The Great Recession: The downturn that wouldn’t end

Nov 8, 2019

3 min

Narayana KocherlakotaLisa KahnDavid Primo

The Great Recession ended 10 years ago, but University of Rochester economist Narayana Kocherlakota says it is still very much with us.


David Primo, associate professor of political science and business administration, agrees that the country continues to feel the effects of the recession, though his take differs from Kocherlakota’s.


And Lisa Kahn, a professor of economics at the University of Rochester, sees another lasting effect from the Great Recession.


“Unemployment is very low right now, leading people to think that we’ve recovered,” says Kocherlakota. “Income levels, however, are now as much as 15 percent below where they might have been, if not for the recession.”


Many economists blame the income slowdown on a natural decrease in the rate at which new ideas are discovered. But Kocherlakota, former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, attributes it to something else. “Businesses don’t want to lock up money in physical investments because they’re nervous about another Great Recession,” he says. “That’s why there’s less innovation, and that’s why we have an income slowdown.”


The Great Recession began in December 2007 after the bottom fell out of the US housing market. That was followed by a shortage of assets in the financial markets and the collapse of the financial sector, including banks, credit card companies, and insurance companies. The recession, the worst in the US since the Great Depression of the 1930s, officially lasted through June 2009, though unemployment levels didn’t peak until October of that year.


According to Primo, the losers were homeowners, among others. The banks, which many observers say bear some responsibility for the recession, were bailed out by the government, while homeowners were not. That perceived double standard has led to the Occupy Movement, support for Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, and the election of Donald Trump, according to Primo.


“Economists may be 100 percent correct in saying it was necessary to bail out the banks,” says Primo. “But that’s a difficult political argument to hear if you lost your house, while banks were bailed out.”



Says Kahn: “Many firms take the opportunity provided by a recession to introduce technologies that reduce their reliance on workers. In the old days, we had bank tellers giving out money; now machines can do that,” she says. “In manufacturing, we’re shifting more and more to machines instead of workers. And a lot of that shift takes place during recessions.”


Kahn points out that wages and employment have been falling for the last 30 years in exactly the types of jobs that are increasingly performed by machines.


Kahn identifies an additional recession-related phenomenon, one that specifically targets college graduates. “It has always been bad to graduate during a recession,” says Kahn. “But the lost earnings from the Great Recession are much larger than they were in previous downturns, and it’s something that will stay with them long term.”


Not only are fewer jobs available, the graduates find themselves competing against experienced workers who had recently been laid off. The net result is persistently lower wages.

Connect with:
Narayana Kocherlakota

Narayana Kocherlakota

Louis and Henry Epstein Professor of Business Administration at the Simon School of Business

Professor Kocherlakota's research includes theoretical and empirical contributions to many fields in economics

Central BanksU.S. Federal ReserveDynamic Games/ContractsFinancial EconomicsEconomics of Money and Payments
Lisa Kahn

Lisa Kahn

Helen F. and Fred H. Gowen Professor in the Social Sciences

Kahn's research focuses on labor economics with interests in organizations and education

Economic DownturnsContract TheoryEconomics of Organizations
David Primo

David Primo

Ani and Mark Gabrellian Professor, Professor of Political Science and Business Administration

An expert in American politics; campaign finance; corporate political strategy, social responsibility & fiscal policy; & airline industry.

Airline IndustryAirline BusinessElection LawFederal Tax PolicyPolitical Gridlock

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from University of Rochester

2 min

Taking the Reins of Holiday Stress

Ho-ho-ho and a bottle of Tums? From feeding a crowd to juggling travel and schedules and managing finances during a challenging economic time, the holidays can feel like a pressure cooker. But University of Rochester psychologist Jeremy Jamieson, one of the country’s leading researchers on stress, says the pressures of the season of giving (and giving and giving and giving some more) can be mitigated by mentally reframing the stress we feel. In other words, what matters is how we interpret our stress. Jamieson’s Social Stress Lab studies a technique called "stress reappraisal": the practice of reframing stress responses as helpful rather than harmful. According to researchers, people can learn to treat their signs of stress — the racing heart, the sweaty palms, the mental sense of urgency — as tools that prepare them to meet a challenge rather than a sign that they’re falling apart. “Stress reappraisal isn’t about calming down or shutting stress off,” Jamieson says. “It’s about changing the meaning of your stress response. If you view the demands as something you can handle, your body shifts into a challenge state, which is a more adaptive, productive kind of stress.” The research behind this approach has grown considerably. In one of Jamieson’s studies, published in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, the Social Stress Lab trained community college students to reinterpret stress as a resource. The results were striking: students experienced less anxiety, performed better on exams, procrastinated less, were more likely to stay enrolled, and approached academic challenges with healthier physiological responses. Newer findings from the lab also suggest that stress reframing can support people facing workplace pressures, caregiving responsibilities, and major life transitions. In short, stress isn’t the enemy of our well-being during the holidays. The real culprit is believing stress is dangerous. Jamieson is available for interviews and can explain how people can use stress reappraisal strategies to navigate holiday pressures — and other high-demand moments — with more confidence, better health, and better outcomes. Click on his profile to connect with him.

2 min

Adam Frank: New Peer-reviewed Studies Change the Conversation on UFOs

For decades, talk of UFOs has thrived on fuzzy photos and personal anecdotes—never the kind of hard data scientists can actually test. But new peer-reviewed studies have changed the conversation, says Adam Frank, a University of Rochester astrophysicist who studies life in the universe and the nature of scientific discovery. Two recent papers, published in reputable astronomy journals, claim to have found evidence of “non-terrestrial artifacts” in astronomical photographs from the 1950s — objects that appear to be  orbiting Earth before the Space Age began. “That’s an extraordinary claim,” Frank says, “and, as Carl Sagan famously said, 'Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.' “The good news is that, finally, there’s something associated with UFOs that science can work with.” Led by astronomer Beatriz Villarroel and her VASCO project (Vanishing and Appearing Sources during a Century of Observations), the studies passed the first test of scientific credibility: rigorous peer review. Now, Frank says, comes the harder part — the “call-and-response” that defines real science. “Getting a paper published doesn’t make the claim right,” he explains. “It just means the debate can begin. Other scientists will now dig into the data, test the methods, and try to tear the claim apart. That’s how science works.” Frank is a frequent on-air commentator for live interviews and segments in national media outlets and the author of The Little Book of Aliens (Harper Collins, 2023). He also regularly contributes to written publications, including The Washington Post, The Atlantic, The New York Times, and Scientific American. In 2021 he received the Carl Sagan Medal, which recognizes and honors outstanding communication by an active planetary scientist to the general public. It is awarded to scientists whose efforts have significantly contributed to a public understanding of, and enthusiasm for, planetary science. Connect with him by clicking on his profile. 

1 min

'Brain-on-a-chip': Engineering tomorrow’s breakthroughs today

A “brain-on-a-chip” technology might sound like science fiction, but it’s real-world hope. James McGrath, a biomedical engineer at the University of Rochester, leads a team that develops micro-scale tissue chips to study diseases in lieu of conducting animal experiments. The team’s “brain-on-a-chip” model replicates the blood-brain barrier — the critical membrane separating the brain from the bloodstream — to mimic how the barrier functions under healthy conditions and the duress of infections, toxins, and immune responses that can weaken it. Recent findings from McGrath’s team show how systemic inflammation, such as that caused by sepsis, can compromise the barrier and harm brain cells. The researchers also demonstrated how pericytes — supportive vascular cells — can help repair barrier damage, an insight that could guide new therapies for Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. The research culminated in a pair of recent studies published in Advanced Science and Materials Today Bio. “We hope that by building these tissue models in chip format, we can arrange many brain models in a high-density array to screen candidates for neuroprotective drugs and develop brain models with diverse genetic backgrounds,” McGrath says. McGrath aims to transform how scientists test drugs and predict neurological side effects before they occur — helping rewrite how we study, and one day safeguard, the brain. Contact McGrath by clicking on his profile

View all posts