Showing posts with label RECOVERY. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RECOVERY. Show all posts

Thursday, December 9, 2010

VISUALIZING THE JOBLESS RECOVERY

Home ? Chart Of The Day, Most Recent Stories

9 December 2010 by TPC 0 Comments

Although the economy appears to be gaining some traction the labor market remains extraordinarily weak.? In a recent research report the Cleveland Fed put this weakness into perspective (Cleveland Fed):

“The effects of the recent recession have been especially bad for the labor market. With the current estimate of real GDP only 0.6 percent lower than its prerecession peak, most of the loss in real GDP over the course of the recession has been recovered, but payroll employment is still about 5.4 percent less than its pre-recession peak. The U.S. economy has been generating only 86,000 new nonfarm payroll jobs a month on average since the beginning of 2010. Though blurred somewhat by the hiring of temporary Census workers, total private nonfarm payrolls gives a similar picture; firms on average created 106,000 jobs in the first eleven months of 2010.”

“The recovery in payroll employment so far is relatively weak by historical standards. In previous recessionary episodes, it took almost 23 months for payroll employment to return to its pre-recession peak. The current recovery presents a stark contrast; even after 35 months, we are still 5.4 percent below the previous peak. The slow recovery might be due to the unusually long duration of the last recession. On average, recessions last about 10 months, but the last one lasted 18 months.”

“However, the unusually long duration doesn’t seem to explain the sluggish recovery in payroll employment entirely. One problem is the timing of the recovery. In all previous recessionary episodes, the end of the decline in payrolls coincided with the official end of the recession on average, about 10 months. After the last recession, however, payroll employment reached its trough in 24 months, half a year after the official end of the recession.”

This recession is starting to give new meaning to the term “jobless recovery”….

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured site: So, Why is Wikileaks a Good Thing Again?.


View the original article here

Thursday, November 25, 2010

AN UNUSUALLY WEAK RECOVERY

Home ? Chart Of The Day

25 November 2010 by TPC 0 Comments

The latest GDP and personal income data have been widely praised for being “better than expected”, however, it is important to keep things in perspective.? Expectations have become abnormally low as the recovery continues to be well below prior trend levels:

Source: St. Louis Fed

——————————————————————————————————————————————————

The content on this site is provided as general information only and should not be taken as investment advice. All site content shall not be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any security or financial product, or to participate in any particular trading or investment strategy. The ideas expressed on this site are solely the opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the opinions of firms affiliated with the author(s). The opinions of all guest authors or contributors can and will differ from those of Mr. Roche. These opinions do not necessarily represent the opinions or investment decisions of Mr. Roche. The author(s) may or may not have a position in any security referenced herein and may or may not seek to do business with one another or companies mentioned via this website. Any action that you take as a result of information or analysis on this site is ultimately your responsibility. Consult your investment adviser before making any investment decisions.

A brief note on comments – The increase in users in recent months has resulted in an increase in unproductive comments. Any user who engages in the use of racial epithets or uses the comment section as a place to insult other users will be banned from the site. The comment section is welcome to all readers who are interested in asking pertinent questions and/or engaging in thoughtful, intelligent, and productive debate. In short, just be nice. Thanks.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Falluja's Cancer Catastrophe.


View the original article here

Friday, November 19, 2010

BERNANKE DISCUSSES THE TWO SPEED RECOVERY, CALLS FOR FISCAL SUPPORT

Ben Bernanke delivered a superb speech this morning at the ECB.? He was eloquent, non-partisan and displayed an unusual understanding of the problems the global economy confronts.? The speech is an absolute must read as it provides an excellent overview of our current malaise.

The theme of the speech was the two speed recovery – the stagnant growth in developed economies vs the high growth in emerging markets – and how imbalances have been created that require differing policy responses.? He says:

“International policy cooperation is especially difficult now because of the two-speed nature of the global recovery… These differences are partially attributable to longer-term differences in growth potential between the two groups of countries, but to a significant extent they also reflect the relatively weak pace of recovery thus far in the advanced economies.”

The Chairman appears to have backed off his monetarist tendencies in favor of a non-partisan approach.? At one point he even admits that the recovery was largely due to fiscal stimulus:

“In the United States, the recession officially ended in mid-2009, and–as shown in figure 3–real GDP growth was reasonably strong in the fourth quarter of 2009 and the first quarter of this year. However, much of that growth appears to have stemmed from transitory factors, including inventory adjustments and fiscal stimulus.”

He goes on to appropriately describe the disinflationary environment that currently rules the day and why this environment is likely to persist:

“Low rates of resource utilization in the United States are creating disinflationary pressures. As shown in figure 5, various measures of underlying inflation have been trending downward and are currently around 1?percent, which is below the rate of 2?percent or a bit less that most Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) participants judge as being most consistent with the Federal Reserve’s policy objectives in the long run.1 With inflation expectations stable, and with levels of resource slack expected to remain high, inflation trends are expected to be quite subdued for some time.”

Mr. Bernanke acknowledges that he has failed in his mandate of creating full employment, but makes vitally important comments regarding fiscal policy.? He seems to have made an about face in recent months and now understands that monetary policy is indeed a blunt instrument.? In addition to monetary policy Mr. Bernanke is directly calling for fiscal stimulus.? This is a crucial change in his stance as it shows an openness to the possibility that we are in a balance sheet recession and monetary policy simply won’t cut it:

“In sum, on its current economic trajectory the United States runs the risk of seeing millions of workers unemployed or underemployed for many years. As a society, we should find that outcome unacceptable. Monetary policy is working in support of both economic recovery and price stability, but there are limits to what can be achieved by the central bank alone. The Federal Reserve is nonpartisan and does not make recommendations regarding specific tax and spending programs. However, in general terms, a fiscal program that combines near-term measures to enhance growth with strong, confidence-inducing steps to reduce longer-term structural deficits would be an important complement to the policies of the Federal Reserve.”

He points out that, because the recovery has two differing speeds, it requires two differing responses.? In one region more support is required.? In the emerging markets it is likely that tightening phases are beginning.? This unevenness in the recovery is not a good sign and creates an imbalance that could pose a future threat:

“The two-speed nature of the global recovery implies that different policy stances are appropriate for different groups of countries. As I have noted, advanced economies generally need accommodative policies to sustain economic growth. In the emerging market economies, by contrast, strong growth and incipient concerns about inflation have led to somewhat tighter policies.”

Without naming names, Mr. Bernanke shows how a fully free floating exchange system would improve the global economy.? These are important comments in my opinion as the Chairman is emphasizing the fact that countries should not run persistent and large trade surpluses as these policies ultimately discourage domestic consumers from experiencing the benefits of what they sow:

“It is instructive to contrast this situation with what would happen in an international system in which exchange rates were allowed to fully reflect market fundamentals. In the current context, advanced economies would pursue accommodative monetary policies as needed to foster recovery and to guard against unwanted disinflation. At the same time, emerging market economies would tighten their own monetary policies to the degree needed to prevent overheating and inflation. The resulting increase in emerging market interest rates relative to those in the advanced economies would naturally lead to increased capital flows from advanced to emerging economies and, consequently, to currency appreciation in emerging market economies. This currency appreciation would in turn tend to reduce net exports and current account surpluses in the emerging markets, thus helping cool these rapidly growing economies while adding to demand in the advanced economies. Moreover, currency appreciation would help shift a greater proportion of domestic output toward satisfying domestic needs in emerging markets. The net result would be more balanced and sustainable global economic growth.”

These currency pegs also create internal costs that have never proven sustainable.?? Again, the Chairman notes that government should endorse monetary and fiscal policy which best supports higher living standards at home:

“Third, countries that maintain undervalued currencies may themselves face important costs at the national level, including a reduced ability to use independent monetary policies to stabilize their economies and the risks associated with excessive or volatile capital inflows. The latter can be managed to some extent with a variety of tools, including various forms of capital controls, but such approaches can be difficult to implement or lead to microeconomic distortions. The high levels of reserves associated with currency undervaluation may also imply significant fiscal costs if the liabilities issued to sterilize reserves bear interest rates that exceed those on the reserve assets themselves. Perhaps most important, the ultimate purpose of economic growth is to deliver higher living standards at home; thus, eventually, the benefits of shifting productive resources to satisfying domestic needs must outweigh the development benefits of continued reliance on export-led growth.”

Mr. Bernanke concludes with a comparison to the Great Depression.? Although he emphasizes that this is certainly not a depression he shows how there are similar problems.? Interestingly, he uses an example involving the gold standard and how such a policy can in fact have recessionary tendencies.? I can’t be certain that this is a subtle jab at the recent nonsense regarding the revival of the gold standard, but it looks that way to me:

“As currently constituted, the international monetary system has a structural flaw: It lacks a mechanism, market based or otherwise, to induce needed adjustments by surplus countries, which can result in persistent imbalances. This problem is not new. For example, in the somewhat different context of the gold standard in the period prior to the Great Depression, the United States and France ran large current account surpluses, accompanied by large inflows of gold. However, in defiance of the so-called rules of the game of the international gold standard, neither country allowed the higher gold reserves to feed through to their domestic money supplies and price levels, with the result that the real exchange rate in each country remained persistently undervalued. These policies created deflationary pressures in deficit countries that were losing gold, which helped bring on the Great Depression.3 The gold standard was meant to ensure economic and financial stability, but failures of international coordination undermined these very goals.”

All in all, this is some of Mr. Bernanke’s finest work.? It appears to me as though he is displaying a more flexible and open opinion with regards to monetary and fiscal policy.? That’s a nice change and a positive development. In addition, he exhibits an unusual understanding for what is occurring on Main Street instead of his persistent focus on Wall Street.? Let’s hope he will use his influence to follow thru and rather than consistently helping bankers, help Main Street for once.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————

The content on this site is provided as general information only and should not be taken as investment advice. All site content shall not be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any security or financial product, or to participate in any particular trading or investment strategy. The ideas expressed on this site are solely the opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the opinions of firms affiliated with the author(s). The opinions of all guest authors or contributors can and will differ from those of Mr. Roche. These opinions do not necessarily represent the opinions or investment decisions of Mr. Roche. The author(s) may or may not have a position in any security referenced herein and may or may not seek to do business with one another or companies mentioned via this website. Any action that you take as a result of information or analysis on this site is ultimately your responsibility. Consult your investment adviser before making any investment decisions.

A brief note on comments – The increase in users in recent months has resulted in an increase in unproductive comments. Any user who engages in the use of racial epithets or uses the comment section as a place to insult other users will be banned from the site. The comment section is welcome to all readers who are interested in asking pertinent questions and/or engaging in thoughtful, intelligent, and productive debate. In short, just be nice. Thanks.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Falluja's Cancer Catastrophe.


View the original article here

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

QE2 IS ANOTHER BANK BAILOUT & NOT A MAIN STREET RECOVERY PLAN

I’ve shown in rather elaborate detail in recent weeks that quantitative easing does not help the real economy generate a sustained recovery.? This can be summed up as follows:

“QE’s effect on raising aggregate demand and prices was often limited” (Ugai, 2006)

  • QE has been shown to have had little to no impact in the U.K.? (also see here).
  • While QE worked to ease the strains in the credit markets in 2008 and also improved bank balance sheets there was no change in interest rates during the entirety of the program in the USA and borrowing has remained very weak.
  • Because the US has a demand side problem and not a supply side problem QE is unlikely to result in higher aggregate demand and revenues (see here).
  • QE is likely to negatively impact corporate margins as investors falsely interpret QE as “money printing” and seek the safety of hard assets (see here).
  • The “wealth effect” of QE is likely to fail.? Attempts to keep asset prices “higher than they otherwise would be” will always fail (see here).
  • Since QE has been shown to have no discernible long-term impact on interest rates or aggregate demand there is no fundamental reason for stocks to move higher due to the program (see here).

All of my work regarding QE has me wondering why the Fed would implement such a policy when the evidence appears to point to little to no gain in economic growth?? The only logical answer is that QE2 is really just another case of the Federal Reserve proving that this is a country centered around the bankers, by the bankers and for the bankers. Before you brush me off as some conspiracy theorist please consider the evidence.

The problem with a policy like QE is that it does not actually add net new financial assets to the private sector.? This is ultimately the primary misconception regarding QE. The expansion of the monetary base is not net new money in your pockets.? Thus, it will not help finance new spending or investment, it will not create jobs, it will not increase aggregate demand, etc.? Therefore, any policy effectiveness is based on a shuffling of assets and hopes for a sustained psychological change.? A sitting member of the FOMC has (finally) admitted that QE is unlikely to do anything for the economy:

“What?is?the?ultimate?impact?on?the?overall?economy?of?this?shift?in?risk??In?the?baseline models used by central banks, all bondholders are?taxpayers. In?these?models,?QE?is?essentially? shifting risk from one pocket to another.?As?a?result,?the?increase?in?tax?risk?(what?I’m?calling?the fourth effect of?QE) completely undoes the decrease?in?interest?rate?risk?(the?third?effect?of?QE). QE ends up?having?no?effects,?except for?those associated?with?any?new?forward?guidance?that it?signals.”

But there is one distinct benefit of such a policy – it alters the composition of bank balance sheets.? At the end of the day it’s really just an asset swap and a transfer of risk via bond duration or bond type.? The kicker here, is that if you’re a bad bank with a few trillion dollars in bad mortgage paper you’re delighted if a AAA rated entity comes in and swaps those assets out with their highly rated paper.? This is exactly what the Fed did in 2009 and make no mistake – it was hugely successful in clearing the credit markets and altering the composition of bank balance sheets.? This was Mr. Bernanke’s goal after all.? He was simply trying to clear the credit markets and improve the banking system and he believed that would ultimately fix the problems in the US economy. Unfortunately, he misdiagnosed a household balance sheet recession as a banking crisis.? QE1 provided liquidity in the credit markets and it gave the banks some much needed breathing room.? Unfortunately, the impact on the real economy was far more muted.

I think Ben Bernanke knows all of this.? He has added $1T in reserves to the banks already and it hasn’t resulted in a surge in borrowing or self sustaining economy recovery.? It doesn’t take a genius to understand that adding another trillion won’t change anything either.? If there is low demand for apples putting more apples on the shelves does not improve the apples salesman’s ability to sell more apples.

But Mr. Bernanke is seeing the same thing that I am seeing.? He sees a weak economy and a housing market that appears to be rolling over again.? Knowing that the banks are extremely fragile here and understanding that there is absolutely no political will for another bailout Mr. Bernanke is creating his own bailout by bypassing Congress.

Some of my colleagues say I am giving Mr. Bernanke far too much credit here.? After all, this would require a great deal of foresight and a level of proactivity that hasn’t really been a trademark of his in recent years.? I am not so certain.? In fact, I don’t doubt for one second that Mr. Bernanke is fully prepared to do whatever he must to avoid another bank meltdown.? He continues to believe that this is a supply side problem and not a demand side problem.? He may have failed in his mandate of full employment, but when it comes to the banking sector Mr. Bernanke is more than accommodative.

What’s unfortunate in all of this is that the policy is being sold to the American public as if it’s a Main Street stimulant.? There is, arguably, some merit in doing what Mr. Bernanke is doing.? After all, another bank meltdown would be truly traumatic (though probably necessary).? So, there’s an argument in favor of being prepared.? But selling it as another Main Street stimulant is disingenuous at best.? And unfortunately, 99.9% of the public is too oblivious to:

1. Understand QE

2. Raise a fuss.

The implications are obvious.? The Fed will likely start with a rather small round of QE this week.? After all, if I am correct Mr. Bernanke doesn’t want to unload all of his shells too early.? He wants to be fully prepared in case the banks relapse so he can step in with a sizable bank bailout.? So, don’t be one bit surprised this week when Mr. Bernanke announces a small round of Treasury purchases with the option to buy MBS in the future.? In all likelihood, this program will remain open until it’s clear that the U.S. economy is sustaining recovery and another bank meltdown is off the table.? Don’t be fooled into thinking that this is some economic panacea.? Unless of course, you’re a banker.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————

The content on this site is provided as general information only and should not be taken as investment advice. All site content shall not be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any security or financial product, or to participate in any particular trading or investment strategy. The ideas expressed on this site are solely the opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the opinions of firms affiliated with the author(s). The opinions of all guest authors or contributors can and will differ from those of Mr. Roche. These opinions do not necessarily represent the opinions or investment decisions of Mr. Roche. The author(s) may or may not have a position in any security referenced herein and may or may not seek to do business with one another or companies mentioned via this website. Any action that you take as a result of information or analysis on this site is ultimately your responsibility. Consult your investment adviser before making any investment decisions.

A brief note on comments – The increase in users in recent months has resulted in an increase in unproductive comments. Any user who engages in the use of racial epithets or uses the comment section as a place to insult other users will be banned from the site. The comment section is welcome to all readers who are interested in asking pertinent questions and/or engaging in thoughtful, intelligent, and productive debate. In short, just be nice. Thanks.

Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Falluja's Cancer Catastrophe.


View the original article here