Session One Panel Response

May 9, 2014

previous  view previous video in this series | view next video in this series  next

View more about the conference »


   James Bullard, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (5:54)

Keynote Address

- Introduction
   Ray Boshara, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (4:05)

- Keynote Address
   Neil Howe, Founding Partner and President, LifeCourse Associates and President, Saeculum Research (36:03)

   Keynote Q&A (11:04)

   Extended Interview with Keynote Speaker Neil Howe (28:43)

Plenary One — A Micro and Macro Look at Younger Americans' Balance Sheets

- The State of the Balance Sheets of Younger Americans
   Lisa Dettling, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System (14:25)

- Links Between Younger Americans’ Balance Sheets and Economic Growth
   William Emmons, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (21:40)

- Discussant:
   Steve Fazzari, Washington University in St. Louis (18:14)

   Plenary One Q&A (15:06)

Plenary Two — Student Loans

- Student Loans and the Economic Activity of Young Consumers
   Meta Brown, Federal Reserve Bank of New York (21:12)

- Does Parents’ College Savings Reduce College Debt?
   Melinda Lewis, University of Kansas (18:11)

- Discussant:
   Alex Monge-Naranjo, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (19:01)

   Plenary Two Q&A (18:22)


   Michael Sherraden, Washington University in St. Louis (2:52)

   Clint Zweifel, Missouri State Treasurer (6:26)

   Tishaura Jones, City of St. Louis Treasurer (6:14)

Concurrent Session I

- Moderator:
   Julie Birkenmaier, Saint Louis University (4:36)

- Toward Healthy Balance Sheets: The Role of Savings Accounts for Young Adults’ Asset Diversification and Accumulation
   Terri Friedline, University of Kansas (22:23)

- Financial Decisions of Young Households During the Great Recession: An Examination of the SCF 2007-09 Panel
   Wenhua Di, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (19:00)

- Discussant:
   John Sabelhaus, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System (14:38)

now playing  Session One Panel Response (6:57)

   Session One Q&A (5:41)

Concurrent Session II

- Impacts of Child Development Accounts on Change in Parental Educational Expectations: Evidence from a Statewide Social Experiment
   Michael Sherraden, Washington University in St. Louis (13:09)

- Trends and Patterns in the Asset Holdings of Young Households
   Ellen A. Merry, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System (15:19)

- Discussant:
   Trina Williams Shanks, University of Michigan (7:06)

   Session Two Q&A (28:58)

Plenary Three — Homeownership

- Moderator:
   Todd Swanstrom, University of Missouri–St. Louis (5:54)

- Homeownership and Wealth Among Low-Income Young Adults: Evidence from the Community Advantage Program
   Blair Russell, Washington University in St. Louis (15:57)

- Aggregate and Distributional Dynamics of Consumer Credit in the U.S.
   Don Schlagenhauf, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (21:53)

- Discussant:
   John Duca, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (13:59)

   Plenary Three Panel Response (6:40)

   Plenary Three Q&A (8:46)

Plenary Four — Economic Mobility

- Moderator:
   Jason Purnell, Washington University in St. Louis (2:00)

- The Balance Sheets and Economic Mobility of Generation X
   Diana Elliott, Pew Charitable Trusts (17:58)

- Coming of Age in the Early 1970s vs. the Early 1990s: Differences in Wealth Accumulation of Young Households in the United States, and Implications for Economic Mobility
   Daniel Cooper, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston (17:11)

- Discussant:
   Bhashkar Mazumder, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (16:15)

   Plenary Four Panel Response (3:14)

   Plenary Four Q&A (19:02)

Closing Reflections: From Research to Policy

   Michael Sherraden, Washington University in St. Louis (15:59)

   Ray Boshara, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (9:30)

Thank You / Adjourn

   Julie Stackhouse, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (5:59)


Below is a full transcript of this video presentation. It has not been edited or reviewed for accuracy or readability.

Julie Birkenmaier: Thank you so much to all our panelists and discussions. I want to first give our panel opportunity to respond to any of the comments. You could just–yeah.

Wenhua Di: Thank you, John, for very thoughtful comment. I just want to say a couple things. We are still trying to digest results we got. And then, thank you for your suggestions in terms of policy implications, tradeoffs between policies. And we–in terms of your comments on the overall model, the significance of the younger, the dummy variable of the 40 and younger, I do want mention that we do note–well, we are aware that that model doesn’t really capture–well, it doesn’t really tell the mechanism behind it. We–although we control for a lot of factors and that’s why we divide this group–divide the sample into two subgroups and then trying to figure out. It’s like interactions all lead to other variables and then see how the age play a role through other variables. That’s what we try to do. And then, that actually help us to keep out at least a partially how this different–what happened to these other variables and how to explain the difference in them, the significance of the variable. And well, Shirley might want to chip in about the bivariate model.

Shirley: Yeah. I have to say I’m a microeconomist by training and so, John is dragging you right into the macro framework kicking and screaming, but the point’s well taken. One of the comments was, you know, we really–it would be great if we could better control for some of the macro-type environmental issues and so that’s a very good takeaway for us to augment into the models directly. But, kind of chiming in with what Wenhua was talking about is that one of the real advantages of a bivariate probit model is that it’s actually able to let us look at this dimension of time, which we’re looking at, and control for the correlation of unobservable as across the two periods. And so, that’s a real advantage to us because we are able to do that and this correlation coefficient row actually does tell us that there are other things that are actually influencing the decisions that we observe. But, the advantage is that it’s not ignoring it. It’s actually controlling for it. And so, I think as we add more depth to these models in terms of the covariates, that it will only better sharpen, I think, the findings. And so, we really appreciate John’s comments and will take them to heart in the next version.

Wenhua Di: Especially the 40 years that cut off and then I really need that.

Shirley: Yeah. We appreciated that actually.

Wenhua Di: Yeah. I–

Shirley: Yeah.

Wenhua Di: . . . like hearing that even as I’m 40 and I’m rethinking all my problems and I–it hit me hard and I really want–

John Sabelhaus: Does anybody want to guess when the next one is?

Male: [Unintelligible at 00:03:36].

John Sabelhaus: When the kids leave.

Terri Friedline: [Unintelligible at 00:03:44] as well and it’s a lot easier to talk and breath simultaneously while sitting. There’s something obstructing my lungs at the moment. And so, I, also, appreciate John’s comments and particularly that we should have, you know, focus on some of the macroeconomic contexts in which young adults are growing up and living, experiencing in their communities. I think that that is certainly something that–you know, the limitations of any paper or of any study is that it doesn’t fulfill all that we want to know and all that we want to take into consideration and so that context–for example, this data was collected in the 1990s during a time, generally, of U.S. growth and prosperity, but in the South, in particular in the years proceeding that prosperity, there was, you know, substantial bank closure in the southern parts of the country, you know, which certainly with bank closures in your community limits your access to financial products as well as, you know, what made may be the underlying structure under both the dependent and the independent variables in the models considering that, you know, that there are unobservables at play here and those are likely some of them. And experimental data as well as qualitative data and various ways that we have opportunities to ask questions about these types of considerations, I think will fill us out as a field in terms of what we know from multiple perspectives about savings accounts, about balance sheets, about debt, net worth, and all those outcomes, generally.

John Sabelhaus: I know we only have five minutes. Just real quick on one thing because I really love what you’re doing and the one suggestion is to think about what it is you’re hoping to achieve with people getting a saving account and I’ve been telling people that their retirement accounts are going to be $6,000.00 higher on average is not necessarily the right message. What you probably want to tell them, and as a parent what I would love to see to be true, and all my kids have accounts and they learn how to use them and I’ll tell you a success story, that you want to learn that they’re making good decisions about certain things like not borrowing too much, not borrowing money that they can’t repay. So, something like this saving account lead to a situation where they’re not getting themselves in over their head, money they can’t afford. And my quick success story, junior in college and he had made some money working over the Christmas break and he had his eyes on a great new iPad tablet and I said, “You know, you really want to have that internship, you know, this summer and it’s probably going to be unpaid. You know, it might be nice to have that money sitting in the bank while you’re doing it,” and it worked, so it was a girl.

Contact Us:
Media Contact:
Laura Taylor

Follow the Center: