Wednesday, January 5, 2011

2011 Kickoff

If you are like me you have probably already seen enough college football to last you until next Fall. But then, not many people would admit to being like me so let’s switch our attention to Brett Favre’s sexual exploits. That’s not what I meant. I meant Roethlisberger’s sex habits. No that’s not what I meant.

At this point you have either gone bowling or you are actually reading in excitement. So let me take advantage and switch to the economy and its performance in 2011. I am writing this on January 4th so not much of 2011 is in evidence but I have noticed that the stock market has been very happy. That makes us retirees and hopeful retirees very happy. But will the fun continue?

That’s the $64,000 question and if that doesn’t date me then holy cow, what else could Edith? Those of you with short-term memories will remember that last year around this time we were very optimistic about the US economy but by spring and the unfolding of too much negative information about gyros and other Grecian statistics, we were wondering if we were in for a double dip – meaning that the US economy would fall from Grace and re-enter purgatory or even worse, you would receive a four-day visit from your closest relatives.
It took a while to climb out of that worrisome economic hole but here were again waiting for another Super Bowl and wondering if the economy will resume a clip fast enough to make a dent in the unemployment rate.   Macro is a great tool but being a practitioner of it doesn’t mean that I can forecast the economy for the rest of 2011. It is too bad that professional talking heads and journalists don’t have some humility because they get us all revved up for nothing but their own fame and wealth. They don’t know any more than we do but they sure look solemn and professional when they tell us about the future.

So if you have nothing better to do let me spend a little time explaining why I am generally optimistic but why I am not betting Betty’s Genesis on any particular outcome. What I do below is to explain why I think we might continue to recover but why there remain challenges that will impact the path of recovery. First, it seems to me that time has helped to heal the economy. While the stimulus policies helped to prevent a more severe downturn the main benefit is that the economy has mostly run its downward course. You don’t spend 10 years in rehab every time you get sick. The economy was not permanently injured by the factors that came together in 2007and thereafter to generate the recession.  The economy got punched and we adjusted to the punch. It was a hard punch so it took a while to digest. The good news is that we are on the mend.  The worst is over. The patient is on an upswing. But let’s not get too crazy.

Second, we still have some lingering problems. For example, housing experts believe that the foreclosure issue is still with us in 2011 (and beyond) and that means that housing prices may have to adjust downward another time or two. Most reports, I believe, see this as an orderly process. I interpret this to mean that housing news is 2011 won’t be good but it won’t interrupt too much the faster growth coming from other sectors of the economy.  I would expand this line of reasoning to include the broader financial system. While regulations have not addressed our problems adequately (too big to fail is one) I think time has helped to resolve the worst problems and debts are being worked off in the private sector.  As long as we don’t learn really bad unexpected news from housing or the financial sector, these sectors will only provide a small drag as we go forward.  Of course, that is one risk factor. If there are new unpleasant discoveries in the financial and housing sectors, then anything could happen.

Third, the big news item right now concerns US government debt and what our leaders in the government are going to do about it. There is the political silliness about extended the debt ceiling. Ignore that. We will not reneg on our national debt and everyone knows that. You guys have really fat wallets and the government has the ability to create infinite amounts of tax revenue at any time. So stop with that nonsense. What does matter is how we deal with reducing the debt. We REALLY need to have a plan and we have one brought forth by a commission at the end of 2010. The plan does not have to create extreme austerity forever and it does not need to create any real austerity until several years hence. But it does need to have an explicit and impossible to wiggle out of plan that reaches into the future. It must have credibility to bring government debt-to-GDP ratios back down to long-term averages.  Should our leaders legislate such a plan in the next few weeks that event will help the economy grow stronger now. Without it, we will lumber forward on the edge of a knife blade until the bond vigilantes get tired of harassing others.

Fourth – whether you call them bond vigilantes or simply grandma and grandpa – any hint of a significant resumption of the disastrous spending and saving performances of either our private or government sectors is going to lead to a economic calamity. Just like your child, presently a freshman  at Spendthrift U who cannot be given your credit card in his second semester,  our nation will not be able to find anyone willing to take the risk of lending us money – that is, buying our stocks and bonds . This eventuality will have the effect of raising interest rates, reducing the values on the stock market, depreciating the dollar and generating very slow growth – if not another recession.

So there we are.  We could have a nice reasonable story for the continuation of the recovery. But there are critical factors which include, at minimum, continued improvements in national saving and no unexpected or severe deterioration in housing or financial markets. With luck we might even see the unemployment rate begin to fall.  There is no magic to getting the unemployment rate back to 5%. In fact, I am guessing that what we call the “natural rate of unemployment” has significantly increased since firms have now found ways to reduce the employment factor in production for three years. Even with a spurt of sales I doubt they will go back to employment levels of 2007.

With households and governments taking years restoring saving balances, economic growth should not be spectacular. That is, do not expect a typical fast-paced recovery now nor in the near future.  Reality suggests that once firms become even more confident and optimistic about the future both output and employment will grow – the GDP gap will shrink and the unemployment rate will fall. This confidence will result from more time passing and the absence of negative surprises. So a gradually improving economy is possible. But those negative surprises with respect to housing, finance, and government debt policies suggest the possibility of something worse.  Time is on our side. Let’s hope our new government in Washington has the sense to minimize and not aggravate those things which will put us in reverse. 

24 comments:

  1. Bring on John Galt. Or John Boehner, should he accept the job as a leader with a plan and the means to implement it. If we could just go from uncertainty and impending doom, to "we have plan to place everyone in charge of their own healthcare and retirement plan and the means to do it without government help." Selling health insurance across state lines makes sense to me...

    ReplyDelete
  2. The debt of cities, counties and states is in peril. On one hand they have to be more austere and increase3 tax revenue either by raising taxes or creating more vibrant economies that will generate a higher volume of tax revenue at the same or lesser rates. If these bonds start to default or the civil institutions begin to cut jobs then that will be enough of a shock to recreate a lull in any economic euphoria. But still where the jobs are going to come from. Some of the big manufacturers have shown increased sales but those sales are from off-shore plants and the products are sold to off-shore people. This is not a sign of great recovery in the USA. Job stimulation is difficult with multipurpose stimulus packages. What works is to identify reasons why jobs are not growing. For most of us in the private sector, over regulation and an environment unfriendly to small and medium businesses is the culprit....not throwing funds into a black hole (or to political friends) and not training programs to train people to do what? If somebody knows what then they also know what types of business/markets to focus on for the future...I see no signs of that happening.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Professor, I wish I could be as optimistic as you, but I'm of the opinion that our elected officials will soon forget why we got so angry at them and return to the ways to which they've grown accustomed. Additionally, the majority of "we the people" have become desensitized to debt and see the government as a well which never runs dry. We've become economically ignorant and actually believe that if we tax the wealthy at 100%, we'll be able to continue to feed at the federal trough in perpetuity. By the way, a full-court press on our wealthy friends could run this country for about 6 months. Then, who do you think our "feeders" will come after?
    No, I believe 2011 may be that favorable stretch of highway before the bridge over troubled waters collapses.

    ReplyDelete
  4. James -- yes employment is quite a pickle. It is going to take quite a while to make a dent.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Bill,

    I read Atlas Shrugged as a freshman at Georgia Tech. I was never the same again.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Crash,

    Thanks for the reply. I hope you are wrong! What you say is always a possibility but I like the idea that people learn and are capable of groping to a better solution. I also think that the US economy has a lot of positives and they will counterbalance some of the stupidities. A good boat can tolerate a poor captain for a while. Of course if you are right then the boat will surely sink. I am not ready to go in that direction yet.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I don't understand how improved business productivity will increase the "natural rate." In the short-run it could raise actual unemployment, but eventually the economy would absorb available labor. Higher productivity will then mean that the resulting output will be more. I do however, worry that the natural rate is indeed rising, but for other reasons: 1. The long stretch of unemployment many workers are experiencing may erode their human capital and make them less employable. 2. The flood of regulations from Washington could throw sand in the gears of efficient economic adjustment. 3. Our education system may be a producing less employable product (i.e. students/workers) 4. Demographic changes (i.e. an aging population) will have effects, but I haven't really thought through exactly what they will be. 5. (speculation) The internet/smart phone/twitter/text message revolution could matter(somehow, maybe).

    ReplyDelete
  8. Bill,

    Thanks for the comments and additional reasons why the natural rate of unemployment might rise. I agree with all you say and it cements the idea that it might take a long time to push the unemployment rate down below 6%. My only comment on the relationship between improved business productivity and the natural rate of unemployment is that it depends on what you mean by the short-run and "eventually". In my case, I take eventually to be a really long time in today's environment. Keeping in mind pensions and healthcare of employees I think firms are beginning to see that it is prudent to not hire new employees. Even when things pick up in the economy they might continue to be reluctant to hire as they did in the past. One more point about demographics. As retirements are postponed it is possible that the elderly will contribute more to the unemployment pool than in the past. Or as they hang on to their jobs they will limit job changes for younger cohorts. As more potential retirees see what's left of social security after deducting tax withholding and Medicare, they may find there isn't enough left to keep them going....

    ReplyDelete
  9. witte said "Our education system may be a producing less employable product (i.e. students/workers)." An understatement if I ever heard one! Here in GA, 25% of the high school grad can't pass the Army qualification test. I wouldn't be surprised to find similar results in many states. We expect these people to hold down productive jobs?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Dear Crash,

    At Indiana the cheerleaders have a cheer called Indiana in which they spell-out the word I-N-D-I-A-N-A. In that way Hoosiers who attend sporting events can all spell the name of their state. That's what I can ej-u-katshun.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I can remember when it was possible to flunk out of a university. I also remember when Dion Sanders had to take a class in summer school to stay eligible at FSU. I still spend a lot of time at the gym at FSU, though less lately since they are replacing the hot tub, and talk to the students. More and more I am concerned about the level of critical thinking they exhibit.

    The last time I checked fully 1/3 of the in coming FSU freshmen class had to take remedial English. FSU is not all that bad a school; but the same 1/3 number was true for UF as well, and that is a flagship university.

    The thing that bothers me most is what I view as unrealistic expectations of many students. There are simply not a whole lot of jobs in ecotoursim, but it seems like every third student I meet is expecting to work in that area. Not to say there were a lot of ads in the paper for jobs with my undergrad math degree with a speciality in differential geometry; but at least I could claim I waded through a lot of homework.

    But I was going to grad school anyway (lucky to have a medical doctor for my father) and got both a degree and work study experience that allowed me to quickly get a job. This is something I see very little of with the current crop of students.

    My economic analysis is that there is excess supply or not enough demand for the current crop of workers and I do not see this improving any time soon.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Tom,

    Thanks for the good analysis. At Indiana we have plenty of serious students in the Business School and other areas of the campus who are studying the right things. But I get your drift -- social change and attitudes toward work and leisure can definitely affect our outlooks for future jobs. It will be a tough time for job seekers for quite a while. But my glass half full side suggests that there is plenty we cannot now guess about the future. For example, we have already seen a lot of employment growth come out of the Internet. How about social networking and the spinoffs from that? I am sure you read about the valuations of Google and Facebook. Perhaps this is just another bubble -- but maybe it is the dawn of an age of job growth? I hope we all live a long time so we can see how this plays out...

    ReplyDelete
  13. Tom, your use of the word "workers" would have driven one of my IM profs at Tech around the bend; however, I believe that another problem with our "potential college grads" is that they don't really expect to have to work. They envision a world where they'll walk out of academia and into a corner office with a six-figure salary attached. When reality smacks them in the face they'll complain about the sorry state of America and demand a government that gives them what they want. I experienced that attitude in the Air Force with many new AFA grads. Most became problem children when they saw how things really worked. But, I was a "90-day wonder," and they probably figured out quickly that I was too stupid to be their commander.

    ReplyDelete
  14. If there are any people under the age of 9000 reading this blog, I hope you will please defend at least some of these young folks! :-)

    Seriously Tom and Crash -- I can recall some of these same goal-less folks when I was an E2 in the USAF in 1969. They have always been with us. Society has changed a lot since then and with that have come changes in attitudes. There are still plenty of younger people who have what it takes. Some of these changes come from changes in hiring and retention. Keep in mind that firms busted the model of loyalty-- so they cannot complain about lack of loyalty of their workers -- young or old.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The following letter-to-the-editor recently appeared in the local fish wrap:

    "Daily, there are articles in the XXX about the plight of unemployed workers.
    Would it be possible to enact a law prohibiting outsourcing of jobs to overseas companies? I am sure it is less expensive for large outfits to outsource, but wouldn’t the American unemployed rather receive less pay, than none at all? Perhaps they don’t accept lower wages, and consumers don’t want to pay more. Tough luck!
    Is it unconstitutional to prohibit outsourcing?"

    I believe this type of thinking is what we're dealing with all over the country and is a pretty good sign of why we're in the shape we're in. "We" are economically ignorant and far too dependent on the feds. When something doesn't work they way we think it should, pass a law! Hasn't our educational system had a large hand in creating all of these Frankensteins......"that's 'Frankensteen!'"

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hi Crash,

    Here's the way I see it. My experience learning economics was hard and slow. I wasn't a natural.I am not alone. Think of all the really crappy econ teachers you had. It is no wonder that even some good students might not have mastered it enough to apply it the way you do. So it is partly education. But please notice that our society does not put a lot of stock in learning economics. Our kids dance, sing, take music lessons, play basketball, and learn to use their phones and Facebook. As a society we place a lot of emphasis on things other than econ. Furthermore whether we go to church or not, we emphasize ethical lessons that ask us to be charitable and loving to our friends and neighbors. When we see a neighbor without a job or when we learn a company has outsourced jobs -- we see how badly our friends are hurt by these things. If you put all this together it is easy to see why people do not or cannot look at outsourcing in the same way an economist would. It is quite a leap to think that most of us would know econ AND be tough enough to say that there might be better ways to help the unemployed than by prohibiting outsourcing.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Larry, I am not claiming some students are not very sharp or do not work very hard. But I do claim education has changed a lot since I was in school. Undergrads use to actually flunk out, when I started at UT freshman English was a flunk out course. There was no such thing as remedial English or Math at a university.

    Sure there were goof offs I met in the Army, but I got to be a speedy 4 because I was the best marksman in basic, did well in AIT, and was invited to be a sniper; and most every one else in the Army understood incentives mattered. I could have also gone to OCS, but not only would that require a re-up; but at that time the leading cause of death of a 2ndLT in VietNam was a 5.56 round in the back. There was no such thing as DADT, and only Rangers could wear a black beret. I was talking to my nephew who was on leave after basic, and he told me it is now possible to ask the DI for a "time out" if the DI got on your case too much.

    Once I got out and went back to school at USF things seemed much easier; and I credit a lot of it to my Army experience. Just my ability to get up early and shit, shower, and shave before class put me way ahead of lots of other students. It also helped that the Army taught me incentives mattered.

    I guess that is the biggest problem I see with our current economy. A lot of peeps, for what ever reason, do not think incentives matter. The employment numbers out today frightened me because even thought the rate went from 9.8 to 9.4 not enough jobs were created; but more worrying was the drop in participation in the work force. It is hard for me to understand how someone could drop out of the workforce, but clearly this is happening in increasing numbers.

    Until peeps see a reason to stay in the workforce and think incentives matter I will remain worried.

    ReplyDelete
  18. In my opinion.....and that speaks volumes.....nobody is a "natural" at econ, or for much of anything for that matter....well, maybe Cam Newton is an exception. But much of the economics that we're exposed to everyday is common-sense stuff, a commodity we are seriously lacking today.

    Indeed, I believe the Founders expected neighbors to depend on neighbors during tough times, but I doubt they foresaw a time when it was "all about me." That would have been a completely alien concept to them. There was even a time when a president refused to provide federal drought relief for an area and encouraged the people to help each other....and it worked! That is the "sense of community" many on the left don't want to see. They want the feds involved at every turn. "Why should the people have to think for themselves? That would make us irrelevant."

    My kids...well, grandkids...don't dance and sing. I can't get them away from the Wii long enough.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Hmmm -- good stuff Tom. First, part of the problem is generational change. My father and maybe yours thought my generation was weaker than his. He survived the great depression and world war II and then watched us turn into lovers of Elvis -- or become hippies. What you say is true. Our universities used to flunk us out. Now they beg us to stay. Part of the problem is that universities have become high schools -- more people go and as a result the bottom group is weaker than during our times. I can't be sure whether this is good or bad. As for the unemployment figures -- I wouldn't bet the farm on one month's figures. And keep in mind that the household survey number was considerably higher than the payroll number. I do not think there is any real movement out of the labor force right now. In the coming year my guess is that a lot of people will come back into the labor force once they see firms are hiring more. Despite all this, you register an important concern -- is the US really up to handle the competitive pressures on the next decade? I am not sure but I may be a little more optimistic than you are...

    ReplyDelete
  20. Crash,

    Maybe the word "natural" was the wrong thing. But I can tell you that I was very jealous of young guys at Tech who seemed to have had a bunch of experience with economic terms and ideas. I barely understood what a price was -- and thanks to Bill Schaffer's patience and a bunch of tutoring I started to learn and enjoy studying economics. I was very lucky to go to Tech. It challenged me (almost killed me) and sent me in a direction I never would have gone. I feel really lucky to have gone there and to have read Atlas Shrugged as a freshman.Otherwise I might have been like my brother at the time -- he dropped out and was a sort of hippie for a long time.

    Like you, I'd like to see a world or a neighborhood where people took care of each other. But the truth is that we are about 50 years beyond that. I doubt we are ever go back sans some sort of catastrophe. The best a conservative can hope for is to slow the process and to move things at the margin. It will be a constant battle of trying to restore proper incentives for people to take care of themselves while we provide a safety net for those who can't seem to help themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "The lessons of history, confirmed by the evidence immediately before me show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit....It is a violation of the traditions of America." - Franklin Delano Rossevelt!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  22. Crash,

    Any narcotic or pain medicine can be put to good or bad use -- much depends on the application.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Larry,

    I think the universities are simply rent seekers, that is why they beg peeps to stay. My Dad paid for my first two years, then I went in the service. Once I got out I had the GI bill, worked part time as a doorman at a bar close to campus, drove a taxi over Christmas break, had a debate scholarship; bottom line no debt when I graduated. It is common for todays grads to have hundreds of thousands in debt, backed by fed govt.

    Looks like rent seekers to me.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Tom,

    Interesting point. I am not sure I agree with this motivation for universities. I would prefer to believe that they are caught in the middle. Government expects them to accommodate whomever wants a post high school education. Government also creates huge reporting requirements so that universities spend a ton of money on administration. During my career the business school tried to limit enrollments and raise quality many times only to be told by the state government that we are elitist. The state pushed to have an MBA available in almost every town. While the University of Michigan somehow finds ways to raise standards and retard this populist approach to higher ed, Indiana university finds it much harder to do. Rent seekers perhaps but only as a result of pressure from government to make universities like high schools. Of course, stronger leadership at universities might have prevailed....

    ReplyDelete