the decade-long expansion in US housing market activity peaked in 2006, the Great Moderation came to an end, and residential development began to decline. Losses on mortgage-related financial assets began to burden global financial markets in 2007, and the US economy entered a recession in December 2007. Several prominent financial firms were in financial difficulties that year, and several financial markets were undergoing substantial upheaval. The Federal Reserve responded by providing liquidity and support through a variety of measures aimed at improving the functioning of financial markets and institutions and, as a result, limiting the damage to the US economy. 1 Nonetheless, the economic downturn deteriorated in the fall of 2008, eventually becoming severe and long enough to be dubbed “the Great Recession.” While the US economy reached bottom in the middle of 2009, the recovery in the years that followed was exceptionally slow in certain ways. In response to the severity of the downturn and the slow pace of recovery that followed, the Federal Reserve provided unprecedented monetary accommodation. Furthermore, the financial crisis prompted a slew of important banking and financial regulation reforms, as well as congressional legislation that had a substantial impact on the Federal Reserve.

Rise and Fall of the Housing Market

Following a long period of expansion in US house building, home prices, and housing loans, the recession and crisis struck. This boom began in the 1990s and accelerated in the mid-2000s, continuing unabated through the 2001 recession. Between 1998 and 2006, average home prices in the United States more than doubled, the largest increase in US history, with even bigger advances in other locations. During this time, home ownership increased from 64 percent in 1994 to 69 percent in 2005, while residential investment increased from around 4.5 percent of US GDP to nearly 6.5 percent. Employment in housing-related sectors contributed for almost 40% of net private sector job creation between 2001 and 2005.

The development of the housing market was accompanied by an increase in household mortgage borrowing in the United States. Household debt in the United States increased from 61 percent of GDP in 1998 to 97 percent in 2006. The rise in home mortgage debt appears to have been fueled by a number of causes. The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) maintained a low federal funds rate after the 2001 recession, and some observers believe that by keeping interest rates low for a “long period” and only gradually increasing them after 2004, the Federal Reserve contributed to the expansion of housing market activity (Taylor 2007). Other researchers, on the other hand, believe that such variables can only explain for a small part of the rise in housing activity (Bernanke 2010). Furthermore, historically low interest rates may have been influenced by significant savings accumulations in some developing market economies, which acted to keep interest rates low globally (Bernanke 2005). Others attribute the surge in borrowing to the expansion of the mortgage-backed securities market. Borrowers who were deemed a bad credit risk in the past, maybe due to a poor credit history or an unwillingness to make a big down payment, found it difficult to get mortgages. However, during the early and mid-2000s, lenders offered high-risk, or “subprime,” mortgages, which were bundled into securities. As a result, there was a significant increase in access to housing financing, which helped to drive the ensuing surge in demand that drove up home prices across the country.

Effects on the Financial Sector

The extent to which home prices might eventually fall became a significant question for the pricing of mortgage-related securities after they peaked in early 2007, according to the Federal Housing Finance Agency House Price Index, because large declines in home prices were viewed as likely to lead to an increase in mortgage defaults and higher losses to holders of such securities. Large, nationwide drops in home prices were uncommon in US historical data, but the run-up in home prices was unique in terms of magnitude and extent. Between the first quarter of 2007 and the second quarter of 2011, property values declined by more than a fifth on average across the country. As financial market participants faced significant uncertainty regarding the frequency of losses on mortgage-related assets, this drop in home values contributed to the financial crisis of 2007-08. Money market investors became concerned of subprime mortgage exposures in August 2007, putting pressure on certain financial markets, particularly the market for asset-backed commercial paper (Covitz, Liang, and Suarez 2009). The investment bank Bear Stearns was bought by JPMorgan Chase with the help of the Federal Reserve in the spring of 2008. Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy in September, and the Federal Reserve aided AIG, a significant insurance and financial services firm, the next day. The Federal Reserve, the Treasury, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation were all approached by Citigroup and Bank of America for assistance.

The Federal Reserve’s assistance to specific financial firms was hardly the only instance of central bank credit expansion in reaction to the crisis. The Federal Reserve also launched a slew of new lending programs to help a variety of financial institutions and markets. A credit facility for “primary dealers,” the broker-dealers that act as counterparties to the Fed’s open market operations, as well as lending programs for money market mutual funds and the commercial paper market, were among them. The Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF), which was launched in collaboration with the US Department of Treasury, was aimed to relieve credit conditions for families and enterprises by offering credit to US holders of high-quality asset-backed securities.

To avoid an increase in bank reserves that would drive the federal funds rate below its objective as banks attempted to lend out their excess reserves, the Federal Reserve initially funded the expansion of Federal Reserve credit by selling Treasury securities. The Federal Reserve, on the other hand, got the right to pay banks interest on their excess reserves in October 2008. This encouraged banks to keep their reserves rather than lending them out, reducing the need for the Federal Reserve to offset its increased lending with asset reductions.2

Effects on the Broader Economy

The housing industry was at the forefront of not only the financial crisis, but also the broader economic downturn. Residential construction jobs peaked in 2006, as did residential investment. The total economy peaked in December 2007, the start of the recession, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research. The drop in general economic activity was slow at first, but it accelerated in the fall of 2008 when financial market stress reached a peak. The US GDP plummeted by 4.3 percent from peak to trough, making this the greatest recession since World War II. It was also the most time-consuming, spanning eighteen months. From less than 5% to 10%, the jobless rate has more than doubled.

The FOMC cut its federal funds rate objective from 4.5 percent at the end of 2007 to 2 percent at the start of September 2008 in response to worsening economic conditions. The FOMC hastened its interest rate decreases as the financial crisis and economic contraction worsened in the fall of 2008, bringing the rate to its effective floor a target range of 0 to 25 basis points by the end of the year. The Federal Reserve also launched the first of several large-scale asset purchase (LSAP) programs in November 2008, purchasing mortgage-backed assets and longer-term Treasury securities. These purchases were made with the goal of lowering long-term interest rates and improving financial conditions in general, hence boosting economic activity (Bernanke 2012).

Although the recession ended in June 2009, the economy remained poor. Economic growth was relatively mild in the first four years of the recovery, averaging around 2%, and unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment, remained at historically high levels. In the face of this sustained weakness, the Federal Reserve kept the federal funds rate goal at an unusually low level and looked for new measures to provide extra monetary accommodation. Additional LSAP programs, often known as quantitative easing, or QE, were among them. In its public pronouncements, the FOMC began conveying its goals for future policy settings more fully, including the situations in which very low interest rates were likely to be appropriate. For example, the committee stated in December 2012 that exceptionally low interest rates would likely remain appropriate at least as long as the unemployment rate remained above a threshold of 6.5 percent and inflation remained no more than a half percentage point above the committee’s longer-run goal of 2 percent. This “forward guidance” technique was meant to persuade the public that interest rates would remain low at least until specific economic conditions were met, exerting downward pressure on longer-term rates.

Effects on Financial Regulation

When the financial market upheaval calmed, the focus naturally shifted to financial sector changes, including supervision and regulation, in order to avoid such events in the future. To lessen the risk of financial difficulty, a number of solutions have been proposed or implemented. The amount of needed capital for traditional banks has increased significantly, with bigger increases for so-called “systemically essential” institutions (Bank for International Settlements 2011a;2011b). For the first time, liquidity criteria will legally limit the amount of maturity transformation that banks can perform (Bank for International Settlements 2013). As conditions worsen, regular stress testing will help both banks and regulators recognize risks and will require banks to spend earnings to create capital rather than pay dividends (Board of Governors 2011).

New provisions for the treatment of large financial institutions were included in the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010. The Financial Stability Oversight Council, for example, has the authority to classify unconventional credit intermediaries as “Systemically Important Financial Institutions” (SIFIs), putting them under Federal Reserve supervision. The act also established the Orderly Liquidation Authority (OLA), which authorizes the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to wind down specific institutions if their failure would pose a significant risk to the financial system. Another section of the legislation mandates that large financial institutions develop “living wills,” which are detailed plans outlining how the institution could be resolved under US bankruptcy law without endangering the financial system or requiring government assistance.

The financial crisis of 2008 and the accompanying recession, like the Great Depression of the 1930s and the Great Inflation of the 1970s, are important areas of research for economists and policymakers. While it may be years before the causes and ramifications of these events are fully known, the attempt to unravel them provides a valuable opportunity for the Federal Reserve and other agencies to acquire lessons that can be used to shape future policy.

What impact did the global financial crisis of 2008 have?

The crisis caused the Great Recession, which was the worst worldwide downturn since the Great Depression at the time. It was followed by the European debt crisis, which began with a deficit in Greece in late 2009, and the 20082011 Icelandic financial crisis, which saw all three of Iceland’s major banks fail and was the country’s largest economic collapse in history, proportionate to its size of GDP. It was one of the world’s five worst financial crises, with the global economy losing more than $2 trillion as a result. The proportion of home mortgage debt to GDP in the United States climbed from 46 percent in the 1990s to 73 percent in 2008, hitting $10.5 trillion. As home values climbed, a surge in cash out refinancings supported an increase in consumption that could no longer be sustained when home prices fell. Many financial institutions had investments whose value was based on home mortgages, such as mortgage-backed securities or credit derivatives intended to protect them against failure, and these investments had lost a large amount of value. From January 2007 to September 2009, the International Monetary Fund calculated that large US and European banks lost more than $1 trillion in toxic assets and bad loans.

In late 2008 and early 2009, stock and commodities prices plummeted due to a lack of investor trust in bank soundness and a reduction in credit availability. The crisis quickly grew into a global economic shock, resulting in the bankruptcy of major banks. Credit tightened and foreign trade fell during this time, causing economies around the world to stall. Evictions and foreclosures were common as housing markets weakened and unemployment rose. A number of businesses have failed. Household wealth in the United States decreased $11 trillion from its peak of $61.4 trillion in the second quarter of 2007, to $59.4 trillion by the end of the first quarter of 2009, leading in a drop in spending and ultimately a drop in corporate investment. In the fourth quarter of 2008, the United States’ real GDP fell by 8.4% from the previous quarter. In October 2009, the unemployment rate in the United States reached 11.0 percent, the highest since 1983 and about twice the pre-crisis rate. The average number of hours worked per week fell to 33, the lowest since the government began keeping track in 1964.

The economic crisis began in the United States and quickly extended throughout the world. Between 2000 and 2007, the United States accounted for more than a third of global consumption growth, and the rest of the world relied on the American consumer for demand. Corporate and institutional investors around the world owned toxic securities. Credit default swaps and other derivatives have also enhanced the interconnectedness of huge financial organizations. The de-leveraging of financial institutions, which occurred as assets were sold to pay back liabilities that could not be refinanced in frozen credit markets, intensified the solvency crisis and reduced foreign trade. Trade, commodity pricing, investment, and remittances sent by migrant workers all contributed to lower growth rates in emerging countries (example: Armenia). States with shaky political systems anticipated that, as a result of the crisis, investors from Western countries would withdraw their funds.

Governments and central banks, including the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank, and the Bank of England, provided then-unprecedented trillions of dollars in bailouts and stimulus, including expansive fiscal and monetary policy, to offset the decline in consumption and lending capacity, avoid a further collapse, encourage lending, restore faith in the vital commercial paper markets, and avoid a repeat of the Great Recession. For a major sector of the economy, central banks shifted from being the “lender of last resort” to becoming the “lender of only resort.” The Fed was sometimes referred to as the “buyer of last resort.” These central banks bought government debt and distressed private assets from banks for $2.5 trillion in the fourth quarter of 2008. This was the world’s largest liquidity injection into the credit market, as well as the world’s largest monetary policy action. Following a strategy pioneered by the United Kingdom’s 2008 bank bailout package, governments across Europe and the United States guaranteed bank debt and generated capital for their national banking systems, ultimately purchasing $1.5 trillion in newly issued preferred stock in major banks. To combat the liquidity trap, the Federal Reserve produced large sums of new money at the time.

Trillions of dollars in loans, asset acquisitions, guarantees, and direct spending were used to bail out the financial system. The bailouts were accompanied by significant controversy, such as the AIG bonus payments scandal, which led to the development of a range of “decision making frameworks” to better balance opposing policy objectives during times of financial crisis. On the day that Royal Bank of Scotland was bailed out, Alistair Darling, the UK’s Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time of the crisis, stated in 2018 that Britain came within hours of “a breakdown of law and order.”

Instead of funding more domestic loans, several banks diverted part of the stimulus funds to more profitable ventures such as developing markets and foreign currency investments.

The DoddFrank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act was passed in the United States in July 2010 with the goal of “promoting financial stability in the United States.” Globally, the Basel III capital and liquidity criteria have been adopted. Since the 2008 financial crisis, consumer authorities in the United States have increased their oversight of credit card and mortgage lenders in attempt to prevent the anticompetitive activities that contributed to the catastrophe.

Why did the global recession of 2008 have such an impact?

The economic crisis was precipitated by the collapse of the housing market, which was fueled by low interest rates, cheap lending, poor regulation, and hazardous subprime mortgages. New financial laws and an aggressive Federal Reserve are two of the Great Recession’s legacies.

Who was affected by the Great Recession of 2008?

Rising unemployment, dropping property values, and the stock market decline all had an impact on those approaching retirement, either directly or indirectly. Furthermore, many elderly persons who were not directly impacted by the recession had children or other relatives who were. For many older persons, the recession’s financial difficulties resulted in changes in wealth and spending patterns, as well as physical and mental health issues with long-term effects.

What influence did the Great Recession have?

This RFP has now been closed. The general rationale for the 30 project wins made in 2011 through early 2012 can be found in the original RFP outlined below.

The United States is now two years past the official end of the Great Recession, which lasted the longest and deepest since the 1930s. Although GDP and the stock market have risen since the recession ended in June 2009, the social and economic consequences of the downturn continue to ripple across the US economy. According to labor market data, more than 14 million Americans are unemployed, with 6.3 million of them out of work for more than six months. Another 11.3 million people are working less than they would like either part-time or looking for work but not finding it. Job growth is encouraging but sluggish, and at current rates of growth, reestablishing the pre-recession unemployment rate of 5% could take a decade or longer. Although the unprecedented number of home foreclosures experienced during the recession and its immediate aftermath has lessened, the housing market remains stagnant, with home prices hitting new lows in the first quarter of 2011. State and local budgets have seen huge gaps between revenues and expenditures as a result of the economic downturn, and stock market losses have exposed unfunded pension plans across the country. To attain balanced budgets, governments at all levels will have to undertake a mix of discretionary cuts and higher taxes, as predicted by the long-term repercussions of this recession. Public sector job losses have canceled out 40% of private sector employment increases in the two-year recovery, and government workforces are set to be under pressure for some time to come.

Given the likelihood of continued slow growth, high unemployment, low home values, and severe government fiscal limitations, the Russell Sage Foundation has opted to fund a series of studies on the social and economic consequences of the Great Recession. Long-term economic stagnation will most likely change American institutions and significantly impair many Americans’ life chances. We’re looking for studies that look at these effects across a broad spectrum of social and economic life, including, but not limited to, effects on individual aspirations and optimism about the future; health and mental health; family formation and stability, as well as children’s well-being; the viability of communities, particularly those hardest hit by the foreclosure crisis; the performance of the educational system at all levels; the incidence of crime and the performance of the criminal justice system. The Appendix demonstrates the types of topics that the Foundation is concerned about in each of these social and economic spheres. These are examples of the types of challenges the Foundation is interested in solving, although they are not meant to be exhaustive or exclusive.

In general, the Foundation will consider funding for a variety of projects, including:

Long-term studies on the effects of the Great Recession over the next three to five years. As a result, the effects of the fiscal crisis on state budgets, for example, may take some time to manifest. A comparison of the decisions governments make in balancing their budgets, as well as the implications of those choices, may not be significant for several years after the current crisis has ended. In another area, the consequences of the recession on families may not become apparent until after families have exhausted their resources in dealing with unstable work or housing, and if there are lasting repercussions on children, these may take even longer to manifest.
Analytic research that look at the long-term repercussions of the Great Recession across a variety of social and economic realms. An examination of how the recession affects underprivileged adolescents, for example, could look into the probable link between local variation in unemployment, school dropout, and criminal involvement. Alternatively, a study of older Americans’ labor market participation might look into the consequences of changes in pension wealth and the early receipt of Social Security benefits after a job loss.
Innovative investigations of the Great Recession’s deeper, more subtle consequences on psychological attitudes and social norms. Will the exceptionally high rates of long-term unemployment that have characterized this recession and its aftermath, for example, result in long-term scarring and decreased aspirations? Will high rates of overdue debt and “underwater” mortgages impair financial responsibility in general and undermine default norms? Or will the need to deleverage lead to a more conservative and cautious approach to household financial decisions in the United States? To assess the subjective impact of changed financial conditions, studies of these subjective issues may require a creative combination of qualitative and quantitative methodologies.
Studies of how the Great Recession has affected American institutions, particularly in reaction to economic and other challenges that have arisen during the crisis and its aftermath. Universities, for example, have faced severe budget restrictions as a result of state budget cuts or private endowment losses at a time when student financial aid needs are rising. What has been the impact of universities’ responses to these pressures? To establish generalizations about institutional change, studies of institutional adaptation of topics like these may rely on case studies of specific institutions or the collecting of administrative data across institutions.

In general, we’re looking for creative research projects that go beyond simple trend analysis to look at unintended consequences of the Great Recession. Such study might use comparisons of present conditions with what is known about the results of previous recessions to make testable predictions about the current slump’s likely effects. We expect many of the funded initiatives to employ publicly available data sets, but we also understand that valid assessments of predictions regarding the effects of the Great Recession may require conducting new waves of past surveys or replicating data from other sources that give pre-recession baselines. We are happy to evaluate ideas for restricted data acquisition or collection in such instances. The Foundation’s funding will be limited to research help, data analysis expenditures, and limited release time for analyzing and writing up results in all other circumstances. We anticipate that all working papers and research briefs from projects financed under this initiative will be published (non-exclusively) on the RSF website.

The second round of funding for this endeavor is now underway. After the first round, we sponsored ten initiatives in nine of the appendix’s domains (a description of projects funded in the first round can be found here). We will consider projects from all domains in this round, but we are particularly interested in projects that address the following topics that were not addressed in the first round: changes in attitudes and norms caused by the economic downturn, effects on communities particularly hard hit by foreclosures and/or unemployment, changes in the incidence of crime linked to recessionary conditions, and effects of the fiscal crisis on state and local budgets. We’re also interested in study on the labor market’s performance in the United States throughout this extended era of high unemployment. Although there are no restrictions on the quantity of funding requests that will be considered, cost/benefit analysis will be a major factor in the evaluation of all projects. For your information, prizes accepted in the first round typically ranged from $75,000 to $250,000 for project periods ranging from one to four years.

We ask all academics interested in being a part of this program to send us a letter of inquiry of no more than three single-spaced pages explaining the research topic on the effects of the Great Recession that you would want to do. Your letter should explain and estimate the research expenditures involved, as well as outline and motivate the hypothesis concerning the effects of the Great Recession that you are interested in exploring. It should also specify out the empirical work required and the data sources to be used.

All letters of enquiry will be reviewed by the Foundation’s Advisory Committee, and detailed proposals will be solicited for the initiatives that appear to be the most promising.

Over the last decade, poverty in the suburbs has soared by more than a third. Although poverty rates in the inner city are still greater, the gap is closing. Earlier downturns mainly evaded the effects of suburban areas, but not this time.

What happens when a community’s unemployment rate and foreclosure rate are both high? What effect will it have on housing stock, home values, fiscal capacity, out-migration, and more ephemeral issues such as social capital and social efficacy?
What impact has the recession had on the poor’s regional distribution and concentration?
How would a decrease in residential mobility influence a community’s social infrastructure?

From less than 3% of disposable personal income in 2005-2007 to nearly 6% of disposable income in 2010, the personal savings rate has increased. Furthermore, the total quantity of outstanding consumer credit has decreased for the first time since 1940 as a result of the present crisis.

What has the recession’s overall impact been on personal finances, consumer spending, and consumer confidence?
How did households cut back on their consumption? Are these solutions viable in the event that revenues do not recover?
Have people lowered or raised their savings and retirement contributions? To stay afloat, have families taken out loans against their current investment and retirement accounts? What are the ramifications?
Are these patterns indicating a fundamental shift in consumer and financial behavior?

For the better part of the last decade, crime rates in the United States have remained steady or even decreased marginally. According to some research, those tendencies may be in peril. While the general crime rate in New York City stays steady, the most current statistics shows that the murder rate has increased by 15% over the previous year.

Will crime rates that have been declining or constant in the long run continue in the same path or change?
With fewer resources and higher demands, how well will police, courts, and prison institutions be able to function?
Will states employ early release procedures to reduce the number of people incarcerated and their costs? Is it likely that caseloads for probation and parole will vary, and if so, how will this affect technical violation rates?
What will happen if a larger number of incarcerated people are released into economically challenged communities? What will happen to those people, their families, and their communities?

Families are likely to be affected in a wide range of ways. Job losses and unemployment, one of the most apparent characteristics of the recession, have been linked to higher stress, poorer health outcomes, decreases in children’s academic achievement and educational attainment, marriage age delays, and changes in household structure. According to recent statistics, the number of multigenerational homes increased by 12% between 2006 and 2010.

What impact has it had on marriage, divorce, cohabitation, fertility, and family structure? Has this had a greater impact on some groups than others?
What have been the ramifications for home labor division? Are fathers more likely than mothers to get laid off? Is it true that mothers work more when their fathers work less?
What impact has this had on young adult children? Are more people staying at home longer because of poor career prospects? Do they need more financial and social assistance?
What has been the impact on family function, particularly the quality of parents’ relationships, parent-child connections, and parenting?
What impact has this had on children’s immediate results, such as academic performance, behavior, and delinquency, as well as their long-term life prospects?

States faced overall budget shortfalls of nearly $300 billion between 2009 and 2012 due to a drop in revenue and higher demand for state services. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) brought temporary relief, but it has finally come to an end.

What policy adjustments have states implemented to overcome substantial budget deficits, given that nearly all states are suffering significant budget gaps? What are the distributional effects of policy changes at the state level?
How will governments allocate the more constrained resources associated with diminishing tax receipts, given that health and prisons have been the fastest rising parts of state budgets over the last several decades? Which states are most likely to enact tax increases rather than spending cuts, and what effect will this have on the state’s economy?
The financial crisis has brought to light the underfunding of pension systems across the country. What are the chances that states will follow through on promised benefits? What effect will it have on state budgets?

Thirty-five states reduced education budgets totalling roughly $8 billion in K-12 and higher education in 2010, and 31 states are seeking more cutbacks in 2011.

What impact do budget cuts have on the delivery of public K-12 education? What impact has graduation rates, class sizes, school closures, and teacher employment and turnover had?
What has happened to the quality of public higher education at all levels, from four-year universities to community colleges?
Has there been a rise in the demand for a college education? Has it changed as a result of the family’s socioeconomic condition or the demography of the students?
What has changed in terms of the net cost of a college education, and what are the implications for students from various socioeconomic backgrounds?

Between 2006 and 2009, the number of home foreclosure filings grew from from 1.2 million to over 4 million per year, with black and Hispanic areas being disproportionately affected. Home losses of this magnitude and concentration are likely to cause more community upheaval and deterioration. Home ownership is also one of the most common means of accumulating wealth in the United States, meaning more financial insecurity for millions of Americans in the short and long term.

Which people and communities have been the most affected by foreclosures? What have been the ramifications for both those who have lost their homes and the localities that have seen the highest rates of home loss?
Have the losses in wealth caused by home foreclosures been allocated differently across different groups?
Have housing policies aimed at reducing home foreclosures been successful? Who has benefited the most?

Job loss is a major source of stress, and it has been linked to a variety of health effects, including an increased risk of heart attack and stroke, diabetes, arthritis, and psychiatric issues, as well as increased melancholy, anxiety, and sleep loss.

What kinds of health and mental-health changes can be ascribed to the Great Recession’s economic uncertainty and its aftermath?
Has there been a psychological shift in the general public’s aspirations, optimism for the future, and expectations for performance and upward mobility, particularly among the young?
What are the health ramifications in neighborhoods that have been impacted especially hard by the recession?
What are the anticipated ramifications of health-care and mental-health service cuts?

As the recession has set in, the number of economic migrants crossing the Mexican border into the United States has dramatically decreased, and internal migration patterns may have transformed as typical employment possibilities for migrants have decreased.

What are the current trends in immigration and internal migration? What will the ramifications be for immigrant communities?
What has been the impact of the collapse of the building industry on internal migration? Is there a link between changes in other industries and changes in internal migration?
How has extended economic suffering and uncertainty influenced Americans’ attitudes toward immigrants, immigration, and the immigration debate?
Are the lasting consequences of the recession affecting return migration patterns?

The official poverty rate rose from 13.2% in 2008 to 14.3% in 2009, with roughly 4 million more people living in poverty than the previous year. Since 1969, nearly every recession has resulted in considerable rises in poverty rates, with the consequences disproportionately affecting children.

What impact has the recession had on the income and wealth of people at various levels of the income distribution? Which individuals and groups have experienced the most transformation? Which assets (for example, retirement assets, property, and investments) have been most sensitive to the downturn if diverse vehicles for wealth generation have been disproportionately impacted?
Has the rate of poverty changed, and who is more likely to slip into or stay in poverty?
Is the greater concentration of incomes at the top of the income distribution a result of the recession?
Has the gradual increase in economic inequality that has marked the United States since the 1970s been aggravated, reduced, or remained unchanged?

A lengthy period of high unemployment, typified by historically high long-term unemployment rates, is expected to have far-reaching implications for the operation of the US labor market, as well as the lives of the unemployed, their families and communities, and the institutions that support them.

How bad are the ramifications of long-term unemployment? Who are the people who are most affected? What policies and programs work best to re-employ long-term unemployed people?
Is the size of the recession a sign of a massive reorganization of the US labor market? To what extent are structural mismatches between skill demand and supply, rather than weak demand, the causes of long-term unemployment?
What geographical areas and localities have the highest levels of unemployment, and why? What are their chances of getting back on their feet?

During the Great Recession, American politics was extremely turbulent, with rising populist fury directed at incumbents blamed for the crisis, significant electoral swings, and new forms of political organizing and fundraising.

In the aftermath of the recession, how are political attitudes, party affiliation, and political involvement changing?
What role do business and government play in producing the problem and resolving it, according to Americans?

State and municipal pension liabilities are anticipated to be close to $4 trillion, while private pension account balances are down approximately $800 billion from pre-recession levels, notwithstanding the stock market recovery.

What effect do pension losses have on pensioners’ projected retirement income? Which groups have been hurt the hardest?
What impact does the loss of pensions and jobs have on older Americans’ retirement decisions? Is there a shift in the distribution of retirement age based on income or education?

Approximately 46% of the 14.6 million unemployed people have been jobless for 27 weeks or longer, and 31% have been jobless for 52 weeks or longer.

How well did the social safety net in the United States perform during the recession and the subsequent period of high unemployment? How has the recession affected the need for emergency and safety-net services? How well have different programs (such as TANF, SSI, and SNAP) responded to increased demand?
Have community nonprofits been able to address any gaps that exist? Is it possible that the impact of the recession on such NGOs has reduced their ability to respond to rising need?
In a high-unemployment environment, what happens to welfare claimants whose time-limited benefits expire?
What was the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act’s impact? What will happen to state welfare programs now that the ARRA is no longer in effect?

What was the impact of the Great Recession on the rest of the world?

The recession spread as the financial crisis moved from the United States to other countries, particularly western Europe (where several big banks had extensively invested in American MBSs). Most developed countries experienced economic slowdowns of different severity (China, India, and Indonesia being prominent exceptions), and many of them responded with stimulus programs similar to the ARRA. The recession had major political ramifications in various nations. Iceland’s government disintegrated, and the country’s three largest banks were nationalized, as the country was particularly badly impacted by the financial crisis and experienced a severe recession. Latvia’s GDP dropped by more than 25% in 200809, and unemployment reached 22%. Latvia, like the other Baltic countries, was hit hard by the financial crisis. Meanwhile, Spain, Greece, Ireland, Italy, and Portugal had sovereign debt crises that prompted intervention by the European Union, the European Central Bank, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and culminated in the imposition of draconian austerity measures. Recovery was slow and uneven in all of the countries affected by the Great Recession, and the broader social consequences of the downturnincluding lower fertility rates, historically high levels of student debt, and diminished job prospects among young adults in the United Stateswere expected to last for many years.

What is the economic consequence of the recession?

Traditional fiscal stimulus analysis focuses on the short-run effects of fiscal policy on GDP and employment creation in the near term. Economists, on the other hand, have long recognized that short-term economic situations can have long-term consequences. Job loss and declining finances, for example, can cause families to postpone or forego their children’s college education. Credit markets that are frozen and consumer spending that is down can stifle the growth of otherwise thriving small enterprises. Larger corporations may postpone or cut R&D spending.

In any of these scenarios, an economic downturn can result in “scarring,” or long-term damage to people’s financial positions and the economy as a whole. The parts that follow go through some of what is known about how recessions can cause long-term harm.

Economic damage

Higher unemployment, decreased salaries and incomes, and lost opportunities are all consequences of recessions. In the current downturn, education, private capital investments, and economic opportunity are all likely to suffer, and the consequences will be long-lasting. While economies often experience rapid growth during recovery periods (as idle capacity is put to use), the drag from long-term damage will keep the recovery from reaching its full potential.

Education

Many scholars have pointed out that educationor the acquisition of knowledgeis important “Human capitalalso known as “human capital”plays a crucial role in promoting economic growth. Delong, Golden, and Katz (2002), for example, assert that “Human capital has been the primary driver of America’s competitive advantage in twentieth-century economic expansion.” As a result, variables that result in fewer years of educational achievement for the country’s youth will have long-term effects.

Recessions can have a variety of effects on educational success. First, there is a large body of research on the importance of early childhood education (see, for example, Heckman (2006, 2007) and the studies mentioned therein). Because parental options and money drive schooling at this stage (pre-k or even younger), issues that diminish families’ resources will have an impact on the degree and quality of education offered to their children. Dahl and Lochner (2008), for example, indicate that household income has a direct impact on math and reading test scores.

Second, a variety of factors outside of the school environment influence educational attainment. Health services, for example, can remove barriers to educational attainment, from prenatal care to dental and optometric treatment. After-school and summer educational activities have an impact on academic progress and learning in the classroom. Forced housing dislocationsand, in the worst-case scenario, homelessnesshave a negative impact on educational outcomes. Economic downturns obviously affect all of these factors on educational performance. In 2008, 46.3 million individuals were without health insurance, with over 7 million children under the age of 18 being uninsured (U.S. Census 2009). We can expect even more children to struggle with their schooling as poverty (nearly 14 million children in 2008) and foreclosures (4.3 percent of home loans in the foreclosure process1) rise.

Finally, families who are trying to make ends meet are frequently pushed to postpone or abandon aspirations for further education. According to a recent survey of young adults, 20% of those aged 18 to 29 have dropped out or postponed education (Greenberg and Keating 2009). According to a survey performed in Colorado, a quarter of parents with children attending two-year colleges expected to send their children to four-year colleges before the recession (CollegeInvest 2009).

College attendance is costly if it is postponed or reduced. Not only does attending college lead to higher earnings, lower unemployment, and other personal benefits, but it also leads to a slew of social benefits, such as improved health outcomes, lower incarceration rates, higher volunteerism rates, and so on (see, for example, Baum and Pa-yea (2005) or Acemoglu and Angrist (2000)).

Opportunity

There’s no denying that recessions and high unemployment restrict economic opportunities for individuals and families. Individuals and the greater economy suffer losses as a result of job losses, income decreases, and increases in poverty.

To give just one example of missed opportunities, recent study has indicated that college graduates who enter the workforce during a recession earn less than those who enter during non-recessionary times. Surprisingly, the findings also imply that the income loss is not only transient, but also affects lifetime wages and career paths. “Taken together, the findings show that the labor market effects of graduating from college in a terrible economy are big, negative, and enduring,” writes Kahn (2009). She finds that each 1 percentage-point increase in the unemployment rate results in an initial wage loss of 6 to 7%, and that the wage loss is still 2.5 percent after 15 years.

Non-college graduates will most likely do badly. While unemployment has grown for all demographics throughout the recent crisis, individuals with less education and lower incomes face significantly greater rates than others.

Job loss

The unemployment rate has risen from 4.9 percent in December 2007 to 9.7 percent in August of this year during the current recession. About 15 million people are unemployed right now, more than double the level at the onset of the recession, with nearly one out of every six workers unemployed or underemployed. About 5 million individuals have been out of job for more than six months, making up the greatest percentage of the total workforce since 1948.

Losing one’s employment causes obvious challenges for most people and their families. Even once a new job is taken, the income loss can last for years (often at a lower salary).

Although the research on the effects of job loss is far too large to discuss here, Farber’s evidence is worth highlighting (2005). Farber concludes that job separation is costly, based on data from the Displaced Workers Survey from 2001 to 2003. 2 “In the most recent period (2001-03), approximately 35% of job losers were unemployed at the next survey date; approximately 13% of re-employed full-time job losers are working part-time; full-time job losers who find new full-time jobs earn about 13% less on average than they did on their previous job…”

Job loss has an impact on one’s mental health in addition to their income and earnings (see Murphy and Athanasou (1999) for a review of 16 earlier studies). It’s also worth noting that how one does during a recession is determined by a multitude of things. When compared to other age groups, older employees are disproportionately represented among the long-term unemployed.

Economic mobility

As previously stated, intergenerational mobility or the lack thereof can exacerbate the effects of recessions.

Through a variety of processes, poorer families can lead to less opportunities and lower economic results for their children, whether through nutrition, school attainment, or wealth access. As a result, a recession should not be viewed as a one-time occurrence that strains individuals and families for a few years. Economic downturns, on the other hand, will affect the future chances of all family members, including children, and will have long-term effects.

Private investment

Investments and R&D are two of the most obvious areas where recessions can stifle economic progress. Economists have long acknowledged the importance of investment and technology as driving forces behind economic growth. 4

Investment spending and the adoption of innovative technology can and do decline during recessions. At least four causes have contributed to this. First, a downturn in the economy will reduce demand for enterprises’ products as customers’ incomes fall, diminishing the return on investment. Second, enterprises’ ability to invest will be hampered by a lack of credit. Third, recessions are periods of greater uncertainty, which may cause businesses to cut down on spending “They may be less willing to experiment with new items and procedures because they are “core” products and production techniques. Finally, the relationship between human and physical capital must be considered. Technology is frequently integrated in new physical equipment: as output and employment decline, fewer fresh equipment purchases are made. As a result, workers are less able to put existing abilities to use, and there is less of a need to learn new ones “current employees to be “up-skilled,” or hire new employees with new skills.5

Figure C depicts non-residential investment growth during each of the last four recessions, as well as a more specialized category of equipment and software (thus excluding structures). Annualized quarterly non-residential investment averaged 4.7 percent from 1947 to 2009, whereas investment in equipment and software averaged 5.9 percent. Investment falls sharply during recessions, as shown in the graph. It also demonstrates the severity of the present slump, with total non-residential investment down 20% from its peak in the second quarter of 2009.

The repercussions of reduced investment levels are evident. Decreased levels of economic production in the future are a result of lower capital investment today. Poorer levels of physical investment can lead to lower productivity and, as a result, lower earnings. 6 The consequences will linger long after the present recession has officially ended.

Entrepreneurial activity: Business formation and expansion

Apart from the general drop in investment activity, recessions, particularly those with a credit crunch, such as the current one, can stifle small firm formation and entrepreneurial activity.

There are various ways that recessions might stifle the establishment and expansion of new businesses. To begin with, it is self-evident that new businesses require new clients. Because a slowing economy equals less overall spending, those considering starting a new firm may prefer to wait until demand returns to typical levels. Second, new businesses necessitate the addition of new debtors and investors. Lower wages and wealth levels may make it more difficult for new businesses to recruit individual investors, and credit limits may limit private bank financing.

“The credit freeze in the short-term funding market had a disastrous effect on the economy and small enterprises,” according to a recent analysis from the US Small Business Administration (SBA 2009). The usual production of products and services had virtually stalled by late 2008.” According to a study of loan officers, conditions for small-business commercial and industrial loans have been dramatically tightened.

Not only do recessions make it more difficult to establish a new firm, but they can also derail struggling new businesses. There could be a slew of new firms (and business models) popping up.

els) that might be successful in normal times but can’t because to a lack of demand or credit. In 2008, 43,500 businesses declared bankruptcy, up from 28,300 in 2007 and more than double the 19,700 that declared bankruptcy in 2006. (SBA 2009).

The influence of the recession can also be observed in the number of initial public offerings (IPOs). Firms use the funds earned from initial public offerings (IPOs) to grow their operations. There were just 21 operating company IPOs in 2008, down from an annual average of 163 the previous four years (Ritter 2009). 8 Furthermore, the median age of IPOs in 2008 was slightly greater than in previous years, indicating that the capital flood is going to the more established companies.

It’s tempting to believe that recessions just delay the establishment of new businesses, and that delayed plans will eventually be implemented. However, many new enterprises have a limited window of opportunity to get started. Furthermore, innovative new businesses frequently build on previous technological and innovation platforms. A delay in one business may cause delays in many others, causing a cascade effect across a wider variety of businesses.

Who was the hardest hit by the financial crisis of 2008?

The crisis had an impact on all countries in some form, but some countries were hit more than others. A picture of financial devastation emerges as currency depreciation, stock market declines, and government bond spreads rise. These three indicators, considered combined, convey the impact of the crisis since they show financial weakness. Ukraine, Argentina, and Jamaica are the countries most hit by the crisis, according to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s International Economics Bulletin. Ireland, Russia, Mexico, Hungary, and the Baltic nations are among the other countries that have been severely affected. China, Japan, Brazil, India, Iran, Peru, and Australia, on the other hand, are “among the least affected.”

What is the relationship between the 2008 recession and the Great Depression?

The price level decreased by 22% and real GDP plummeted by 31% during the Great Depression, which lasted from 1929 to 1933. The price level climbed slowly during the 2008-2009 recession, and real GDP fell by less than 4%. For a variety of factors, the 2008-2009 recession was substantially milder than the Great Depression:

Bank failures, a 25% reduction in the quantity of money, and Fed inaction culminated in a collapse of aggregate demand during the Great Depression. The sluggish adjustment of money pay rates and the price level resulted in massive drops in real GDP and employment.
During the 2008 financial crisis, the Federal Reserve bailed out struggling financial institutions and quadrupled the monetary base, causing the money supply to rise. The expanding supply of money, when combined with greater government spending, restricted the fall in aggregate demand, resulting in lower decreases in employment and real GDP. (21)

The 20082009 Recession

Real GDP peaked at $15 trillion in 2008, with a price level of 99. Real GDP had declined to $14.3 trillion in the second quarter of 2009, while the price level had climbed to 100. In 2009, a recessionary void formed. The financial crisis, which began in 2007 and worsened in 2008, reduced the supply of loanable funds, resulting in a drop in investment. Construction investment, in particular, has plummeted. As a result of the worldwide economic downturn, demand for U.S. exports fell, and this component of aggregate demand fell as well. A huge injection of spending by the US government helped to soften the decline in aggregate demand, but it did not stop it from falling.

The supply of aggregates has also dropped. A decline in aggregate supply was caused by two causes in 2007: a spike in oil costs and a rise in the money wage rate. (21)

What impact did the 2008 recession have on families?

The Great Recession resulted in large and long-term salary and employment declines. In 2011, the median actual household cash income declined from $57,357 to $52,690. At the height of the recession, 15.6 million people were unemployed. From 12.5 percent in 2007 to 15.1 percent in 2010, poverty has risen. What impact did this have on persons who were already poor? Was the social safety net effective? What about the recession’s non-economic effects on families?

We look at two UC Berkeley professors’ attempts to answer these problems. With a few significant exceptions, Hilary Hoynes, Professor of Economics and Public Policy, contends that the social safety net does safeguard disadvantaged communities for the most part. Increases in the unemployment rate during the Great Recession led to an increase in men’s controlling behavior and a fall in fertility rates among unmarried and young women, according to Daniel Schneider, Assistant Professor of Sociology.

What was the impact of the 2008 recession on Canada?

Canada was one of the last developed countries to experience a downturn. GDP growth was negative in the first quarter of 2008, but positive in the second and third quarters. In the fourth quarter, the recession officially began. Two variables account for the nearly one-year delay in the commencement of the recession in Canada compared to the United States. First, Canada has a solid banking system that is not burdened by the same level of consumer debt problems as the United States. The US economy was collapsing from within, while Canada’s economic connection with the US was hurting the country’s economy. Second, commodity prices rose steadily until June 2008, bolstering a significant component of the Canadian economy and postponing the onset of the crisis. The Bank of Canada announced in early December 2008 that it was dropping its central bank interest rate to its lowest level since 1958, as well as declaring that Canada’s economy was entering a recession. Since then, the Bank of Canada has stated that the country’s economy has shrunk for two months in a row (Oct -0.1 percent & Nov -0.7 percent ). According to the most recent OECD report, the country’s unemployment rate could grow to 7.5 percent in the following two years.

The Bank of Canada pronounced the recession in Canada to be finished on July 23, 2009. However, it was not until November 30, 2009 that the actual economic recovery began. In the first quarter of 2010, the Canadian economy grew at an annualized pace of 6.1 percent, exceeding analyst estimates and recording the strongest growth rate since 1999. Economists anticipated annualized GDP growth of 5.9% in the fourth quarter, up from 5% in the fourth quarter of the previous year (SeptemberDecember 2009). Following three quarters of contraction, Canada’s economy expanded for the third time in a row in the first quarter. March growth was 0.6 percent, which was higher than the 0.5 percent forecast. In the winter and early spring months of 2010, alone, 215,900 new employment were generated, despite the fact that this is traditionally the season when the Canadian economy is at its most moribund.

During the first two quarters of 2015, Canada was also in a recession, with GDP falling by 0.1 percent on average.