2010 – about 7 months after the official end of the recession – the country had lost almost 6. 5 percent of its jobs and the unemployment rate had more than doubled. many people lost their jobs or saw their hours or income cut, and the duration of unemployment for jobless workers reached a historical high. for many families, this distress was compounded by losses of wealth from declining home prices and stock market losses. since the jobs trough, unemployment has retreated by a percentage point and jobs growth has resumed, albeit at a slow pace. today, we will review questions about jobs in our region such as : how severe was the downturn? where are jobs returning? and, what factors affect the employment outlook? as in other parts of the country, employment in our region declined substantially during the recession. but, new york and new jersey and puerto rico had very different experiences. employment in much of new york state, including new york city, declined less severely than the nation. both the state and city lost about 3. 8 percent of their jobs. as we discussed at our briefing last october, part of reason for the more moderate decline in jobs in new york during the recession was a less pronounced boom - bust housing cycle. indeed, as a percentage, the city and state lost fewer jobs during this recession than they did during either of the last two downturns. by contrast, the downturn in employment in new jersey in the current cycle was more severe. about 250, 000 jobs were lost, or roughly 6. 0 percent of total state employment – about the same as in the country as a whole. this decline is comparable to the job losses during the most severe recent recession in the state, that of 1989 – 1992. fairfield county in connecticut, also part of our district, saw declines comparable to the nation, while puerto rico experienced much deeper and longer job declines than the nation. in fact, employment in puerto rico began declining nearly two years before the onset of the recession on the mainland. now, as in the nation, a labor market recovery has begun across much of the region. over the past year, the tri - state region added roughly 100, 000 private - sector jobs. within the region, however, the recovery has been somewhat uneven. new york city, upstate new york and fairfield county have been gaining jobs for more than a year now – at roughly the same pace as the nation. however, employment in new jersey has only begun to expand during the past few months.

overall financial stability. cross - border perspectives – avoid straightjacket measures thirdly, i would like to stress the importance of cross - border perspectives on macroprudential policy. the business models of financial institutions differ substantially, reflecting the different needs for financial services in each country. moreover, we should also recognize the significant differences in legal and regulatory frameworks for financial services among jurisdictions, as a consequence of the authorities ’ best efforts to tailor them to the people ’ s needs. in some jurisdictions a traditional “ buy - and - hold ” model is dominant, in which banks generally rely on stable household deposits in their funding and make commercial loans. in such cases it is especially important for supervisors to grasp credit risks in banks ’ loan portfolios. however, in other jurisdictions, where an “ originate - to - distribute ” model with market - based wholesale funding is more pronounced, supervisors should pay more attention to liquidity structure, the risk - profile of structured products and where the ultimate risk lies. “ level - playing - field ” is undoubtedly important. nonetheless, what we really need is a playingfield that should lead to fair competition among financial institutions of different types and backgrounds, both in a theoretical and a practical sense. thus, a global regulatory framework should have sufficient flexibility in order that regulators can take account of regional and functional heterogeneity. a one - size - fits - all regulation, which some institutions in a specific jurisdiction could more easily circumvent, might eventually prove rather harmful to social welfare. moreover, too rigid regulation might encourage less - transparent entities to replace banks ’ businesses and thereby stimulate “ shadow - banking ” in some countries. a one - size - fits - all approach, which would put carnivorous lions and herbivorous elephants in the same cage, can never produce good results. we need to strike the right balance between rules and discretion in financial regulation, making full use of the “ three pillars ” framework of the basel accords, especially pillar ii. i also reiterate that liquidity issues are critical, especially from a cross - border perspective. central banks are strongly required to monitor liquidity risk, and provide liquidity if necessary, so as to contain cross - border spillovers. in this regard, the bank of japan, through its off - site monitoring, observes closely the liquidity position of branches, subsidiaries and affiliates of overseas financial institutions. moreover, bilateral swap agreements between major central banks, such as the fed, the ecb and