Full Employment and the Path to Shared Prosperity | Dissent

Great summary of the current political gridlock by Dean Baker and Jared Bernstein:

There are many policies that can reduce inequality, but there is none as straightforward conceptually and as difficult politically as full employment. The basic point is simple: at low rates of unemployment, the demand for labor allows workers at the middle and bottom of the wage distribution to achieve gains in hourly wages, annual hours of work, and thus income.

Levels of unemployment are not the gift or curse of the gods; they are the result of conscious economic policy. The decision to tolerate high rates of unemployment is a choice. It is one that has enormous implications not just for the millions of people who are needlessly unemployed or underemployed but also for tens of millions of workers in the bottom half of the wage distribution whose bargaining power is undermined by high unemployment.

It is pretty obvious that low unemployment would enhance wage growth amongst middle- and low-income workers. But the policies to create low unemployment are not as clear:

  • Raising inflation to lift real interest rates would not get strong support in many quarters. It would seem that you are manipulating market signals to dupe business investors to act in a fashion that may not be in their long-term best interest.
  • Infrastructure spending is the key to a sound recovery, but beware of raising public debt to fund anything other than productive assets that can generate a market-related return (to service the debt).
  • The trade deficit is a big part of any solution. We need to penalize currency manipulators like China (Japan before them) for buying US Treasurys to suppress their exchange rate.
  • Job sharing is not a long-term solution, but it does enable unemployed workers to retain skills that would otherwise be lost.
  • Overall, an excellent summary of what needs to be done. But it omits one vital piece of the puzzle. How do we get politicians and interest groups to act in the best interest of the country rather than their own?

    Read more at Full Employment and the Path to Shared Prosperity | Dissent Magazine.

Will Inflation Remain Low? | FRBSF

From Yifan Cao and Adam Shapiro at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco:

The well-known Phillips curve suggests that future inflation depends on current and past inflation and a measure of economic slack or resource utilization. Using the unemployment gap to measure slack, a simple Phillips curve currently predicts that inflation will remain quite low through 2015. Two variations of the model, which impose a higher anchor for inflation expectations or focus only on a short-term unemployment gap, still predict that inflation will remain low, albeit higher than implied by the basic model.

Read more at Federal Reserve Bank San Francisco | Will Inflation Remain Low?.

US inflation: Will the recent uptrend persist?

From Elliot Clarke at Westpac:

…it seems as though these price movements have not been driven by demand. This is particularly true for food services, which has seen growth in consumption volumes fall from 5.3% in November to –0.6% in May. Housing and utility demand has remained highly volatile, but there was no evidence of a ‘break out’ move in this component of personal consumption in early 2014, and growth has since slumped back to 0.2%. This is not to say that rents have not contributed materially to the level of housing inflation in recent years; more below.

This then points to an exogenous shock being to blame for the recent jump. Further, the coincident nature of the inflation uptrends for food and housing services alludes to a common cause: the cost of energy. The 6.1% gain in total PCE energy prices from April 2013 to May 2014 corroborates this belief. To the extent that shifts in energy costs typically prove temporary, this inflationary impulse will likely dissipate in coming months – leaving aside current geopolitical concerns.

Read more at WIB IQ – world-class thinking in real time..

Yellen takes the heat out of gold

Janet Yellen held firm on the Fed taper and unsettled markets somewhat with her throwaway “6 months” remark.

The Fed said the change in its rate hike guidance did not mark a shift in its intentions and that it would wait a “considerable time” after shuttering its asset purchase program before pushing borrowing costs higher. Yellen, who had fielded numerous questions without a hitch, hesitated when asked what the Fed meant by “considerable.”

“I — I, you know, this is the kind of term it’s hard to define, but, you know, it probably means something on the order of around six months or that type of thing. But, you know, it depends — what the statement is saying is it depends what conditions are like.” (Reuters)

That is not a firm commitment to raise rates any time soon. More like: “We are keeping our options open”.

The Dollar Index jumped, along with Treasury yields, but only 13-week Twiggs Momentum recovery above zero would indicate a trend change; confirmed if there is a breakout above 81.50.

Dollar Index

* Target calculation: 79.0 – ( 81.5 – 79.0 ) = 76.5

Spot gold retreated to support at $1320/ounce in response to the stronger Dollar. Breach of the rising trendline would warn of another test of primary support at $1200, while respect would signal another attempt at $1420/$1440.

Spot Gold

* Target calculation: 1400 + ( 1400 – 1200 ) = 1600

Rude Awakening Awaits Western Economies | WSJ

Michael J. Casey at WSJ interviews HSBC group chief economist Stephen King, author of When the Money Runs Out: The End of Western Affluence:

Mr. King’s thesis….. is that we in the West are in line for a shock when we discover that the high-growth rates to which we’re accustomed aren’t coming back. In the U.S., we’ve been wrongly budgeting for a return to 3.5% average real growth rates that persisted through the second half of the 20th century — an affliction suffered by both policymakers and households that he calls an “optimism bias” — and yet even before the financial crisis destroyed trillions of dollars of wealth the economy was only clocking gains of 2.5% per year. Forget worrying about the post-crisis onset of a Japan-style “lost decade,” Mr. King says. “We have been through a lost decade already. ”Among the reasons for this long-term shift to a slower potential growth rate, he cites the exhaustion of a various one-off productivity gains that boosted growth after World War II: the entry of women into the workforce; the liberalization of world trade; a tripling in rates of consumer credit founded on an unsustainable increase in housing prices; and education. These gains are no longer to be had, he says, but policymakers are blind to that fact and so are burdening the economies of the U.S., Europe and Japan with long-term debts.

While I agree that we are unlikely to see a resumption of the rapid debt growth of the last 3 decades, this should contribute to lower inflation and greater stability, without a credit-fueled boom-bust cycle, that could partially offset the negative effects. I also question whether productivity gains are really exhausted, or if this is a temporary after-effect of low, post-GFC capital investment. There is ample evidence that the global economy is slowing and productivity gains will fall — if one is prepared to ignore evidence to the contrary such as the rise of automation, advances in genetics, nanotechnology, sustainable energy and slowing global population growth — which should alleviate the poverty trap that many countries are still in. The researcher has to beware of confirmation bias, where they gather data to support a preconceived opinion.

Read more at Horror Story: Rude Awakening Awaits Western Economies – Real Time Economics – WSJ.

Blame del Pont for the nightmarish rise in Argentine inflation | The Market Monetarist

Lars Christensen cites MercoPress on hyper-inflation in Argentina:

Because of inflation, people collect their salaries and rush to turn them into foreign currency”, added the money traders…

He observes:

The collapse of the peso should be no surprise to anybody who have studied Milton Friedman. Unfortunately Argentina’s central bank governor Mercedes Marcó del Pont hates Milton Friedman, but she loves printing money to finance public spending.

Read more at Blame del Pont for the nightmarish rise in Argentine inflation | The Market Monetarist.

March FOMC Meeting | Business Insider

The Committee continues to see downside risks to the economic outlook. The Committee also anticipates that inflation over the medium term likely will run at or below its 2 percent objective.

To support a stronger economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at the rate most consistent with its dual mandate, the Committee decided to continue purchasing additional agency mortgage-backed securities at a pace of $40 billion per month and longer-term Treasury securities at a pace of $45 billion per month. The Committee is maintaining its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments from its holdings of agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in agency mortgage-backed securities and of rolling over maturing Treasury securities at auction. Taken together, these actions should maintain downward pressure on longer-term interest rates, support mortgage markets, and help to make broader financial conditions more accommodative.

via March FOMC Meeting – Business Insider.

NGDP level targeting – the true Free Market alternative (we try again) | The Market Monetarist

Scott Sumner suggests that NGDP targeting is a far more conservative approach than the current inflation targeting practiced by the Fed and many other central banks:

Most of the blogging Market Monetarists have their roots in a strong free market tradition and nearly all of us would probably describe ourselves as libertarians or classical liberal economists who believe that economic allocation is best left to market forces. Therefore most of us would also tend to agree with general free market positions regarding for example trade restrictions or minimum wages and generally consider government intervention in the economy as harmful.

I think that NGDP targeting is totally consistent with these general free market positions – in fact I believe that NGDP targeting is the monetary policy regime which best ensures well-functioning and undistorted free markets.

And here explains why inflation is not a threat under NGDP targeting:

Inflation will be higher under NGDP targeting. This is obviously wrong. Over the long-run the central bank can choose whatever inflation rate it wants. If the central bank wants 2% inflation as long-term target then it will choose an NGDP growth path, which is compatible which this. If the long-term growth rate of real GDP is 2% then the central bank should target 4% NGDP growth path. This will ensure 2% inflation in the long run.

Read more at NGDP level targeting – the true Free Market alternative (we try again) | The Market Monetarist.

Analysis: Bond managers fret junk bond rally is losing steam | Reuters

Jennifer Ablan and Sam Forgione at Reuters explain why Dan Fuss, vice chairman and portfolio manager at Loomis Sayles, which oversees $182 billion in assets, is slashing exposure to high-yield bonds:

Fuss and others worry the Fed’s easy money policy – short-term interest rates held at effectively zero and a bond-buying program known as quantitative easing – will soon foster inflation, a bond manager’s biggest fear. That would drive up interest rates, so bond prices, which move in the opposite direction to rates, would fall.

Read more at Analysis: Bond managers fret junk bond rally is losing steam | Reuters.