(What’s Left of) Our Economy: U.S. Manufacturing Remains Stuck in Pandemic Aftermath Mode

Tags

CCP Virus, coronavirus, COVID 19, durable goods, global financial crisis, Great Recession, manufacturing, nondurable goods, recession, {What's Left of) Our Economy

‘Tis still the season – and it will continue for a while to be the season – for year-end 2022 economic data, and today we’ll examine the list of the production growth winners and losers in domestic manufacturing. The big takeaway is that U.S.-based industry’s output patterns are still being shaped by the fading but ongoing aftermath of the CCP Virus pandemic. The main evidence? The unusual  fluctuations in manufacturing ouput.

But before getting to the results from the twenty widest manufacturing categories tracked by the Federal Reserve, let’s review the even bigger picture results, which provide an indication of the dramatic ups and downs experienced recently by industry.

Manufacturing’s overall production last year dipped by 0.41 percent after adjusting for inflation (the measure most closely followed by students of the economy). So by the standard definitions (two straight quarters of contraction) the sector is in recession. Moreover, excepting the peak pandemic year of 2019-20, this latest annual output showing was U.S.-based manufacturers’ weakest since the 2.43 percent yearly drop in 2019.

At the same time, this decrease followed 2021’s 4.19 percent gain in constant dollar manufacturing production – the best such showing since the 6.48 percent registered in 2010, early during the recovery from the Great Recession triggered by the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-08.

Narrowing the focus slightly, production in the durable goods super-category climbed between 2021 and 2022 by 0.85 percent. But that relatively feeble expansion came right after the 4.79 percent price-adjusted growth the previous year – its best such performance since 2011’s 5.96 percent.

In nondurable goods,after-inflation production sank last year by 1.72 percent. But the previous year’s 3.58 percent expansion was the strongest since the 3.89 percent way back in 2004.

Big fluctuations can be seen in the statistics for the aforementioned “Big 20.” In the left-hand column below is how their constant dollar output grew or shrank last year in percentage terms, listed from best to worst. In the right-hand column are the counterpart numbers for 2021, in the same order.

1. aerospace & misc, transportation:  10.87    petroleum and coal products:   13.99

2. apparel and leather goods:              10.11   machinery:                                 11.98

3. nonmetallic mineral product:            5.69  computer & electronic product:  9.20 

4. automotive:                                       5.05 miscellaneous durable goods:      6.38

5. fabricated metal product:                  1.75  chemicals:                                   6.37

6. miscellaneous durable goods:           1.60  primary metals:                          5.87  

7. food, beverage and tobaco:                0.11  fabricated metal product:          5.84 

8. elec equip, appliances:                      -0.44 aerospace,misc transportation:  5.39

9. plastic and rubber products              -1.07 elec equip., appliances:              5.35

10.printing                                            -1.19 textiles & products:                   4.56

11. chemicals:                                       -2.01 furniture:                                   4.11

12. petroleum & coal products:            -2.33 apparel & leather goods:           4.11

13. primary metals:                               -2.83 printing:                                    3.26

14. machinery:                                      -2.89 plastics & rubber products:      1.99

15. computer & electronic product:      -2.91 paper:                                       0.90 

16. misc.nondurable goods:                 -3.56 wood product:                           0.13

17. furniture:                                        -5.19 nonmetallic mineral product:   -0.17  

18. wood product:                                -6.14 food, beverage & tobacco:       -0.35 

19. paper:                                             -8.23 automotive:                              -4.29    

20. textiles & products:                     -11.98 misc nondurable goods            -6.00

The weakness of 2022 comes through from noting that of these twenty industries, inflation-adjusted production fell in fully 13.  In 2021, such losers nubeed only five.

As for the fluctuations, in 2022, the after-inflation growth for five of the twenty were the worst since the Great Recession years of 2008 and 2009:  wood product, computer and electronic product, furniture, textiles and products, and paper. And for the latter two, that “worst since the Great Recession” description includes their results for the terrible peak pandemic year 2020. In 2021, no sectors achieved that dubious distinction.     

But in 2021, five sectors recorded their best annual price-adjusted production increases since 2010 – the first full year of recovery after the Great Recession:  primary metal, fabricated metal product, machinery, computer and electronic product, and electrical equipment and appliances.   

From the perspective of today, domestic manufacturing looks like it’s been on a roller-coaster, with 2021 being a sizable leg up followed by a small leg down last year. The big question facing U.S.-based manufacturing (assuming no more pandemics or new conflicts breaking out in Europe or Asia or or other black swan events) is how deep a dive that leg down will become if the broader economy slows meaningfully or falls into a new recession – as domestic industry already has.     

                                                       

Advertisement

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: Why the Really Tight U.S. Job Market Isn’t Propping Up Much Inflation

Tags

CCP Virus, consumer spending, consumers, coronavirus, cost of living, COVID 19, Federal Reserve, headline PCE, inflation, inflation-adjusted wages, interest rates, Jerome Powell, monetary policy, PCE, personal consumption expenditures index, prices, recession, stagflation, stimulus, wages, {What's Left of) Our Economy

It’s been widely assumed that even though very tight U.S. labor markets haven’t yet touched off the kind of wage-price spiral that can supercharge inflation, they’ve been helping consumers offset the effects of rapidly rising prices – and therefore helping to keep living costs worrisomely high.

The intertwined reasons? Because even though when adjusted for inflation, wages generally have been falling since price increases took off in early 2021, rock-bottom unemployment rates and the wage hikes that have been received have enabled healthy consumer spending – and given business unusual pricing power.

Most important, this is what the Federal Reserve believes, and it’s the federal government institution with the prime responsibility for fighting inflation. According to Chair Jerome Powell, “demand for workers far exceeds the supply of available workers, and nominal wages have been growing at a pace well above what would be consistent with 2 percent inflation over time.”

For good measure, Powell said that the labor market “holds the key to understanding inflation” especially in U.S. services industries other than housing, which make up more than half of the set of inflation data favored by the Fed, and where “wages make up the largest cost.”

How come, then, when you look at the wage data put out by the federal government, it’s so hard to find evidence that recent wage levels have significantly bolstered U.S. workers’ spending power during this current high inflation period?

Given the Fed’s power, it makes sense to use the inflation measure it values most – which as RealityChek regulars know is the Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) Price Index. As the Fed prefers, we’ll focus on the “headline” gauge, which includes the food and energy prices that are stripped out of a different (“core”) reading supposedly because they’re volatile for reasons having nothing to do with the economy’s underlying prone-ess to inflation.

And for the best measure of the wages workers are taking home, we’ll use weekly wages. What they show is that since the headline PCE rate first breached the central bank’s two percent target, in March, 2021, inflation-adjusted weekly pay (as opposed to the pre-inflation wages Powell oddly emphasizes) is actually down – by 4.60 percent. For production and non-supervisory workers (call them “blue collar” workers for convenience’s sake), real weekly wages were off by a more modest but still non-trivial 3.52 percent.

And this has propped up American consumer spending exactly how?

The Fed actually looks more closely at a wider official measure of compensation than the wage figures. It’s called the Employment Cost Index (ECI) and it takes into account salaries as well as wages, along with non-wage benefits. The ECI only comes out quarterly, and the next one, for the fourth quarter,of last year, won’t be out till January 31. But from the second quarter of 2021 (roughly when headline annual PCE inflation rose higher than that two percent Fed target) through the end of the third quarter of 2022, the ECI for private sector workers) also dropped in after-inflation terms – by 2.39 percent.

But if American workers’ pay isn’t doing much to power their still-strong consumption, what is? Obviously, the answer is mainly the excess savings piled up thanks to pandemic stimulus programs and government measures aimed at…compensating them for high inflation.

When it comes to fighting inflation, there’s good news stemming from the status of these enormous amounts of cash injected into American bank accounts: They’re being run down significantly or are just about gone for everyone except the wealthy. That no doubt explains much of the recent evidence of the cooling of the white hot levels of consumer demand that filled so many businesses with confidence that they could jack up prices dramatically are cooling, and why headline PCE is showing some signs of ebbing.

The bad news remains what it always has – that meaningfully reduced consumer spending, combined with the Fed’s continued stated determination to keep increasing the price of the borrowing that spurs so much spending, could trigger more unemployment, even worse wage trends, and a possibly painful recession.

Yet as I wrote in that above-linked RealityChek post, the $64,000 questions that will determine inflation’s fate remains unanswered: Will recession fears lead the Fed to chicken out, and at least pause its inflation-fighting interest rate increases? And will Congress and the Executive Branch decide to ride to the rescue as well, with new politically popular stimulus programs – which are likely to stimulate inflation, too?  My answer remains a pretty confident “Yes,” which is why my forecast for the economy calls for a short, fairly shallow downturn followed by a significant stretch of “stagflation” – sluggish growth and above-Fed-target inflation.   

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: Why the U.S. Inflation Outlook Just Got Even Cloudier

Tags

CCP Virus, China, consumer price index, consumers, core CPI, coronavirus, cost of living, COVID 19, CPI, energy prices, Federal Reserve, food prices, inflation, Jerome Powell, prices, recession, stagflation, stimulus, supply chains, Ukraine War, Wuhan virus, {What's Left of) Our Economy

If the big U.S. stock indices didn’t react enthusiastically to yesterday’s official American inflation figures (which were insensitively released the very day I had a minor medical procedure), that’s because they were too mixed to signal that consumer prices were finally being brought under control.

Lately, good news on inflation-fighting has been seen as good news for stock investors because it indicates that the Federal Reserve may at least pause its campaign to hike interest rates in order to slow economic growth significantly– and even trigger a recession. That’s because a weaker economy means consumers will have less money to spend and that businesses therefore will find it much harder to keep raising prices, and even to maintain prices at currently lofty levels. And all else equal, companies’ profits would take a hit.

So already softening inflation could convince the central bank that its efforts to date have been good enough, and that its goal of restoring price stability can be achieved without encouraging further belt tightening – and more downward pressure on business bottom lines.

Of course, stock investors aren’t always right about economic data. But their take on yesterday’s figures for the Consumer Price Index (CPI), which cover December. seems on target.

The data definitely contained encouraging news. Principally, on a monthly basis, the overall (“headline”) CPI number showed that prices actually fell in December – by 0.08 percent. That’s not much, but this result marks the first such drop since July’s 0.02 percent, and the biggest sequential decline since the 0.92 percent plunge recorded in April, 2020, when the economy was literally cratering during the CCP Virus’ devastating first wave. Further, this latest decrease followed a very modest 0.10 percent monthly increase in November.

So maybe inflation is showing some genuine signs of faltering momentum? Maybe. But maybe not. For example, that CPI sequential slip in July was followed by three straight monthly increases that ended with a heated 0.44 percent in October.

Moreover, core CPI accelerated month-to-month in December. That’s the inflation gauge that strips out food and energy prices because they’re supposedly volatile for reasons having little or nothing to do with the economy’s underlying inflation prone-ness.

December’s sequential core CPI rise was 0.30 percent – one of the more sluggish figures of the calendar year, but a rate faster than a November number of 0.27 percent that was revised up from 0.20 percent. Therefore, these last two results could signal more inflation momentum, not less.

In addition, as always, the annual headline and core CPI numbers need to be viewed in light of the baseline effect – the extent to which statistical results reflect abnormally low or high numbers for the previous comparable period that may simply stem from a catch-up trend that’s restoring a long-term norm.

Many of the multi-decade strong year-to-year headline and core inflation rates of 2021 came after the unusually weak yearly results that stemmed from the short but devastating downturn caused by that first CCP Virus wave. Consequently, I was among those (including the Fed) believing that such price rises were “transitory,” and that they would fade away as that particular baseline effect disappeared.

But as I’ve posted (e.g., last month), that fade has been underway for months, and annual inflation remains powerful and indeed way above the Fed’s two percent target. The main explanations as I see it? The still enormous spending power enjoyed by consumers due to all the pandemic relief and economic stimulus approved in recent years, and other continued and even new major government outlays that have put more money into their pockets (as listed toward the end of this column).

(A big hiring rebound since the economy’s pandemic-induced nadir and rock-bottom recent headline unemployment rates have helped, too. But as I’ll explain in an upcoming post, the effects are getting more credit than they deserve.)

And when you look at the baselines for the new headline and core CPI annual increases, it should become clear that after having caught up from the CCP Virus-induced slump, businesses still believe they have plenty of pricing power left, which suggests at the least that inflation will stay high.

Again, here the inflation story is better for the annual headline figure than for the core figure. In December, the former fell from November’s 7.12 percent to 6.42 percent – the best such number since the 6.24 percent of October, 2021, and the sixth straight weakening. The baseline 2020-2021 headline inflation rate for December was higher than that for November (6.83 percent versus 7.10 percent), and had sped up for four consecutive months. But that November-December 2020-2021 increase was more modest than the latest November-December 2021-2022 decrease, which indicates some progress here.

At the same time, don’t forget that the 6.24 percent annual headline CPI inflation of October, 2020-2021 had a 2019-2020 baseline of just 1.18 percent. Hence my argument that businesses today remain confident about their pricing power even though they’ve made up for their pandemic year weakness in spades.

In December, annual core inflation came down from 5.96 percent to 5.69 percent. That was the most sluggish pace since December, 2020-2021’s 5.48 percent, but just the third straight weakening. But the increase in the baseline number from November to December, 2021 was from 4.59 percent to that 5.48 percent – bigger than the latest November-December decrease. In other words, this trend for core CPI is now running opposite it encouraging counterpart for headline CPI.

Finally, as far as baseline arguments go, that 5.48 percent December, 2021 annual core CPI increase followed a baseline figure the previous year of a mere 1.28 percent. Since the new annual December rate of 5.69 percent comes on top of a rate more than four times higher, that’s another sign of continued business pricing confidence.

But the inflation forecast is still dominated by the question of how much economic growth will sink, and how the Fed in particular will react. And the future looks more confusing than ever.

The evidence for considerably feebler expansion, and even an impending recession, is being widely cited. Indeed, as this Forbes poster has reported, “The Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia’s Survey of Professional Forecasters indicates the highest probability of a recession over the next 12 months in the survey’s 55-year history.”

If they’re right, inflation may keep cooling modestly for a time but still remain worrisomely warm. And the Fed may react either by keeping interest rates lofty for longer than expected – as Chair Jerome Powell has already said – or even raise them faster. 

Nonetheless, although the recession that did take place during the first and second quarters of last year convinced numerous observers that worse was yet to come, the third quarter saw a nice bounceback and the fourth quarter could be even better. So if a downturn is coming, it will mean that economic activity will need to shrink very abruptly. Hardly impossible, but hardly a sure thing.

And if some form of economic nosedive does occur, it could prompt the Fed to hold off or even reverse course to some extent, even if price increases remain non-trivial. A major worsening of the economy may also lead Congress and the Biden administration to join the fray and approve still more stimulus to cushion the blow.

Complicating matters all the while – the kind of monetary stimulus added or taken away by the central bank takes months to ripple through the economy, as the Fed keeps emphasizing.  Some of the kinds of fiscal stimulus, like the pandemic-era checks, work faster, but others, like the infrastructure bill and the huge new subsidies for domestic semiconductor manufacturing will take much longer.

Additionally, some of the big drivers of the recent inflation are even less controllable by Washington and more unpredictable than the immense U.S. economy – like the Ukraine War’s impact on the prices of energy and other commodities, including foodstuffs, and the wild recent swings of a range of Chinese government policies that keep roiling global and domestic supply chains. 

My own outlook? It’s for a pretty shallow, short recession followed by a comparably moderate recovery and all accompanied by price levels with which most Americans will keep struggling. Back in the 1970s, it was called “stagflation,” I’m old enough to remember that’s an outcome that no one should welcome, and it will mean that the country remains as far from achieving robust, non-inflationary growth as ever.  

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: Manufacturing Job Creation Downshifts Further

Tags

aerospace, aircraft, aircraft engines, aircraft parts, automotive, CCP Virus, chemicals, coronavirus, COVID 19, Employment, fabricated metal products, food products, furniture, Jobs, machinery, manufacturing, non-metallic mineral products, petroleum and coal products, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, surgical equipment, transportation equipment, vaccines, {What's Left of) Our Economy

No doubt about it now – at least for now. As yesterday’s official U.S. employment data (for December) confirm, domestic manufacturing is experiencing a pronounced job-creation slowdown.

Of course, these latest figures, as well as November’s, are still preliminary. But it would take mammoth revisions to change this narrative. U.S.-based manufacturers upped their payrolls by only 8,000 on month in December. On top of the same (downwardly revised) November employee increase, those last two data months have each seen industry’s weakest job gains since the 28,000 loss suffered in April, 2021. And the new October and November figures are downgrades, too.

Another perspective: During the first half of this year, manufacturing employment rose by an average of 39,830. So far, during the second half of the year, this monthly average is down to 23,330.

Moreover, the unimpressive recent results have placed the private sector overall ahead of manufacturing as an employment generator during the post-CCP Virus period. Since February, 2020 – the last full data month before the pandemic began hammering and roiling the economy – the former’s head counts are up 1.29 percent versus 1.17 percent for manufacturing. Last month, manufacturing held the lead by 1.17 percent to 1.16 percent. (Government payrolls at all levels are still down by 1.91 percent during this stretch.

Consequently, manufacturing’s share of total U.S. private sector jobs slipped for the second straight month – from 9.86 percent to 9.85 percent. But industry’s strong two years of hiring mean that this percentage is still higher than the immediate pre-CCP Virus level of 9.83 percent. And the December results still left the manufacturing workforce at its highest level (12.934 million) since November, 2008’s 13.034 million.

Nonetheless, the December jobs report was by no means devoid of bright spots, as the rundown that follows will show that several major industries created gobs of jobs during the month.

December’s biggest manufacturing jobs winners among the broadest sub-sectors tracked by the U.S. Labor Department were:

>transportation equipment, a big, diverse grouping boosted employment by 15,200 in December – its best such performance since August’s 20,900. Revisions were mixed, with November’s initially reported 6,100 advance downgraded to one of 4,500; October’s initially reported 4,700 increased revised way up to 13,200, and then again to 14,500; and September’s original 8,400 increase downgraded to 4,700 but then revised up to settle at 6,300.

Employment in transportation equipment is now 1.94 percent higher than in the last full pre-CCP Virus data month of February, 2020, versus the 1.08 percent calculable last month;

>non-metallic mineral products, where payrolls improved by 4,500 in December in the best monthly performance since December, 2020’s 5,200. Revisions were mixed here, too. November’s initially reported 1,800 gain is now recorded as a loss of 800; October’s results have gone from an increase of 3,200 to one of 2,900 and back to 3,000; and September’s initially reported 1,500 job loss was revised up to a dip of just 200 before settling at a decrease of 300.

The non-metallic mineral products workforce has now expanded by 0.57 percent since immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, versus the 0.01 percent calculable last month.

>machinery, a bellwether for the entire economy, since its products are so widely used in both manufacturing and non-manufacturing sectors, enjoyed job growth of 3,300 in December. Revisions were positive overall. November’s advance of 3,900 was revised up to one of 4,200 – its best monthly increase since April’s 5,800. October’s initially reported 3,000 increase was upgraded to 3,600 but then revised back down to the original 3,000. But September’s initially reported 1,700 decrease (then the sector’s worst such total since November, 2021’s 7,000 plunge) was upgraded to a decline of just 300, where it finally settled.

This performance moved machinery’s head count to within 0.28 percent of its February, 2020 level, versus the 0.55 gap percent calculable last month;

>food manufacturing, another big industry, which saw employment rise by 3,300 in December. Revisions were overall positive. November’s initially reported 3,400 increase is now judged to have been 4,200. October’s initially reported 1,000 rise was downgraded to 500, but then revised back up to 900. And although September’s initially reported 7,800 job growth was ultimately revised down to 7,600, it was still the sector’s best such performance since February’s 11,100.

The food manufacturing workforce has now expanded by 3.80 percent since just before the pandemic’s arrival in force, versus the 3.52 percent calculable last month; and`

>fabricated metal products, another sizable sector, upped employment by 2,900 in December, and revisions were mixed. November’s net new hires were revised down from 1,300 to 500. October’s results were at first downgraded from a 5,200 increase to one of 5,000, but then revised up to 6,600 (the strongest such number since April’s identical increase. But September’s initially reported advance of 6,300 has been downgraded significantly, to 5,500 and then finally to 2,300.

Job levels in fabricated metal products is now off by 0.93 percent since February, 2020, versus a 1.18 percent shortfall calculable last month.

The biggest December jobs losers among the broadest manufacturing categories were:

>chemicals, a big category whose 5,700 employment contraction in December was its first drop since August, 2021 and by far the worst since the 20,000 nosedive of April, 2020, when the devastating effects of the CCP Virus’ first wave were peaking. Revisions, moreover, were negative on net. November’s initially reported 4,700 head count climb (then chemicals’ best result since May’s 5,100 improvement) to 3,600. After having been upgraded from 1,600 to 2,200, October’s rise was revised down to 1,700. But September’s initially reported 3,400 increase was downgraded to one of 2,700 before being upgraded again to its final level of 3,200.

The chemicals workforce is now 6.47 percent greater than in immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020 – down from the 7.32 percent increase calculable last month;

>petroleum and coal products, a sector whose payrolls weakened by 3,300 in December – its worst such performance since the 3,500 jobs lost in winter weather-affected January, 2021. Revisions were mixed, though. November’s initially reported 900 jobs added now stands at 1,100 (the best such increase since February’s 2,000). October’s results bounced up from an initially reported employment dip of 100 to a gain of 200 and back to a 100 loss. And September’s initially reported head count advance of 300 has stayed upgaded to 400 for three months.

But the December fall-off dragged petroleum and coal products employment down to 8.31 percent below its level just before the pandemic’s arrival in force, versus the 5.31 percent gap calculable last month;

>furniture and related products, whose 2,900 employment decrease was its worst since the 73,900 catastrophe suffered in April, 2020 – during the height of the pandemic’s first wave. Revisions, moreover, were significantly negative – no surprise given the recent woes of the nation’s housing sector. November’s initially reported slump of 1,500 is now estimated at 1,900. October’s results have deteriorated from a slip of 200 to one of 400. And September’s initially reported 300 decrease now stands at one of 600.

These employment setbacks have pushed the furniture industry’s workforce down to 2.31 percent below its February, 2020 levels, versus the 1.33 percent calculable last month; and

>miscellaneous nondurable goods, which also reduced its payrolls by 2,900 in December, and whose revisions were negative on net. November’s initially reported jobs gain of 1,200 is now pegged as a retreat of 3,300 – these companies’ worst such performance since they cut 9,400 positions in December, 2020. After October’s gain of 2,100 was upgraded to one of 3,300, it was lowered to 2,700 – which at least was still the best such performance since June’s 5,400. But September’s results have been revised up from 1,300 net new hires to 2,000 and have settled at 2,300.

This diverse group of industries’ have now enlarged their workforce by 9,68 percent since immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, versus the 12.13 percent calculable last month.

As known by RealityChek regulars, throughout the CCP Virus period, the automotive industry’s employment gyrations have influenced manufacturing’s overall hiring, and in December, as with other sectors examined above, its robust job creation helped keep industry’s monthly total in the black.

Indeed, U.S.-based vehicle and parts makers added 7,400 workers on month, and revisions were positive. November’s initially reported increase of 1,900 was revised up to 2,300 – though this result was still these industries’ weakest since they shed 7,400 employees in May. But October’s initially reported rise of 4,800 has been upgraded twice – to 7,500 and then to 9,000. And September’s results have been revised from 8,300 to 7,400 and then bsck up to 9,000 – where they’ve remained.

All told, automotive’s jobs numbers are now 5.11 percent higher than in February, 2020, versus the 4.17 percent calculable last month.

RealityChek has also been following several other industries of specical interest during the pandemic era whose results are always a month behind those of the above categories. And on the whole, they expanded job creation modestly in November.

In the semiconductor sector, whose shortages have handicapped so many other industries, and which will now benefit from massive government subdidies aimed at reviving domestic production, head counts rose by 1,200, and revisions were mixed. October’s initially reported increase of 2,300 was downgraded to one of 2,200 – a total that was still the best since June, 2020’s 3,000, during the recovery from the first CCP Virus wave. But September’s figures remained donwardly revised from an initially reported gain of 800 to a loss of 1,000.

The semiconductor workforce is now 6.60 percent larger than in immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, versus the 6.01 percent calculable last month.

Aerospace manufacturers were especially hard hit by the CCP Virus-era travel bans and by individuals’ reluctance to fly. But with normalization returning, these companies’ revived hiring continued on balance in November.

Aircraft makers enlarged their workforce by 300 – a performance that was actually their weakest since they cut 800 positions in January. Revisions were slightly negative, however, with October’s initially reported 3,900 revised down to 3,800 – still the sector’s best such performance since June, 2021’s 4,400 jump. And September’s initially reported advance of 1,300 stayed at a downwardly revised 1,200.

As a result, aircraft employment crept to within 5.77 percent of its immediate pre-pandemic level, versus the 5.85 percent calculable last month.

In aircraft engines- and engine parts-makers, payrolls grew by 500, and revisions were positive. October’s initially reported improvement of 700 was upgraded to one of 800, and September’s 100 job loss has remained unrevised. Employment in these industries has now contracted by 7.42 percent since February, 2020, versus the 8.83 percent calculable last month.

The exceptions to this pattern of stronger November hiring were the non-engine aircraft parts- and equipment sectors. They cut payrolls by 400 in November, and revisions were slightly negative. October’s initially reported gain of 100 was revised down to no change, and Smbeepter’s contraction stayed at 700 after having been downgraded from a loss of 500. These results left employment among these companies off by 14.45 percent during the CCP Virus era, versus the 14.36 percent calculable last month.

The healthcare manufacturers that have occupied the spotlight since the pandemic began generally added jobs in November, too. But the surgical appliances and supplies makers that turn out so many of the products used to fight the CCP Virus weren’t among them.

These companies shrank their workfoce by 800 in November in their weakest performance since identical cuts in June, and revisions were negative on balance. October’s initially reported hiring flatline was revised up to an increase of 600 – their best employment month since they added 900 positions in August. But September’s results have been downgraded to a decline of 300 after having been revised up from an advance of 1,000 to one of 1,200.

These ups and downs left this sector’s workforce just 4.83 percent larger than in immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020 –much lower than the 11.64 percent growth calculable last month.

By contrast, the big pharmaceuticals and medicines category boosted employment by 2,200 in November – its best such performance since June’s 4,000. Revisions were positive, too. October’s initially reported increase of 600 (which I erroneously reported last month as a flatline) was downgraded to 500, but September’s advances have been revised up from 200 to 500 to 1,200.

During the CCP Virus era, this sector has upped employment by 12.51 percent, versus the 11.64 percent calculable last month.

Finally, the medicines subsector containing vaccines hired 700 net new workers in November, but revisions were mixed. October’s initially reported gain of 600 was upgraded to one of 900 – the best improvement since the identical addition in June. But September’s results have been revised down from a rise of 500 to one of 300 after having been initially reported as a 200 increase.

Still, employment in this vaccines-centric grouping is now 27.31 percent higher than just before the pandemic hit the United States in force, versus the 26.29 percent calculable last month.

The substantial hiring increases in major industries like automotive and fabricated metals products make it difficult to forecast a significant downturn in manufacturing job creation during the next few months. And the strong job creation in machinery is especially encouraging, since it seems to indicate that companies throughout industry and the rest of the economy are ordering its products in anticipation of continued solid demand from their customers.

At the same time, the chemicals sector also provides inputs for many other industries, and its December job cuts could presage, at a minimum, a softening of activity in manufacturing and beyond. And since it began acknowledging inflation’s seriousness, the Federal Reserve seems as determined as ever to achieve such softening in order bring prices under control.

Right now, the safest bet seems to be that manufacturing job creation stays subdued, and even loses more momentum.

Those Stubborn Facts: Beijing’s CCP Virus Cover Up Continues

Tags

CCP Virus, China, coronavirus, cover up, COVID 19, public health, Those Stubborn Facts, transparency, Wuhan virus, Zhejiang province

China’s central government official tally of new CCP Virus cases yesterday: 9,548

Zhejiang province government tally of new daily CCP Virus cases as of Tuesday: c. one million

 

(Source: “Explainer: Is China sharing enough Covid-19 information?” by Huizhong Wu and Annirudha Ghosal, Associated Press, January 6, 2023, EXPLAINER: Is China sharing enough COVID-19 information? | AP News)

 

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: What a U-Turn for the U.S. Trade Deficit!

Tags

CCP Virus, China, coronavirus, expansion, exports, Federal Reserve, GDP, goods trade, gross domestic product, imports, inflation, manufacturing, non-oil goods trade deficit, pandemic, recession, services trade, supply chains, Trade, trade deficit, {What's Left of) Our Economy

As this morning’s stunning official U.S. international trade figures (for November) made clear, the CCP Virus pandemic really wasn’t over yet near the end of last year – at least when it came to China. The steep monthly drop in the November overall trade gap stemmed largely from the Chinese dictatorship’s erratic response to a new tidal wave of virus cases. Beijing at first ordered a series of new shutdowns in numerous major cities, and then abruptly tried reversing course following widespread protests from an outraged and pandemic-and lockdown-exhausted Chinese citizenry.

The resulting turmoil and confusion depressed the Chinese economy – including the export-focused sectors that had led the country to serve as the “world’s factory.”

At the same time, the renewed disruption of China-centric global supply chains only accounted for a little less than half of the November U.S. trade balance’s sequential improvement. And at least as strikingly, the combined goods and services shortfall cratered even though by most accounts the U.S. economy’s growth accelerated late last year. More surprising still, growth appears to have sped up in November – and during the rest of the quarter – even as imports fell off the table.

As known by RealityChek regulars, it’s been rare for the deficit to tumble when the gross domestic product (GDP – the standard measure of the economy’s size) increases, and largely because American expansion typically means that both U.S. consumers and businesses are stepping up their historically robust importing. Much more common are deficit drops mainly due to the economy sagging and this importing tailing off.

As the U.S. recession during the first half of last year came to an end, America’s trade performance racked up a short winning streak during which the trade gap shrank and – even better – exports increased and imports decreased. That’s “even better” because an economy that’s importing less and exporting more is one that’s growing less because of borrowing and spending and more because of producing.  Early in the third quarter, though, the return of growth seemed to start reproducing the standard pattern during which rising imports boosted the deficit.

November’s results sharply reversed that latest trend – to put it mildy. The overall deficit sank month-to-month in November by a whopping 20.93 percent. That’s the biggest fall-off since February, 2009’s (26.85 percent), when the economy was still mired in the Great Recession triggered by the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-08. And the $61.51 billion level (down from October’s $77.85 billion) is the lowest monthly figure since the $59.11 billion in September, 2020, when the economy was recovering from the first CCP Virus wave.

Total exports were off sequentially in November, but only by two percent, from $256.996 billion to $251.864 billion. That was the third straight decline, the biggest since January’s 2.01 percent, and the lowest monthly figure since April’s $244.230 billion. But given the sluggishness of the rest of the global economy, and the unusually level of the U.S. dollar then (which undermines the price competitiveness of U.S.-origin goods and services at home and abroad), this decrease seems pretty modest.

The bigger move by far was in total imports, which plunged by 6.41 percent, from $334.843 billion to $313.374 billion. The decrease was the biggest in percentage terms since the 13.16 percent nosedive of April, 2020, when the pandemic and its economic effects were at their worst in the United States.

The China effect was certainly a huge contributor. The U.S. goods gap with the People’s Republic (country-specific services data take much longer to release) slumped by fully 26.23 percent, from $28.87 billion to $21.30 billion. This $7.57 billion difference represented 46.33 percent of the $16.34 billion monthly improvement in the total trade deficit in November. For good measure, the sequential plunge was the greatest since the 38.93 percent nosedive of February, 2020 (when China was still struggling with the first virus outbreak), and the monthly total the lowest since April, 2020’s $22.30 billion.

And goods imports from China fell sequentially in November by $7.70 billion, from $44.57 billion to $36.88 billion. That decrease of 17.27 percent was steepest since the 31.47 percent collapse in February, 2020, and the monthly total the most modest since March, 2020’s $19.64 billion.

But as a result, more than half of the spectacular monthly drop in the November combined goods and services deficit came from other trade flows, as did 64.13 percent of the month’s total import decline of $21.47 billion.

More evidence that the monthly trade shortfall’s decrease was spurred by much more than China’s troubles: The U.S..global non-oil goods trade gap, the closest proxy to U.S.-China goods trade, was off by $15.21 billion on a monthly basis in November (more than twice the amount of the $7.57 billion decline in the U.S.-China deficit). And non-oil goods imports tumbled by $19.87 billion month-to-month in November – some two and a half times the amount of the $7.70 billion drop in goods imports from China.

In other noteworthy November trade developments, the U.S. goods deficit drooped by 15.44 percent on month, from $99.40 billion to $84.05 billion. That figure is the lowest since December, 2020’s $83.20 billion and the decrease the biggest relatively speaking since the 20.79 percent in Great Recession-y February, 2009.

The long-time surplus in services, the biggest sector of the U.S. economy, and a cluster of industries hit especially hard by the pandemic and its resulting economic damage, rose 4.60 percent, from $21.55 billion to $22.54 billion.  That monthly total was the highest since February, 2021’s $23 billion.

The November slippage in goods exports of 3.03 percent, from $176.16 billion to $170.82 billion, was the largest in percentage terms since the 3.34 percent of September, 2021.

Goods imports dropped 7.51 percent, from $275.56 billion to $254.87 billion. That total was the lowest since October, 2021’s $243.85 billion and the percentage decline the greatest since the 12.79 percent in pandemic-y April, 2020.

Services exports inched up by just 0.26 percent sequentially in November, but the $81.05 billion total was the eighth straight record, and the monthly advance the tenth in a row.

The huge, chronic trade deficit in manufacturing sank from $134.73 billion in October to $115.72 billion, with that November level the best since February’s $106.49 billion – when the last economic downturn had begun. And the sequential retreat of 14.11 percent was the greatest since the 23.09 percent in Great Recession-y February, 2020.

Manufacturing exports were down 4.71 percent on month, from $110.44 billion to $105.24 billion, and manufacturing imports plummeted by 9.88 percent, from October’s $245.17 million (the second worst monthly total ever, behind March’s $256.18 billion), to $220.95 billion.

On a year-to-date basis, however, the manufacturing deficit of $1.3902 trillion has already passed last year’s annual record of $1.3298 trillion, and is running 15.49 percent ahead of the 2021 pace.

Even by CCP Virus-era standards, the November U-turn taken by the trade deficit has rendered the U.S. economic outlook awfully fuzzy. Economists seem pretty confident that the economy is headed for a recession soon, but the latest prominent forecast shows that growth heated up notably between last year’s third and fourth quarters. So if a downturn really is imminent, it’s going to come incredibly abruptly.

That should improve the trade deficit further. But what if the Federal Reserve chickens out and decides to halt or just pause its strategy of cooling inflation by slowing growth significantly because…it becomes clear that the tightening it’s already pursued has begun slowing growth? What if all the money Washington has put into consumers’ pockets continues to fuel robust spending – which tends to pull in more deficit-widening imports? But if so, how come growth has been so much better in the second half of the year even as Americans’ purchases from abroad now look like they’re tanking?

And will China finally get control over the pandemic, and return its economy to some semblance of normalcy?

The answers to those questions seem to be way above any mortal’s pay grade.  And although I’m in the “recession’s coming” camp, so far, the economy doesn’t seem to care.  As a result, I’ll be following the incoming trade and other economic data unusually closely – and with unusual humility.      

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: No, Immigration Curbs Haven’t Caused U.S. Labor Shortages

Tags

CCP Virus, Center for Immigation Studies, coronavirus, COVID 19, immigrants, Immigration, Karen Ziegler, Labor Force Participation Rate, labor shortages, LFPR, prime-age population, productivity, Steven A. Camarota, Trump administration, wages, workers, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Thanks to the non-partisan Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), one of the biggest and most harmful recent claims about the American economy has been exposed as a sham: that the current shortages of labor about which employers keep whining are due to a shortage of immigrant workers spurred by the Trump administration’s restrictive policies and worsened by the CCP Virus pandemic.

As known by RealityChek regulars, the very idea of a chronic labor shortage – as opposed to the kinds of temporary supply and demand mismatches that occur regularly in every market-based economy – is un-serious mainly because the solution typically is so simple: raise wages enough to attract new employees. And standard labor shortage claims tend to be harmful because they’re usually covers for business demands for more mass immigration – which enables them to keep wages down rather than respond by investing in labor-saving equipment and improving efficiency in ways that boost productivity and therefore benefit the entire economy, especially long term.

But leaving such broader considerations aside, CIS, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank, has demonstrated that blaming immigration restrictions for all the Help Wanted signs that do indeed seem to be appearing all over the country is simply wrong on its face. According to a December 22 CIS study by Steven A. Camarota and Karen Ziegler, the biggest culprit by far is a continuing decline in the number of U.S.-born residents of the country looking for work.

The authors use Census data to show that although the number of immigrants (legal and illegal) working in America did fall from 27.8 million in November, 2018 (the Trump-era peak) and 27.7 million the following November (just before the pandemic arrived in the United States), by last month (the latest available) data, it was back up to 29.6 million. So there the immigrant worker population has not only recovered all of its pre-pandemic losses. It’s 1.9 million greater than its pre-CCP Virus level.

More important statisically speaking, that November, 2022 immigrant worker number is above the level it would have reached had this population’s growth trend going back to 2000 simply continued uninterrupted.

Meanwhile, the number of U.S.-born U.S. residents in the workforce has continued its long-term decline despite a modest rebound from pre-pandemic lows. The standard measure is the Labor Force Participation Rate (LFPR), which shows the share of working-age Americans are either on the job or looking for one.

The LFPR for all U.S.-born residents of the country fell from 77.3 percent in November, 2000 to 74.1 percent in 2019, dropped further in pandemic-y 2020, and has only bounced back modestly as of November, 2022 to 73.5 percent. And the post-2019 fall-offs for the most closely followed groups – “prime age” men and women, defined as the 25-54- year olds – have generally been steeper. As a result, the number of U.S.-born Americans at work now is 2.1 million smaller than in November, 2019.

In fact, Camarota and Ziegler calculate that if the total U.S. LFPR today was the same as in 2000, 6.5 million more U.S.-born residents would be either working or looking for work today. That’s 3.42 times more than the number of foreign-born residents who have been added to the working population during the pandemic era.

So whatever labor shortages have been experienced lately have been home-grown – and unrelated to immigration restrictions. And if the business community and others favoring more immigration were really interested in easing them meaningfully, they’d be spending more of their time figuring out how to attract more U.S.-born residents to the workplace. That wouldn’t boost national productivity or wages. But the social benefits of ending idleness and welfare dependency in the working-age population should hardly be ignored.

Unfortunately, as Camarota and Ziegler write, the push to fill the gap with immigrants both threatens to keep the native-born on the occupational sidelines and increase their vulnerability to crime, addiction, mental health issues, and obesity, as well as to “reduce political pressure from employers and society in general to address” the domestic LFPR decline.

Im-Politic: A CCP Virus Lesson Learned and a Mystery Still Unsolved

Tags

Biden, CCP Virus, CDC, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, coronavirus, COVID 19, Donald Trump, hospitalizations, Im-Politic, mortality, National Center for Health Statistics, vaccines, Washington Post, Worldometers.info, Wuhan virus

As the third anniversary of the CCP Virus’ arrival in the United States approaches, new data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have upended a widely held belief about the U.S. government’s response, even as other recent statistics have left another conclusion firmly in place.

The upended belief: that President Biden has handled the pandemic much better than former President Trump. Recently released figures from the CDC say it ain’t so – at least when it comes to the virus’ death toll.

According to the agency’s National Center for Health Statistics, in 2020, the number of American deaths attributable to the CCP Virus was 350, 831. According to its latest report on the leading causes of mortality in the United States, Covid 19 took 416,893 lives in 2021. That’s an 18.83 percent increase.

In other words, in 2020, when Trump was President and his policies toward the pandemic were widely considered an unmitigated disaster (except for the Operation Warp Speed policy that produced vaccines in record time), the virus killed many fewer Americans than in 2021, when Joe Biden’s administration has gotten much better marks.

But maybe these results are skewed by the fact that the Trump Covid year only lasted eleven months (because the first recorded American CCP Virus death didn’t occur till February 29, 2020, and the Trump administration ended on January 20, 2021)? Nope. Even when you make the needed changes, and peg the start of the Biden administration in February, 2021, you get the same 18.83 percent gap (with monthly deaths under Trump coming in at 31,893 and under Mr. Biden at 37,899).

The big bump up in deaths under Biden are even stranger when you consider that when the pandemic hit the United States, it was a truly novel coronavirus, meaning that it was difficult to figure out what it even was, much less how rapidly it could spread (thanks in part to China’s refusal to share reliable information), let alone how to treat it. So healthcare providers (and public health agencies) literally were flying blind. Moreover, there was absolutely no vaccine. And relatively few had the chance to develop natural immunity.

It’s true that the vaccine rollout took some time to complete (partly because, again, it was a novel challenge), and that once it was widely available, many Americans refused to be jabbed. But according to this source, by July 30, half of the population was fully vaccinated, and by year-end, this level had hit 62 percent.

Biden supporters can point to the fact that. in fall, 2021, the seven-day daily average of CCP Virus-attributable deaths peaked at 2,093 (on September 22). That was 37.47 percent below the peak under Trump (a seven-day average of 3,347 on January 17, 2021). (These figures come from the Washington Post‘s Covid tracker feature.) But again, there was no vaccine available at all in fall, 2021, under Trump. And natural immunity was much more widespread during President Biden’s first year.

Of course, deaths aren’t the only metric needed to evaluate the effectiveness of CCP Virus responses. Hospitalizations are important, too. A flood of severe virus victims can strain the healthcare system to the breaking point, both making each of them harder to treat effectively, and leaving fewer personnel and resources available for dealing with other serious medical problems.

So it’s more than a little interesting to observe that, according to the Post‘s virus tracker, the peak of reported Covid-related hospital admissions under Trump came on January 6, 2021, at 139,752. During President Biden’s first year, it was 101,865 on December 31, 2021. That’s 27.11 percent fewer. But again, the Trump peak came during a vaccine-less period. Moreover, that Trump peak was the peak for that winter’s wave. That Biden peak wouldn’t arrive until January 19, 2022, when reported hospitalizations hit 161,789 – 15.77 percent higher than the worst Trump figure. And these Biden-era hospitalizations reached such levels even though this was the time when the virus’ Omicron variant became dominant in the United States – strain that was the most infectious, yet the least severe, yet.

But the conclusion that’s been left in place is that, whoever the President, the United States’ virus response has been much less effective than that of many other countries in terms of saving lives.

As of today, the Worldometers.info website reports that the CCP Virus has killed just under 6.69 million globally. The death toll in the United States: Just under 1.12 million. So the United States has suffered 16.74 percent of the world’s virus-related deaths even though it represents just 4.25 percent of the world’s population. That’s a discrepancy so big that it can’t possibly be explained to any meaningful extent by national differences in how virus-related deaths are defined.

A new U.S. Congress convenes next month, and supposedly lots of investigations will be launched – especially by the new Republican majority in the House. Let’s hope that a serious probe of the nation’s clearly bipartisan failure to cope adequately with the CCP Virus is at or near the top of the list.  

Making News: Back on National Radio Tonight on Apple and China, & a New Podcast On-Line

Tags

Apple, CBS Eye on the World with John Batchelor, CCP Virus, China, coronavirus, COVID 19, decoupling, Employment, friend-shoring, Jobs, Making News, Market Wrap with Moe Ansari, recession, subsidized private sector, supply chains, Zero Covid, Zero Covid protests

I’m pleased to announce that I’m scheduled to be back tonight to the nationally syndicated “CBS Eye on the World with John Batchelor.” Our subject – an update to Saturday’s report on Apple’s potentially game-changing decision to move production out of China at a faster pace. 

I don’t know yet when the pre-recorded segment will be broadcast but John’s show is on between 9 PM and midnight EST, the entire program is always compelling, and you can listen live at links like this. As always, moreover, I’ll post a link to the podcast as soon as one’s available.

Speaking of podcasts, the recording is now on-line of yesterday’s interview on the also-nationally syndicated “Market Wrap with Moe Ansari.” The segment focused on my post yesterday on the worsening quality of many of America’s newly created jobs, the political and economic impact of Chinese protests against the regime’s Zero Covid policy, and the latest signs of an impending U.S. recession.

To listen, click here, and scroll down a bit till you see my name on the left.  The segment begins at about the 21:30 mark.

And keep on checking in with RealityChek for news of upcoming media appearances and other developments.

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: Worsening U.S. Trade Deficits are Back for Now

Tags

Advanced Technology Products, CCP Virus, China, coronavirus, COVID 19, dollar, euro, Europe, exchange rates, exports, goods trade, imports, manufacturing, natural gas, non-oil goods, services trade, Trade, trade deficit, Wuhan virus, Zero Covid, {What's Left of) Our Economy

At least if you don’t factor in inflation, this morning’s official U.S. figures (for October) show that an encouraging recent winning streak for America’s trade flows and their impact on the economy has come to an end for now.

The winning streak consisted of overall monthly trade deficits that shrank sequentially from April through August, which means – according to how Washington and most economists calculate such things – that trade was contributing to the economy’s growth. And that five month stretch was the longest since the shortfall declined for six straight months between June and November, 2019.

Even better, this contribution translated into expansion that was healthier, fueled more by producing and less by borrowing and consuming. Better still, during the last part of this period, the deficit was falling while growth was taking place – as opposed to the more common pattern of a declining deficit limiting contraction mainly because a shriveling economy was buying fewer imports. And better still, for most of these months, the trade gap shrank both because exports climbed and imports dropped.

In October, however, the combined goods and services deficit rose for the second consecutive month, and by 5.44 percent, from an upwardly revised $74.13 billion to $78.16 billion. That total, moreover, was the highest since June’s $80.72 billion. And also for the second straight month – exports dipped and imports advanced.

That consecutive sequential export decrease was the first such stretch since the peak CCP Virus period of March thru May, 2020. The actual decline was 0.73 percent, from an upwardly revised $258.51 billion to $256.63 billion – a total that was the lowest since May’s $256.08 billion

The total import increase was also the second straight, and marked the first back-to-back improvements since January through March of this year (which capped an eight-month period of increases). These foreign purchases advanced by 0.65 percent in October, from an upwardly revised $332.64 billion to $334.79 billion.

Up for the second straight month as well as the goods trade deficit – a development that last happened from November, 2021 through January, 2022. The gap widened by 6.51 percent, from upwardly revised $93.50 billion to $99.59 billion, and this figure was the highest figure since May’s $104.33 billion.

Goods exports fell for the second straight month in October, too – a first since that peak virus period of March through May, 2020. (The streak actually began in February.) The October retreat was 2.06 percent, and brought the total from a downwardly revised $179.69 billion to $175.98 billion – its worst since April’s $176.80 billion

Goods imports grew a second straight month, too, from an upwardly revised $273.19 billion to $275.57 billion. The 0.87 percent increase resulted in the highest monthly level since June’s $282.68 billion.

Services trade, which is dwarfed by goods trade, nonetheless produced some bright spots in the October trade report. The longstanding surplus in this sector, which was so hard hit by the pandemic, improved for the first time in three months, froma downwardly revised $19.37 billion to $21.43. The 10.62 percent increase produced the best monthly total since last December’s $21.66 billion.

Most of this progress stemmed from the ninth consecutive advance and the seventh straight record in services exports. In October, they expanded from an upwardly revised $78.82 billion to $80.65 billlion.

Services imports dipped by 0.38 percent, from an upwardly revised record of $59.45 billion to $59.22 billion.

Manufacturing’s chronic and enormous trade shortfall became more enormous in October, worsening by 4.32 percent, from $129.14 billion to $134.73 billion. That total was the second highest ever, after March’s $142.22 billion.

Manufacturing exports inched down by 0.24 percent, from $110.69 billion to $110.42 billion, while imports surged by 2.07 percent, from $240.10 billion to a second-highest ever $245.17 billion (behind only March’s $256.18 billion).

At $1.2745 trillion (up 18.06 percent from the 2021 level), the year-to-date manufacturing trade deficit is already close to the annual record – last year’s $1.3298 trillion.

By contrast, dictator Xi Jinping’s over-the-top Zero Covid policies no doubt helped depress the also chronic and enormous U.S. goods trade deficit with China by 22.58 percent on month in October. The nosedive was the biggest since the 38.93 percent plummet in February, 2020, when the People’s Republic was locking itself down against the first CCP Virus wave. And the October monthly trade gap was the smallest since August, 2021’s 31.66 percent.

Interestingly, U.S. goods exports to China soared by 31.38 percent on month in October, from $11.95 billion to $15.70 billion. That amount was the highest since last November’s $15.87 billion, and the monthly increase of 31.33 percent was the fastest since October, 2021’s 51.23 percent.

Imports, however, sank by 9.49 percent, from $49.25 billion to $44.57 billion. The level was the lowest since May’s $43.86 billion and the rate of decrease the greatest since April’s 11.82 percent.

Year-to-date, the China goods trade gap has ballooned by 18.68 percent, once again faster than the rise of the U.S. non-oil goods deficit (17.53 percent), its closest global proxy.

In October, for a change, the widening of the overall U.S. trade deficit – and then some – came largely from a booming imbalance with Europe. The goods gap with the continent skyrocketed by 48.51 percent, sequentially, from $15.78 billion to $23.44 billion. That new total was the biggest since March’s $28.50 billion and the rate of increase the fastest since it shot up by 68.37 percent that same month.

U.S. goods exports to Europe actually set a new record in October ($44.27 billion, versus the old mark of $43.61 billion in June). But American global sales of natural gas, which are up 52.51 percent on a year-to-date basis due largely to the continent’s need to replace sanctioned Russian energy supplies, oddly pulled back by 9.90 percent.

At the same time, American goods imports from Europe, surely reflecting a weak euro, leaped by 16.35 percent, from $58.19 billion to $67.71 billion. That total was the second highest on record (trailing only March’s $70 billion) and the monthly increase (16.35 percent) the fastest since March’s 32.43 percent.

October trade in Advanced Technology Products (ATP) set several records, but most were the bad kind. The deficit worsened by 7.70 percent, from $24.32 billion to $26.19 billion, and hit its second straight all-time in the process.

Exports set a new record, rising 4.08 percent on month, from $34.33 billion to $35.73 billion. (The old mark of $34.91 billion dates back to March, 2018.)

Imports also reached their second straight all-time high, climbing 5.58 percent sequentially, frm $58.65 billion to $61.92 billion.

Moreover, year-to-date, the ATP trade shortfall is up 32.17 percent, and at $204.21 billion, it’s already set a new annual record.

Some relief could be in store for America’s trade flows in the coming months. The dollar has weakened in recent weeks, which will restore some price competitiveness for U.S.-origin goods and services at home and abroad. And a recession, a further growth slowdown, and/or continued high inflation could keep reducing imports as well (though that’s the kind of recipe for smaller trade deficits that no one should welcome).

At the same time, solid economic growth could continue, as it has throughout the second half of the year. Americans’ spending power could remain strong, given still huge (though dwindling) amounts of savings amassed during the pandemic. At the behest of U.S. allies, President Biden seems likely to weaken the Buy American provisions governing the green energy production incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act. And China’s export machine could revive as Beijing decides to back away from economically crippling levels of lockdowns.

At this point, however, I’m thinking that recent deficit improvement will keep “rolling over” as Wall Streeters call a steady reversal of investment gains. It’s not much more than a gut feeling. But my hunches aren’t always wrong.