Tim Harford — Don’t take growth for granted

By Tim Harford

Economic growth is a modern invention: 20th-century growth rates were far higher than those in the 19th century, and pre-1750 growth rates were almost imperceptible by modern standards. Many have seen this as an encouraging trend, but [economist Robert Gordon] draws a different lesson: growth is a recent phenomenon, so why assume that it will last?

……Demographics and debt accumulation have both speeded up growth in the past and, as the pendulum swings back, demographics and debt repayment will reduce it in the future…….

via Tim Harford — Don’t take growth for granted.

Fiscal consolidation in Sweden: A role model? | vox

By Martin Flodén, Associate Professor at Stockholm University

Fiscal austerity was effective during the Swedish economic crisis, but that insight is not particularly helpful today. Austerity would have been more complicated both economically and politically if it had not been supported by currency depreciation and strong external demand, and crisis countries today do not benefit from such developments. Attempts to consolidate before growth had resumed failed in Sweden. One possible interpretation of these observations is that prospects to consolidate are bleak until competitiveness has been restored in crisis economies…….

via Fiscal consolidation in Sweden: A role model? | vox.

Hat tip to Delusional Economics

More than 67 million Americans dependent on government

Interesting charts from The Heritage Foundation: The 2012 Index of Dependence on Government
By William Beach and Patrick Tyrrell – February 8, 2012

The percentage of US citizens who do not pay federal income taxes, and who are not claimed as dependents by someone who does pay them, has climbed more than four-fold from a low of 12 percent in the late 1960s to 49.5 percent in 2009.

Index

More than 70 percent of federal spending goes to programs that encourage dependence.

Index

Index

Index

Index

The Index of Dependence on Government multiplies each program’s yearly expenditure by its weight. The total of the weighted values is the Index score for that year. The Index is calculated using the following weights:

  1. Housing: 30 percent
  2. Health Care and Welfare: 25 percent
  3. Retirement: 20 percent
  4. Higher Education: 15 percent
  5. Rural and Agricultural Services: 10 percent

Index

More than 67 million Americans receive assistance through the programs included in the Index.

Index

If we add government employees, the number dependent on government increases to more than 91 million.

Index

Reproduced with permission from The Heritage Foundation
Read the full report at The 2012 Index of Dependence on Government

Ray Dalio: Market Insights | CNBC

Ray Dalio, founder of Bridgewater Associates, the world’s largest hedge fund, discusses his biggest worry — social disruption due to mismanagement of the de-leveraging by governments — and other market insights.

[gigya name=”cnbcplayer” PLUGINSPAGE=”http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer” allowfullscreen=”true” allowscriptaccess=”always” bgcolor=”#000000″ height=”380″ width=”400″ quality=”best” wmode=”transparent” scale=”noscale” salign=”lt” src=”http://plus.cnbc.com/rssvideosearch/action/player/id/3000117516/code/cnbcplayershare” type=”application/x-shockwave-flash”]

Also PIMCO’s Mohammed El-Erian on the benefits and risks of ECB intervention in the eurozone debt crisis.

Prepare for the mining bust – House and Holes | macrobusiness.com.au

By Houses and Holes on September 20, 2012

The grey-beards of Australian economics today unite to deliver one enormous wake-up call to the nation, its government, its interests, its media and its people.

Don’t get me wrong, the bucket of cold water is not deserved in equal measures. For mine, the Australian people have been awake to the dangers facing the country since the GFC, hence the community embrace of saving. But the nation’s media and government have existed in a bubble of hubris, forging ahead with yesterday’s policies and arguments as if Australia is immune to global and historic forces.

I am talking about the end of the mining boom, which is nothing more than the march of the GFC to those that have escaped until now, and the persistence of policy settings that assume that the private sector is immune to deleveraging, as well as the failure to plan beyond the next hole in the ground.

Ross Garnaut and Bob Gregory deliver the bad news today via a string of speeches and articles in the [Australian Financial Review]. For those that don’t know, Garnaut is the architect of the open economy policy settings that have delivered 30 years of prosperity and Gregory is the local pioneer of arguments about the effects of Dutch disease. Both are eminent economists.

So what do they have to say? Nothing good.

Garnaut warns of falling living standards:

“I think we’re going to have a very difficult time adapting to the decline in living standards that’s going to be a necessary part of the adjustment to the end of phase one and two of the boom,” he told a conference on the rise of Asia. Professor Garnaut’s warning that the looming economic adjustment would be more painful because governments had not saved enough of the resources boom in budget surpluses came as international ratings agency Standard & Poor’s reaffirmed Australia’s AAA sovereign rating assuming budget cuts continue.

…Professor Garnaut said Australians would not be so anxious about potential risks if governments had saved more of the resources boom since 2003.

…“The time for careful management of a difficult adjustment is the time that lies ahead,” he said.

Meanwhile, Bob Gregory with Peter Sheehan write an opinion piece that endorses the Garnaut position but goes further with proposed solutions:

As the resources boom unwinds over the next few years, Australia will experience a large deflationary impact, primarily driven by the fall in the terms of trade and in resource investment. The production and export of resource commodities will rise as projects are completed, but this will generate few jobs and limited domestic income to offset the terms of trade decline and the falls in mining investment.

Many have argued productivity growth or labour market reform are central issues to be addressed as the resources boom passes. Productivity growth in the long run is particularly important but the key challenge over the next few years lies in addressing the change in the impact of the resources boom from expansionary to deflationary.

Until recently, theory and practice around the world has given primacy to monetary policy in responding to macroeconomic shocks. But, with many economies in the zero interest rate trap, the limits of monetary policy are being realised. Monetary policy cannot be expected to play the central role in addressing the long-term demand shocks Australia faces. The current de facto policy settings – that monetary policy will support the economy in the short-run while fiscal policy is restrictive – contain risks for the longer term.

They go on to argue that the Federal government will need to spend big on infrastructure to support growth and propose a new fund to finance the spending, in part through guaranteeing state debt.

I agree with every word. But there is little hope that those in power do. Treasury Secretary Martin Parkinson responded:

“Because boom implies there’s a bust,” he said. “Where we will end up at the end of this is with mining being a much larger share of a reshaped economy.”

Ironically, this is the very thinking that all but guarantees a bust.

Reproduced with thanks to Houses and Holes at Macrobusiness.com.au

Japan Eases Monetary Policy in Surprise Move – WSJ.com

By MEGUMI FUJIKAWA And TATSUO ITO

TOKYO—The Bank of Japan took surprisingly strong steps to further ease its monetary policy on Wednesday, following similar steps by the Federal Reserve, as it tries to tackle entrenched deflation, an export-sapping strong yen and the impact of slowing global growth.

The central bank’s policy board decided at the end of a two-day meeting to increase the size of its asset-purchase program—the main tool for monetary easing with near-zero interest rates—to ¥80 trillion ($1.01 trillion) from ¥70 trillion.

via Japan Eases Monetary Policy in Surprise Move – WSJ.com.

Competitive devaluations, started by the ECB and followed by the Fed, PBOC and BOJ. Let the fun begin!

Job Creators in Chief | Global Macro Monitor

By Global Macro Monitor

Let us begin by saying we don’t like the title of this post and believe it is misleading.

The President cannot, in our opinion, directly create permanent jobs in the private sector. Of course, he can hire federal workers and/or direct taxpayer funds to, say, defense or infrastructure projects, which creates, though temporary, a derived demand for labor. More important, however, is the administration’s policies that incentivize private sector hiring through creating an environment that empowers businesses and entrepreneurs and gives them confidence to expand capacity.

….In the short term, however, quantitative easing and negative real interest rates can generate asset bubbles, which can affect the real economy and hiring. But the experience of the collapse of two major bubbles in just a little over a decade illustrates there is always pay back and the monetary induced artificial boom will eventually turn to bust.

via Global Macro Monitor | Monitoring the Global Economy.

2008 Financial Crisis Cost Americans $12.8 Trillion: BetterMarkets

Better Markets, a pro-financial reform Wall Street watchdog, estimates the total loss of American wealth since Sept. 15, 2008, when Lehman filed for bankruptcy, as $12.8 Trillion dollars — almost one year’s GDP. Better Markets president & CEO Dennis Kelleher calls for effective regulation of systemically important Wall Street firms to prevent a recurrence of the GFC.

[gigya width=”576″ height=”324″ allowFullScreen=”true” src=”http://d.yimg.com/nl/techticker/site/player.swf” type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” flashvars=”show&vid=30617677&”]

Better Markets: Cost of the Crisis (PDF)