Nasdaq and S&P500 meet resistance

July labor stats are out and shows the jobless rate fell to a 16-year low at 4.3%. Unemployment below the long-term natural rate suggests the economy is close to capacity and inflationary pressures should be building.

Unemployment below the long-term natural rate

Source: St Louis Fed, BLS

But hourly wage rates are growing at a modest pace, easing pressure on the Fed to raise interest rates.

Hourly Wage Rates

Source: St Louis Fed, BLS

Fed monetary policy remains accommodative, with the monetary base (net of excess reserves) growing at a robust 7.5% a year.

Hourly Wage Rates

Source: St Louis Fed, FRB

Our forward estimate of real GDP — Nonfarm Payroll * Average Weekly Hours — continues at a slow but steady annual pace of 1.79%.

Real GDP compared to Nonfarm Payroll * Average Weekly Hours

Source: St Louis Fed, BLS & BEA

The Nasdaq 100 has run into resistance at 6000. No doubt readers noticed Amazon [AMZN] and Alphabet [GOOG] both retreated after reaching the $1000 mark. This is natural. Correction back to the rising trendline would take some of the heat out of the market and provide a solid base for further gains. Selling pressure, reflected by declining peaks on Twiggs Money Flow, appears secondary.

Nasdaq 100

The S&P 500 is also running into resistance, below 2500. Bearish divergence on Twiggs Money Flow warns of moderate selling pressure but this again seems to be secondary — in line with a correction rather than a reversal.

S&P 500

Target 2400 + ( 2400 – 2300 ) = 2500

Is the US labor market tightening?

I wouldn’t read too much into weaker US job gains of 138 thousand for May 2017. Job gains seem to be tapering in 2017, with February highest at 232 thousand, but this could also be a sign of tightening labor conditions.

Monthly Nonfarm Payroll: Job Gains

Comments from respondents in yesterday’s ISM report showed hints of a tightening labor market:

  • “Business conditions are steady, and with competition increasing, it’s making negotiations even more intense to reduce costs.” (Machinery)
  • “Business is booming, and getting direct employees is increasingly difficult.” (Fabricated Metal Products)
  • “Difficult to find qualified labor for factory positions.” (Food, Beverage & Tobacco Products)

Unemployment continues to fall, reaching 4.3% for May 2017. The dip below the natural rate of unemployment also warns of tighter labor market conditions.

Unemployment and the Natural Rate

But there are no real signs of a tight labor market in hourly wages. In fact, hourly wage rate growth in the manufacturing sector is slowing.

Hourly Wage Rate Growth and Core CPI

Employee compensation as a percentage of value added (Q1 2017) is starting to rise and the percentage of profits (after tax) is declining. The lines tend to invert, with employee compensation peaking and profits dipping ahead of a recession. This still seems 12 months away.

Profits and Employee Compensation as % of Value Added

In summary, declining unemployment and rising employee compensation as a percentage of value added both indicate a tight labor market. But soft wage rate growth and falling core CPI suggest the Fed will be in no haste to apply the brakes. At least for the next three quarters.

Inflation surges

Inflation is rising, with CPI climbing steeply above the Fed’s 2% target. But core CPI excluding energy and food remains stable.

Consumer Price Index

Job gains were the lowest since May 2016.

Job Gains

But the unemployment rate fell to a low 4.5%.

Unemployment

Hourly wage rate growth has eased below 2.5%, suggesting that underlying inflationary pressures are contained.

Average Hourly Earnings Growth

The Fed is unlikely to accelerate its normalization of interest rates unless we see a surge in core inflation and/or hourly earnings growth.

Gold testing $1100/ounce

Solid job numbers have boosted the prospects for an interest rate hike before the end of the year. Employment is growing steadily, having exceeded its 2008 high by more than 4.2 million new jobs.

Employment and Unemployment

Unemployment is falling as job growth holds above 2.0 percent a year.

Interest Rates and the Dollar

Long-term interest rates are rising, with 10-year Treasury yields headed for a test of resistance at 2.50 percent after breaking through 2.25 percent. Recovery of 13-week Twiggs Momentum above zero indicates an up-trend. Breakout above 2.50 percent would confirm.

10-Year Treasury Yields

The Dollar strengthened in response to rising yields, the Dollar Index breaking resistance at 98. Respect of zero by 13-week Twiggs Momentum indicates long-term buying pressure. Breakout above 100 would confirm another advance, with a target of 107*.

Dollar Index

* Target calculation: 100 + ( 100 – 93 ) = 107

Gold

Gold fell as the Dollar strengthened, testing primary support at $1100/ounce. 13-Week Twiggs Momentum peaks below zero indicate a strong (primary) down-trend. Follow-through below $1080 would signal another decline, with a target of $1000/ounce*.

Spot Gold

* Target calculation: 1100 – ( 1200 – 1100 ) = 1000

US October payrolls justifies December move

From Elliot Clarke at Westpac:

Recent softer gains for nonfarm payrolls cast doubt over labour market momentum, giving cause for some to question whether the FOMC would be able to deliver a first hike before the year is out.

The October report changed that view, with the 271k gain for payrolls taking the month-average pace back up to 206k as the unemployment rate declined to 5.0%.

There is certainly more room for improvement in the US labour market. But subsequent gains need to come at a more measured pace.

We continue to anticipate that a first rate hike will be delivered at the December FOMC meeting.

Read more at Northern Exposure: October payrolls justifies December move

Effect of long-term unemployment on the labor participation rate

Alan B. Krueger is Bendheim Professor of Economics and Public Affairs at Princeton University and an NBER research associate. Here he discusses the effect of long-term unemployment on the declining labor participation rate:

….The SIPP [Survey of Income and Program Participation] data indicate that, irrespective of the business cycle, the probability that an unemployed worker will be “steadily” employed in a full-time job for at least four consecutive months a year later is strikingly low and declines further as the duration of joblessness rises. Even in the strong job market of the late 1990s, the chance of a long-term unemployed worker finding steady, full-time employment after a year was only around 20 percent. This likelihood did not change very much during the 2001 recession, and it didn’t change substantially during the Great Recession. Conversely, the likelihood that an unemployed worker will leave the labor force a year later increases substantially as the duration of joblessness rises. According to the SIPP, 35 percent of workers who became long-term unemployed during the Great Recession were out of the labor force by 2013.

Why does long-term unemployment have such an adverse effect on workers? There has been a long, unresolved debate in the economics profession about whether the job finding rate is lower for the long-term unemployed because of either unobserved heterogeneity in the characteristics of such workers or something about the nature of unemployment that adversely changes people. Although this is an inherently difficult question to answer, the literature suggests that duration dependence plays a larger role than unobserved heterogeneity in explaining this phenomenon….. Much research suggests that long-term unemployment has a negative impact on both the supply side and the demand side.

On the supply side, an individual’s mental health and self-esteem can be affected by the experience of long-term unemployment. Till von Wachter has done good work showing that one’s physical health and mortality are adversely impacted by joblessness. Andy Mueller and I did a longitudinal study where we asked workers who were receiving unemployment insurance about the intensity of their job searches. We found that job search activity tends to decline the longer people are unemployed. We also found that the long-term unemployed tend to be socially isolated…… Furthermore, long-term unemployment tends to be associated with repeated job loss and lower re-employment earnings. All of these findings point to a decline in human capital and disengagement from the labor market as a result of long-term unemployment.

On the demand side, studies have shown that employers discriminate – at least statistically – against the long-term unemployed. Kory Kroft, Fabian Lange, and Matt Notowidigdo conducted a study in which they sent out resumes with varying gaps of joblessness, and they found that the likelihood of receiving an interview depended upon the duration of unemployment. Rand Ghayad also found similar results.

My take on the evidence is that the experience of being unemployed makes it harder for people to get back on their feet, and that even a strong economy doesn’t solve this problem. In addition, once a person leaves the labor force, he or she is extremely unlikely to return. The labor force flows data from the CPS bear this out (Figure 6). According to CPS data, the monthly rate for transitioning from out of the labor force to back in the labor force is unrelated to the business cycle. We didn’t see a wave of people returning to the labor force either in the late 1990s or earlier in the 2000s, and we’re not seeing one now……

Conclusion
To conclude, I will briefly comment on policies to address the problem of long-term unemployment. One of the overriding lessons that I take away from this body of research is that, if left untreated, long-term unemployment can have hysteresis-type effects on the labor market. A cyclical recovery does not cure the problems created by long-term unemployment. Going forward, I think one of the lasting legacies of the Great Recession is that the labor force participation rate will be about one percentage point lower than it otherwise would have been. This analysis argues in favor of using “overwhelming force” in a deep recession to prevent those who lose their jobs from becoming long-term unemployed in the first place.

Since long-term unemployment has been so widespread throughout sectors of the economy, “industry-specific” policies are insufficient to solve the problem. In 2012, for example, only 10 percent of long-term unemployed workers were from the construction sector, and only 11 percent were from manufacturing, despite the fact that these industries were hit particularly hard by the Great Recession.

Instead, I would prefer more targeted measures geared specifically toward helping the long-term unemployed stay in the labor force and find employment, such as a tax credit for employers who hire the long-term unemployed or direct employment. There also has been some research to support the notion that volunteering can help jobless workers make new connections, learn new skills, and stay engaged in the labor force. In the United States, job search assistance has typically been found to be effective in helping workers regain employment. I also think wage loss insurance might be worth considering, especially for older long-term unemployed workers.

Lastly, given that many of the long-term unemployed have already left the labor force, we should consider policies that address the structural decline in labor force participation. For example, more family-friendly policies might help greater numbers of women either enter or remain in the labor force. Likewise, reforms to the disability insurance system could possibly prevent some workers from permanently exiting the labor force.

Source: NBER Reporter Online

Why Fixed Investment is Critical to the US Recovery

The financial sector normally acts as a conduit, channeling savings from private investors to the corporate sector. When the conduit works effectively, the injection of demand from corporate Investment is sufficient to offset the ‘leakage’ from demand caused by Savings. Savings patterns alter during a financial crisis, however, with concerned households cutting back on expenditure and using any surplus to pay down debt, rather than depositing with the bank or buying stocks. Household Savings rise but corporate Investment contracts. The resulting ‘leakage’ from demand causes GDP to spiral downward.

When Investment contracts, unemployment rises. The relationship is evident on the graph below, but it could also be said that Investment rises when employment grows — businesses invest in anticipation of rising demand. Either way, it is safe to conclude that rising investment and job growth go hand-in-hand.

Employment Growth and Private Nonresidential Fixed Investment

Fixed Investment and Corporate Profits

Rising corporate profits also lead to increased investment. The lag on the graph below — investment growth follows profit growth — clearly illustrates the causative relationship.

Employment Growth and Private Nonresidential Fixed Investment

This is an encouraging sign, as the current surge in corporate profits is likely to be followed by rising investment — and further job growth.

Weekly Earnings and GDP

Rising weekly earnings already point to improving aggregate demand and consequent investment growth.

Weekly Earnings Growth

All that is missing is for the federal government to increase investment in productive* infrastructure to further boost job growth.

*Infrastructure investment needs to generate a sufficient return to repay debt incurred to fund the spending. Something many politicians seem to forget when preoccupied with buying votes for the next election.

More….

The Long War [podcast]

The Impunity Trap by Jeffrey D. Sachs | Project Syndicate

RIP ZIRP | PIMCO

How much longer can the global trading system last? | Michael Pettis

Crude retraces

Gold breaks $1180 support

Itzhak Perlman: Schindler’s List (video)

There are two kinds of discontented in this world, the discontented that works and the discontented that wrings its hands. The first gets what it wants and the second loses what it has. There is no cure for the first but success and there is no cure at all for the second.

~ Og Mandino

Why Fixed Investment is Critical to the US Recovery

The financial sector normally acts as a conduit, channeling savings from private investors to the corporate sector. When the conduit works effectively, the injection of demand from corporate Investment is sufficient to offset the ‘leakage’ from demand caused by Savings. Savings patterns alter during a financial crisis, however, with concerned households cutting back on expenditure and using any surplus to pay down debt, rather than depositing with the bank or buying stocks. Household Savings rise but corporate Investment contracts. The resulting ‘leakage’ from demand causes GDP to spiral downward.

When Investment contracts, unemployment rises. The relationship is evident on the graph below, but it could also be said that Investment rises when employment grows — businesses invest in anticipation of rising demand. Either way, it is safe to conclude that rising investment and job growth go hand-in-hand.

Employment Growth and Private Nonresidential Fixed Investment

Fixed Investment and Corporate Profits

Rising corporate profits also lead to increased investment. The lag on the graph below — investment growth follows profit growth — clearly illustrates the causative relationship.

Employment Growth and Private Nonresidential Fixed Investment

This is an encouraging sign, as the current surge in corporate profits is likely to be followed by rising investment — and further job growth.

Weekly Earnings and GDP

Rising weekly earnings already point to improving aggregate demand and consequent investment growth.

Weekly Earnings Growth

All that is missing is for the federal government to increase investment in productive* infrastructure to further boost job growth.

*Infrastructure investment needs to generate a sufficient return to repay debt incurred to fund the spending. Something many politicians seem to forget when preoccupied with buying votes for the next election.

When good news is bad news

“The U.S. economy added 295,000 jobs in February, a strong gain that beat expectations by a mile. Unemployment fell to 5.5%.” You would expect stocks to surge on the strong employment numbers. Instead the S&P 500 fell 1.4% on Friday. Penetration of support at 2080 warns of a correction.

S&P 500 Index

I can only ascribe this to fear of a rate rise. The stronger the employment data, the closer the prospect of the Fed raising interest rates. But Janet Yellen is likely to err on the side of caution, only raising rates when she is sure that the economy is on a sound footing and inflationary pressures are rising. That is far from the case at present, despite the good job numbers.

There is plenty of short-term money in the market, however, that seems to think otherwise.

Surprising lack of inflation as unemployment falls | Bank of England

Sir Jon Cunliffe, Deputy Governor for Financial Stability at the Bank of England:

“The big surprise, therefore, for the [Monetary Policy Committee] … has been the extent to which employment has been able to grow without generating more inflationary pressure through higher pay increases. Understanding why that has happened and how long it will persist is, in my view, now key to deciding policy.”

One possible explanation may be a longer-than-usual lag between falls in unemployment and pay pressure emerging, which could mean that inflationary pressure is building in the pipeline that will be more difficult to curtail if the Bank does not act now. However, another is that a combination of factors has caused labour supply – the amount of hours of labour available to the economy – to be much stronger than in previous recoveries, for example due to the increase in women’s state pension age and changes to the incapacity benefits regime. And the fall in unemployment has included a high number of long-term unemployed, who probably act as less of a drag on pay.

Yet despite the biggest squeeze on real incomes for nearly a century, there appears to be little evidence that workers are demanding a catch-up in pay, Jon observes, possibly due to a shift in the psychology of UK workers resulting from the sharpness of the recession and the years of austerity that have followed it.

Read more at Bank of England | Publications | News Releases | News Release – Monetary policy one year on – speech by Sir Jon Cunliffe.