Tag: Unemployment

Posted on

Are US corporate profits sustainable?

Fierce debate has been raging as to whether rising US corporate profits are sustainable or likely to shrink, leaving the market overvalued. Consideration of some of the key contributing factors will enable us to assess if and when this is likely to occur.

Interest Rates

Low interest rates are clearly boosting corporate profits. The inverse relationship is evident from the strong profits recorded in the 1950s, when corporate bond rates were lower than at present, and also the big hole in profits in the 1980s, when interest rates spiked dramatically during Paul Volcker’s reign at the Fed.

Corporate Profits and AAA Bond Yields

The outlook for inflation is muted and the rise in interest rates is likely to be gradual and over several years, rather than a sharp spike, if the Fed has its way.

Employee compensation

Employee Compensation as a percentage of Net Value Added (by Corporate Business) has fallen sharply since the GFC, boosting corporate profits. Again we can observe an inverse relationship, with corporate profits spiking when compensation rates fall, and vice versa.

Employee Compensation compared to Net Value Added

A sharp fall in unemployment would send wage rates soaring, as employers bid for scarce labor. But that is not yet on the horizon and we are likely to experience soft wage rates in the medium-term (one to two years).

Corporate Tax Rates

The third element is the effective corporate tax rate which has fallen to an historic low, post GFC. Part of this can be attributed to tax losses incurred during the GFC, used to shield current income. The effect is likely to be short-lived, causing effective tax rates to drift upwards, towards pre-GFC rates around 24%.

Effective Corporate Tax Rate

Conclusion

The sharp rise in corporate profits is unsustainable in the long-term, but adjustments in the medium-term are likely to be modest. Higher wages and interest rates will have a more significant impact in the long-term, but are only likely to occur when sound economic growth is restored — which in turn would have a compensatory effect on corporate profits.

The quality of a person’s life is in direct proportion to their commitment to excellence, regardless of their chosen field of endeavor.
~ Vince Lombardi

Posted on

What Happens When Unemployment Benefits Are Cut? North Carolina Offers a Clue | WSJ

Cutting out benefits can reduce the jobless rate in two ways, says Mr. Feroli [Michael Feroli, chief U.S. economist at J.P. Morgan], pointing to past economic literature. Under the employment effect, people will take jobs even if the work pays less than the job seekers want. In the participation effect, people will drop out of the measured workforce since actively seeking a job (a criterion for being labeled officially unemployed) no longer carries an advantage of receiving jobless benefits.

Read more at What Happens When Unemployment Benefits Are Cut? North Carolina Offers a Clue – Real Time Economics – WSJ.

Posted on

The monetary policy revolution

James Alexander, head of Equity Research at UK-based M&G Equities, sums up the evolution of central bank thinking. He describes the traditional problem of inadequate response by central banks to market shocks like the collapse of Lehman Brothers:

Although wages hold steady when nominal income falls, unemployment tends to rise as companies scramble to cut costs. In the wake of the crash, rising joblessness created a vicious circle of declining consumption and investment that proved very difficult to reverse, particularly as central banks remained preoccupied with inflation.

Failure of both austerity and quantitative easing has left central bankers looking for new alternatives:

…..Economist Michael Woodford presented a paper [at Jackson Hole last August] suggesting that the US Federal Reserve (Fed) should give markets and businesses a bigger steer about where the economy was headed by adopting a nominal economic growth target. In September, the Fed announced its third round of QE, which it has indicated will continue until unemployment falls below 6.5% – the first time US monetary policy has been explicitly tied to an unemployment rate. US stocks have since soared, shrugging off continued inaction surrounding the country’s ongoing debt crisis.

While targeting unemployment is preferable to targeting inflation, it is still a subjective measure that can be influenced by rises or falls in labor participation rates and exclusion of casual workers seeking full-time employment. Market Monetarists such as Scott Sumner and Lars Christensen advocate targeting nominal GDP growth instead — a hard, objective number that can be forecast with greater accuracy. Mark Carney, due to take over as governor of the BOE in July, seems to be on a similar path:

Echoing Michael Woodford’s comments at Jackson Hole, he advocated dropping inflation targets if economies were struggling to grow. He has since proposed easing UK monetary policy, adopting a nominal growth target and boosting recovery by convincing households and businesses that rates will remain low until growth resumes.

While NGDP targeting has been criticized as a “recipe for runaway inflation”, experiences so far have not borne this out. In fact NGDP targeting would have the opposite effect when growth has resumed, curbing inflation and credit growth and preventing a repeat of recent housing and stock bubbles.

Read more at Outlook-for-UK-equities-2013-05_tcm1434-73579.pdf.

Posted on

The Grave Evil of Unemployment, Bryan Caplan | EconLog | Library of Economics and Liberty

Bryan Caplan makes the case for a fresh approach from free-market economists:

At the level of high theory, free-market economists love market-clearing models. If there’s surplus wheat, the price of wheat will fall to clear the market. If there’s surplus labor, similarly, the wage will fall to eliminate unemployment. What about nominal wage rigidity? Most free-market economists concede that nominal wage rigidity exists to some degree, but think the problem is mild and short-lived……..The high theory’s wrong: Nominal wage rigidity is both strong and durable.

Rather than treat unemployment as a necessary but temporary affliction, Caplan suggests that free-market economists should be attacking the “vast array of employment-destroying regulations” imposed by government — and tight monetary policy by central banks, where they should be advocating nominal GDP targeting as an alternative.

Read more at The Grave Evil of Unemployment, Bryan Caplan | EconLog | Library of Economics and Liberty.

Posted on

Fed set to unveil extra asset purchases – FT.com

Robin Harding at FT writes:

The other issue on the agenda is replacing the FOMC’s current forecast that rates will stay low until mid-2015 with a set of preconditions for the economy to reach before it considers raising rates. “I now think a threshold of 6.5 per cent for the unemployment rate and an inflation safeguard of 2.5 per cent . . . would be appropriate,” said Charles Evans, president of the Chicago Fed…..

The problem is that both of these thresholds are moving targets:

  • Unemployment is based on surveys and only includes those who have actively sought a job in recent weeks. It fluctuates with the participation rate.
  • Inflation is also subjective, dependent on the basket of goods measured and estimates of housing inflation that are subject to manipulation.

Targeting nominal GDP growth would be far more accurate.

via Fed set to unveil extra asset purchases – FT.com.

Posted on

Larry Elder | Is the US becoming a food stamp nation?

Larry Kudlow interviews Larry Elder: Is there a future for free markets?

[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/3000129206/code/cnbcplayershare” type=”application/x-shockwave-flash”]

“We are at the point where almost 50 percent of voters can go into that voting booth and pull the lever to vote themselves a raise….”

Posted on

The real solution to poverty: JOBS | CIS

By Andrew Baker and Peter Saunders:

There are two ways to reduce “poverty”: increase the value of welfare benefits faster than the value of wages, or move substantial numbers of people off welfare and into full-time jobs. Anti-poverty campaigners invariably emphasise the first option and neglect the second, but the first actually undermines the second……

The real solution to poverty: J-O-B-S, J-O-B-S, J-O-B-S | The Centre for Independent Studies.

Posted on

The unemployment surprise

Headline unemployment may be falling but this extract from John Mauldin summarises the US predicament:

We are employing almost 5% fewer people as a percentage of our population than we were at the beginning of 2008. That means our real unemployment-to-population level is well over 12%. So we’re not even close to where we were in 1999, during the last year of the Clinton administration. And that doesn’t take into account the 50% of college graduates who are underemployed. A significant part of the problem is simply the fact that we are trying to recover from a deleveraging recession. The data suggests that such recoveries may take 10 years. For Japan it is more than 20 years, and counting.

The unemployment surprise (pdf).

Posted on

There's No Solving Europe's Debt Crisis Without Solving the Jobs Crisis – Bloomberg

From the outside it looks like these [Eurozone] countries are faced with a debt crisis. From the inside it looks a lot more like a jobs crisis. Check out the chart below…….

via There’s No Solving Europe’s Debt Crisis Without Solving the Jobs Crisis – Bloomberg.

Hat tip to @10yearBonds

Powered by WordPress / WordPress Maintenance Service By Website Helper