Is the Stimulus Big Enough?

November 12th, 2009

The Congressional Budget Office estimates the Current Output Gap to be a little under 8%. That is, the economy is functioning 8% below what it would be if there was no recession. If that meant that every American was 8% poorer it would be bad but it wouldn’t be the worst thing we’ve experienced.

Unfortunately, recessions don’t work that way. That 8% loss is concentrated, typically in the populations that could least afford it. Many American’s have gone without raises and some have faced pay cuts. However, most of the loss in income has come about because roughly 5% of Americans have lost their jobs entirely.

What that means is closing the output gap will be key to the fortunes of millions of Americans. In a previous post, I discussed why the organic means of closing the output gap wasn’t working this time around. It depends crucially on a well functioning financial sector in general and the housing market in particular. As those have languished, so has the economy.

So, will the stimulus do the trick? The entire stimulus package is desgined to outlay 787 billion dollar, the majority of it before 2011. If we estimate that at roughly $375 Billion a year for 2009 and 2010, how much a difference will it make?

Well the size of the US economy is approximately $14,000 Billion. Thus an extra $375 Billion represents a 2.6% increase. That is, only about 1/3 of the output gap.

What economists are hoping for is some form of multiplier effect. The stimulus should reduce uncertainty and lead consumers to spend more of the money they would have otherwise stashed away.  However, even the White House is estimating a multiplier of only 1.6. That is, for every $100 in stimulus spending, households will kick in an extra $60 themselves.

This would put total outlays at best around $600 Billion or 4.2% of GDP. So, with stimulus closing at best half of the output gap and the housing and financial markets still on the fritz, what can we expect. At this point I for see a long slow recovery.

Even though the recession is technically over, it won’t feel over until well into 2010 and we wont see unemployment back under 6% until at least 2015.  That’s five more years of an economy that weaker than what we’ve grown accustom to.

Now there is some chance that monetary policy could change that. That the Federal Reserve could do some things to juice up growth. However, this is currently a major area of debate among economists and the Federal Reserve has not yet signaled that it is willing to do those things.

New Claims Day

November 12th, 2009

Initial Claims for unemployment insurance came in at 502K this week down from an upwardly revised 514K last week. The four week moving average now stands at 515K

image

 

A few weeks back I wrote about how the seasonal auto adjustment had introduced a false dip the lead first to jubilation and then to depression about the trajectory of the New Claims series. However, we’ve gotten past that now and it is remarkable how well the decline has stabilized.

image

The blue line represents the average weekly declines since the peak on 4/4/2009. By construction the variance of this series should stabilize. In other words it should go from a wobbly line to a smooth line. However, what’s notable is that the level has remained fairly constant since late May. That is, the new claims series has been declining at roughly 5K per week since the beginning.

The change in the four week moving average has seems to be getting a little more stable in terms of volatility as well.

The 5K per week decline means that we are roughly 24 weeks out from 384K, the level at which on average the payroll series began to grow.

If I get a chance I’d like to project out Justin Fox’s payroll chart (shown below) based on a steady 5K decline.

Great_Recession_last5

As always, the long view

image

Where The Money Goes

November 11th, 2009

Recovery.org has a nice map tracking stimulus funding per state.

image

And another for counties within North Carolina

image

North Carolina doesn’t seem to stand out from the pack as getting more or less, but these are absolute, not per capita numbers.

If I get a minute I’ll run the per capita data.

Simulating

November 10th, 2009

Frayda asks

The experts are weighing in about the effect of the stimulus money now that the government is releasing numbers. How do you think the public should assess the value and impact, both in terms of short and long term benefit to the economy?

This is obviously a politically charged question, but I’ll do my best to navigate those shoals.

Its generally accepted among forecasting economists that the stimulus is largely responsible for the upturn in growth that we’ve seen.

Some of this is simple accounting. Without the stimulus state and local government spending would have collapsed even further than it did, because many state and local governments are required to run balanced budgets.  Most states, including North Carolina, are balancing their budgets on the back of stimulus.

The vast majority of Americans also received a tax cut under the stimulus and though forecasting economists disagree on how much impact that had on spending, most of us believe that it had some. 

Both of those effects boosted the economy in the third quarter. That’s the immediate impact of the stimulus.

Where the debate gets a little rougher is on the issue of “priming the pump.”  I believe that the stimulus has increased and will continue to increase private spending in the economy. The rationale is that when households are uncertain about the future they decrease spending and increase savings.

State employees in particular would have faced much more uncertainty had their been no stimulus.  Many more would have been laid off. In response, they would have then decreased their spending. This reduction in spending would have meant more uncertainty for local businesses. This would have led them to trim workforces in order save cash. This results in less spending by their workers and so on. The cycle continues, weakening the entire economy.

When the economy has a functioning financial sector this vicious cycle is arrested by falling interest rates. More and more people are saving. This means more and more money piling up in the banks. In response the banks lower the interest rates they give on savings accounts and CDs, which slows down some of the savings.

The banks also lower the interest rate they charge borrowers. These lower interest rates cause people to go out and buy more houses and more cars. This increases spending, which reduces uncertainty and starts the economy growing again. This is why forecasting economists look to housing sales and auto sales to predict the end of a recession.

Currently, however, financial markets are not functioning well. Moreover, there is still a large inventory of unsold homes. This makes it unlikely that housing will play a major role in leading us out of the recovery. There is some room for auto sales to help out. Still, auto sales were so abysmally low last year that even vast improvement doesn’t give the economy enough boost to grow.

So where will the extra boost come from? The stimulus is one of the few sources available.

There are two questions, however:

1) Will it be enough

2) What are the long run costs.

I’ll answer in the next few posts.

CIT Bankrupt

November 2nd, 2009

Large wholesale banker CIT went belly-up this weekend. CIT was a key player in insuring that small business had the financing they need to pay supplier and workers.

Those who have seen my Temperature presentation know that a key cause of the recession was the inability for large businesses to finance their short term needs in the Commercial Paper market. This brings that same type of stress to small businesses.

We’ll be monitoring the shockwave from the CIT collapse but there is a decent chance that this will negatively impact North Carolina retail sales. The key is the ability of other banks to step into CITs place.

Growing Again

October 29th, 2009

Our first look at third quarter (July, August September) GDP is out and the U.S. does appear to have emerged from recession.

cea-09q3-realGDP 1

The economy is growing stronger than it has in two years. More importantly we are one  a healthy trajectory.  From shrinking by over 6 percent in the first quarter of the year, to flat growth in the second, to strong growth in the third.

Most people, however, care about employment. It will take at least a few quarters for things in the labor market to catch up to the rest of the economy. Some businesses, though not as many  as typical for a recession, have horded workers. That means, that they have kept some workers on staff even though there is no work for them to do.

The first thing that happens in a recovery is that business put those workers to work. Its only when business gets so good that these workers are no longer enough, that they will look for outside hires.

However, we are moving in the right direction and unless we hit a major snag we can safely say that the job market will look much different by the middle of 2010.

North Carolina Unemployment

October 21st, 2009

 State level unemployment data for September is out and North Carolina held steady at a 10.8% level. This is slightly below the peak of 11.1% set back in May.

This remain the worst employment picture North Carolina has seen since we began keeping state level data in 1976

image

Deflation Nation

October 19th, 2009

One of the issues that has concerned me most over the past 18 months is the possibility that the US will enter a deflationary spiral. A period in which prices are falling and the economy is semi-permanently depressed.

The actions of the Federal Government have reduced the probability of a semi-permanent spiral but the short run situations still doesn’t look so hot.

image

There are two basic ways of measuring inflation. First is what’s known as the Headline measure. It takes account of all the prices moving in the economy. The second is the Core measure. The core measure doesn’t count changes in food prices and in energy costs.

The Headline measure tells us what we are experiencing now but the Core tells us more about our future. Energy and Food are traded on commodity exchanges in Chicago and New York. Their prices changes every day.  Oil and corn prices can skyrocket and they can collapse and no one can tell you for sure where they will be tomorrow.

Over the last 12 months the price of oil has fallen dramatically. Thats what’s brought the Headline inflation measure deep into the negative. However, do we think that oil prices will keep failing? Almost certainly not. So that doesn’t tell us a lot about where we are headed.

On the other hand clothing prices, car prices and apartment rents only change a few times a year typically. And once they start changing they usually have a little inertia to them. An clothing store for example may mark up its clothes a little bit each season so that the consumer never faces a big one time shock.

The Core number, however, tells us that we are still trending downward. Core inflation has hit zero yet. That means that we still expect inflation to get better. However, its getting closer and closer.

This is a concern for local governments because tax revenues are tied to prices. The higher prices, the higher tax revenues. Unless inflation picks up the long term growth of sales tax revenue will be weaker than it otherwise could be. Local governments will be under more strain. Thus this is one of the numbers to watch to get a sense of how the future will unfold.

Not a Good Day for B of A

October 16th, 2009

North Carolina is the epicenter of the consumer finance world. That is, we are the banking capital. Our biggest player is of course Bank of America and it looks as if she didn’t do so well last quarter.

From CNBC

Bank of America posted a wider-than-expected third-quarter loss as improvement in its Merrill Lynch investment banking unit failed to offset consumer credit woes, sending its shares down 4.5 percent.

The results underlined how the nation’s largest bank, which has received two taxpayer bailouts totaling $45 billion, remains on a government respirator after acquiring Merrill Lynch & Co and mortgage lender Countrywide at the height of the financial crisis.

The bank suffered $9.6 billion in credit losses in the quarter.

Progressive Tax, Regressive Tax

October 16th, 2009

A progressive tax is one in which higher income folks pay a higher percentage of their income. A regressive tax is one is which lower income folks pay a higher percentage of their income.

As currently structured the North Carolina income tax is progressive. The North Carolina sales tax is regressive. On net the whole system is appears to be mildly progressive.

Brad states

[Under the Fair Tax] what we’d ultimately end up with, I think, is a system where the bottom ~40% still spend almost as much as they earn, and will likely still spend a relatively comparable portion of their income in taxes. Meanwhile, the upper 20% will presumably spend a little less taxes, as the differential between spending is smaller than the difference between income. When there’s a strong disincentive to spend, they’ll put that money into savings. They will ultimately spend it, of course, but it just seems to me like the burden will be more ‘unfair’ than it is currently.

Implicit in Brad’s comment is that more progressive is more fair. I won’t quibble with that. I will simply say that yes the Fair Tax would be less progressive than what we have now, both at the State and National level.