(What’s Left of) Our Economy: The U.S. Labor Productivity Picture Has Gotten Historically Bad

Tags

inflation, Labor Department, labor productivity, non-farm business, productivity, total factor productivity, {What's Left of) Our Economy

I hope you didn’t blink (figuratively) during America’s latest stretch of improvement in labor productivity. Because it’s over after only two quarters, at least according to the new Labor Department report containing the preliminary results for the first quarter of this year. Indeed, this barometer of efficiency has never been worse for an extended period. 

That’s really bad news because strong productivity growth of both kinds tracked by the U.S. government (labor, which measures the output of one hour’s worth of work by a single worker; and total factor, which measures how much output is being generated a wide variety of inputs ,including labor) is the economy’s best hope for creating sustainable prosperity and for keeping inflation under control.

But after improving at an annualized rate of 1.18 percent in the third quarter of last year and 3.16 percent by the same measure in the fourth quarter, labor productivity in non-farm businesses (the Labor Department’s headline category) dropped by an annualized 2.78 percent in the first quarter of this year. And as bad as that sounds, it’s the worst such result only since the second quarter of 2022, when it sank by an annualized 3.77 percent.

The latest actual year-on-year changes are even more discouraging. Let’s let the Labor Department release speak for itself:

“From the same quarter a year ago, nonfarm business sector labor productivity decreased 0.9 percent….The 0.9-percent productivity decline is the first time the four-quarter change series has remained negative for five consecutive quarters; this series begins in the first quarter of 1948.”

And in historical context, the economy’s labor productivity performance since the beginning of the recovery from the CCP Virus’ devastating first wave, in the third quarter of 2020, is more awful still. For since the 1990s, the United States has transitioned from a country whose labor productivity had been growing respectably to one in which it’s decreasing in absolute terms.

Here are the total numbers for the economic expansions since the 1990s. (As known by RealityChek regulars, comparing similar stages in economic cycles sheds the most light on the actual trends and developments.)

1990s expansion (2Q 1991-1Q 2001): +25.02 percent

bubble expansion (4Q 2001-4Q 2007): +16.01 percent

pre-CCP Virus expansion: (3Q 2009-4Q 2019): 11.92 percent

post-CCP Virus expansion: (3Q 2020-1Q 2023): -1.99 percent

So clearly, even though the economy is still being roiled by the pandemic’s aftermath, and its effects will keep fading at least until the next pandemic, there’s plenty to worry about on the labor productivity front. The more so since there’s no evidence that many U.S. leaders or even economists are proposing plausible ways to get labor productivity out of its literally historic doldrums – or even talking about the problem.

Advertisement

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: U.S. Manufacturing Employment Keeps its Head Above Water

Tags

aircraft, aircraft engine parts, aircraft engines, aircraft parts, appliances, automotive, CCP Virus, computer and electronics products, coronavirus, COVID 19, electrical equipment, electronic components, Employment, fabricated metal products, Jobs, Labor Department, machinery, manufacturing, non-farm payrolls, non-metallic mineral products, paper, phamaceuticals, semiconductors, transportation equipment, vaccines, {What's Left of) Our Economy

America’s domestic manufacturing delivered no fewer than two upside employment surprises in April, according to today’s latest U.S. Labor Department report. Despite persistent reports of U.S.-based industry’s mounting woes (here‘s one of the most recent), the sector added 11,000 jobs on net last month – not world-beating, but its best such performance since January’s identical number.

And revisions showed that the two-month employment losing streak manufacturing had experienced as of last month’s data…wasn’t. Specifically, February’s originally reported 4,000 monthly manufacturing headcount drop has now been revised to a gain – most recently of 3,000.

At the same time, the revisions were overall slightly negative, because of the downgrade of March’s results from a drop of 1,000 to one of 8,000. If that figure holds, it will represent the sector’s first setback since the 32,000 sequential nosedive in April, 2021 that stemmed largely from the automotive sector’s problems securing semiconductor supplies.

On the plus side, however, these manufacturing revisions weren’t nearly as bad as those for the previous two months revealed in the new report on “non-farm payrolls” (the Labor Department’s definition of the American jobs universe).

In fact, although the new data left domestic manufacturing as a national job-creation laggard, this status essentially stopped deteriorating in April.

Since February, 2020 – the last full data month before the CCP Virus pandemic began hammering and distorting the entire economy – manufacturing headcounts have risen by 1.61 percent. That’s a slight improvement over the 1.55 percent calculable from last month’s NFP release.

Total employment is now up 2.17 percent during this period, versus the 2,10 percent calculable last month. And the workforce for the private sector as a whole has grown by 2.78 percent, versus the 2.71 percent calculable last month.

Consequently, as of the the April results, manufacturing represented 8.35 percent of all NFP jobs – the same share calculable from the previous employment report but higher than the 8.39 percent it hit just before the pandemic’s arrival in force state-side. And it accounted for 9.76 percent of all private sector jobs – also the same as last month’s share but lower than the 9.87 percent from February, 2020. (The difference stems from still-depressed levels of public sector employment, which is part of that NFP category.)

April’s biggest jobs winners among the broadest manufacturing sub-sectors tracked by Washington were highly concentrated in a handful of industries:

>the big, diverse transportation equipment sector, which enjoyed its third straight month of strong job creation by boosting employment on month in April by 6,700. Payrolls in these companies are now up by 3.81 percent since immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, versus the 3.33 percent calculable last month;

>fabricated metal products, another big sector, where the workforce expanded by 6,300 – its strongest such showing since February, 2022’s 6,900. Moreover, revisions were positive, including a February result initially reported as a drop of 1,100, then downgraded to one of 1,200, but now recorded as a gain of 300. This progress pulled fabicated metals payrolls from the 1.45 percent below their February, 2020 levels calculable last month to witin 0.94 percent; and

>computer and electronic products, where an increase of 3,200 workers was its best monthly performance since last October’s 3,300. Employment in these industries has now advanced by 1.95 percent during the (ongoing) CCP Virus period, versus the 1.70 percent calculable as of last month.

April’s biggest losers among these broad groupings were:

>paper manufacturing, which lost 2,700 employees in its worst such performance since the 4,600 fall-off two Aprils ago. Now down 2.62 percent versus 1.29 calculable last month.

>electrical equipment, appliance, and components, where cuts of 2,600 jobs were made for the second straight month. This loss dragged this grouping’s post-February, 2020 head count gains down to 0.98 percent from the 1.71 percent calculable last month; and

>non-metallic mineral products, where a sequential employment decline of 2,300 represented both the third monthly drop in a row and the biggest since March, 2022’s 5,000. Payrolls in this sector are now 2.19 percent above their immediate pre-pandemic level, versus the 2.81 percent improvement calculable last month.

RealityChek has tracked two industries consistently since the virus began destabilizing the U.S. economy: machinery, because its products are used so widely throughout manufacturing and non-manufacturing sectors that it’s a good barometer of industry’s health; and automotive, because its fortunes have so often and so heavily influenced determined those of manufacturing as a whole during the pandemic period.

As a result, the former’s weak April job growth of 200 wasn’t especially good news. Nor was the sharp downward revision of March’s initially reported 3,800 increase (which had been the biggest since November’s 5,800) to just 1,900. Due to these results, machinery’s employment is up just 1.24 percent since the last pre-pandemic full data month of February, 2020 versus the 1.55 percent calculable last month.

By contrast, vehicle and parts makers added 5,800 new workers in April, extended a string of hiring gains to four months, and turned in their best performance since December’s 9,500 binge. Revisions, moreover, were strongly positive, including a February upgrade from an initially reported increase of 200 to one of 1,300 to one of 3,800. These improvements brought automotive’s post-February, 2020 employment increase up to 7.18 percent from the 6.45 percent calculable last month.

RealityChek has also been monitoring several narrower sectors that have attracted special attention during the CCP Virus era, but where the data are always a month behind those of the above broader sectors, Their aemployment performances (in March) were overall moderately positive.

Although U.S.-based semiconductor companies and their foreign counterparts are slated to receive major government funding to foster domestic production, the sector is now experiencing a global glut for most customer industries. Perhaps that’s why February’s unrevised employment loss of 600 for the semiconductors and related devices category was followed by a gain of only 300 in March – and why this increase was only the first monthly advance since December.

Payrolls in this sector are now up 9.28 percent since just before the pandemic’s arrival in force, versus the 10.20 percent calculable last month.

In aircaft manufacturing, which was damaged by pandemic-era travel curbs and Boeing’s production woes, a strong employment comeback came to a halt in March. Indeed, the month’s drop of 700 was the first such retreat since the 300 jobs shed in January, 2022. Further, February’s initially reported 1,300 hiring burst has been revised down to one of 1,100.

Even so, the aircraft workforce is still just 3.29 percent smaller than in February, 2020, versus the 2.91 percent calculable last month.

Hiring by aircraft engines and engine parts-makers, however, jumped by 1,000 in March – their best such performance since they added 4,800 employees in May, 2020, as they tried to rebound from the devastating first wave of the CCP Virus pandemic. February’s initially reported gain of 900 was downgraded to one of 600, but these companies’ payrolls have now recovered to 6.33 percent below their immediate pre-pandemic total, versus the 7.10 percent shortfall calculable last month.

Non-engine aircraft parts jobs climbed by 600 in March, their fourth straight advance. A stretch that long hasn’t been achieved since these businesses boosted their workforces for six consecutive months between January and June, 2019. Due to these increases, non-engine aircraft jobs are now 14.62 percent fewer than in February, 2020, versus the 15.44 percent gap calculable last month.

As for surgical appliances- and supplies-makers, who turned out many of the products used to fight the virus, their employment remained flat in March. Consequently, their workforces remained 1.23 percent larger than just before the pandemic.

The 400-job gain by the pharmaceuticals and medicines sector pushed their CCP Vius employment growth up to 14.54 percent, versus the 14.41 percent calculable last month.

The pharmaceutical sub-sector that contains vaccines lost 300 jobs in March, but its initially reported February rise of 300 has been revised up to one of 400. Its employee count is now 19.80 percent higher than in immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, versus the 19.90 percent calculable last month.

In the middle of last month, I concluded that the latest official figures on manufacturing output showed the sector to be “spinning its wheels.” These new manufacturing employment numbers seem to be sending the same message – and as with the production data, indicate that industry’s future, like that of the rest of the economy, depending on the fate of domestic demand – and in turn on whether the Federal Reserve will chicken out from its growth-slowing inflation-fighting strategy, and whether and the extent to which politicians will succumb to their traditional temptation to keep voters’ economically happy with robust spending programs, major tax cuts, or some combination of the two.

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: Worker Pay Keeps Lagging, Not Leading, U.S. Inflation

Tags

benefits, core services, cost of living, ECI, Employment Cost Index, Federal Reserve, inflation, Jerome Powell, Labor Department, private sector, services, stimulus, wages, workers, {What's Left of) Our Economy

The Federal Reserve, the agency with the U.S. government’s main inflation-fighting responsibilities, has made clear that it’s paying special attention to worker pay to figure out whether it’s getting living costs under control or not, and that its favored measure of pay is the Labor Department’s Employment Cost Index (ECI).

Therefore, it’s genuinely important that the new ECI (for the fourth quarter of last year) came out this morning. Even more important, the results undercut the widespread beliefs (especially by Fed leaders) both that worker compensation has been a driving force behind the inflation America has experienced so far, and/or has great potential to keep it raging.

Consequently, the new numbers seem likely to influence greatly the big choice before the Fed. Will it keep trying to raise the cost of borrowing for consumers and businesses alike in the hope of slowing spending enough to cool inflation even at the risk of producing a recession? Or will it decide that it’s made enough inflation progress already, and can tolerate current levels of economic growth – which the latest data tell us are pretty good) rather than stepping on the brakes harder.

The central bank likes the ECI better than the hourly and weekly also put out by Labor for two main reasons. First, it measures salaries and non-cash benefits, too. And second, it takes into account what economists call compositional effects.

That is, the standard wage figures report hourly and weekly pay for specific sectors of the economy, but they don’t say anything about labor costs for businesses for the same jobs over time. The ECI tries to achieve this aim by stripping out the way that the makeup of employment between industries can change, and the way that the makeup of jobs within industries can change (e.g., from a majority of lower wage occupations to one of higher wage occupations).

According to the new ECI report, when you adjust for the cost of living, “private wages and salaries declined 1.2 percent for the 12 months ending December 2022” and “ Inflation-adjusted benefit costs in the private sector declined 1.5 percent over that same period.”

So for the last year, total compensation has risen more slowly, rather than faster, than inflation, That’s not the kind of fuel I’d want in my vehicle or home. (As known by RealityChek regulars, private sector trends are the ones that count because compensation levels there are set largely by market forces, rather than mainly by politicians’ decisions, as is the case for public sector workers.)

Blame-the-workers (or their bosses) types can argue that since late 2021, compensation has caught up some with inflation rates. Specifically, from December, 2020 through December, 2021, it had fallen in after-inflation terms by 2.5 percent. Between the next two Decembers, it had dropped by less than half that rate – 1.2 percent.

But it was still down – and this during a period when private business claimed it was frantic trying to fill unprecedented numbers of job openings in absolute terms.

Moreover, the new ECI release contained signs that even this modest compensation catch up could soon reverse itself. Between the first quarter of last year and the fourth, in pre-inflation terms, the total compensation increase weakened from 1.4 percent to one percent even. And for what it’s worth, both economists and CEOs still judge that the odds of a recession this year are well over 50 percent.

Fed Chair Jerome Powell has also expressed concerns about wage trends in what he calls the core service sector, because, as he put it at the end of last November:

“This is the largest of our three categories, constituting more than half of the core PCE index.[the Fed’s preferred gauge of prices]. Thus, this may be the most important category for understanding the future evolution of core inflation. Because wages make up the largest cost in delivering these services, the labor market holds the key to understanding inflation in this category.”

The ECI releases don’t contain figures for this group, but if you look at total compensation for private service sector workers, it’s tough to see how they’ve been en fuego lately, either. Between the first and fourth quarter of last year, their rate of increase dropped by the exact same rate as that for the private sector overall. And although most economic growth forecasts lately have been far too pessimistic, almost no one seems to expect the current expansion to strengthen.

And if workers haven’t been able to reap a major inflation-adjusted compensation bonanza in the conditions that have prevailed for the last few months, or during earlier strong growth bursts since the CCP Virus struck the United States in force, when will they?

I remain concerned that living costs could remain worrisomely high – though not that they’ll rocket up again – because consumers still have lots of spending power, which will keep giving businesses lots of pricing power. But that’s not because Americans’ pay has exploded. It’s because government stimulus has been so mammoth in recent years, and could well stay unnaturally high.

Further, since such government spending is politically popular – and will remain more tempting for politicians to approve as the next election cycle approaches – my foreseeable-future forecast for the U.S. economy remains stagflation.  In other words, growth will be rather stagnant, and inflation will stay way too high.  And as the new ECI release suggests, workers could be left further behind the living cost eight ball than ever.       

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: Why Today’s Best Recent U.S. Inflation Report Isn’t Nearly Good Enough

Tags

Biden, consumer price index, core inflation, CPI, energy prices, Federal Reserve, food prices, inflation, Labor Department, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Today the U.S. government delivered the best report on consumer inflation Americans have seen since this past summer. That said, that’s a pretty low bar, and the Consumer Price Index (CPI) figures released by the Labor Department (for November) still leave some big questions unanswered.

The biggest: Do the signs of improvement mainly stem from a major slowdown in the economy? Even assuming (as I do), that bringing price increases way down from current levels must be the nation’s top economic priority, (as I’ve written before, e.g. here) slashing inflation rates by tightening credit enough to kneecap consumer spending (through a combination of stagnant growth, higher borrowing costs, and mounting joblessness) takes no special expertise. And it certainly deserves no particular applause.

As I’ve also written, if that’s the case, then in principle, all else equal, inflation will rise again as soon as growth and all its benefits return to acceptable levels.

But first, the good news, which came in the data on core inflation. Those are the price advances that leave out energy and food, because they’re supposedly volatile for reasons having nothing to do with the economy’s underlying vulnerability to inflation.

Core prices climbed just 0.20 percent sequentially in November – the weakest such result since February, 2021’s 0.15 percent. Moreover, this new core CPI figure marks the first time since the stretch between last December and this past March that this monthly number has improved – which could signal that this measure of living costs is losing significant momentum.

Of course, after this past March, monthly core inflation popped right back up – until it hit 0.71 percent in June. Core inflation rebounded after February, 2021, too. So unless the economy’s current expansion really is winding down, as they also say on Wall Street, this kind of past performance doesn’t guarantee future results.

The headline CPI results weren’t as noteworthy, but the 0.10 percent sequential advance in November did break a three-month streak of accelerating consumer inflation. Even so, it was only the best result since this past July – when these consumer prices actually dipped in absolute terms by 0.12 percent. But right afterwards, the three-month losing streak began, so that’s another reason for holding the applause.

As for the annual results, they continue to be distorted by that baseline effect that should be so familiar to RealityChek regulars. In other words, for both headline and core CPI, November’s yearly increases (like all yearly increases) need to be compared with those of the previous twelve months. If the latter were unusually low, then chances are an encouraging-looking rise could simply represent a reversion to the mean trend. But if they were unusually high, then chances are they’re revealing continuing strong momentum, along with how much more progress is needed before any cost of living crisis can be considered over.

And the comparisons show that for both headine and core consumer inflation, the baseline figures were unusually high. Therefore, although the November annual headline CPI increase of 7.12 percent was better than October’s 7.76 percent, and indeed the best such 2022 result since January’s 7.52 percent, the October figure followed a rise between the previous Octobers of 5.39 percent. The November baseline figure was an even higher 6.83 percent. In fact, that was the fastest increase for the first eleven months of last year. Even more striking, the January 7.52 percent increase was coming off a headline consumer inflation rate of just 1.36 percent – the lowest figure for 2020-21.

The trends in annual core CPI are only slightly different. The November core rate of 5.96 percent was the lowest of this year and a clear improvement over October’s 6.31 percent. But the baseline figure for October was 4.95 percent – a good deal lower than the November counterpart of 4.95 percent that not so coincidentally was the highest for 2020-21. And back in January, the 2022 annual headline CPI rate was coming off a 2020-21 figure of just 1.39 percent – the second lowest for 2020-21.

But maybe the strongest evidence for greeting today’s inflation report cautiously came from President Biden. Although he’s rarely shy about talking up the economy during his administration, he made clear that “he hopes prices will return to normal by the end of next year, if not sooner. But he stressed he cannot make that prediction.”  

 

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: The New Productivity Numbers Look Awfully Inflation-y

Tags

consumers, demand, Federal Reserve, inflation, Labor Department, labor productivity, non-farm business, productivity, supply, {What's Left of) Our Economy

The new official U.S. figures on productivity growth are a good-but-mostly-bad news story.

The good news is that, at least for now, the American economy’s efficiency by this measure is no longer sinking like a stone – which was a real fear based on the absolute sequential declines recorded in the first and second quarter.

Further, even the feeblest improvement in productivity deserves applause because a more productive economy is (a) one better able to spur higher living standards on a sustainable basis; and (b) one less vulnerable to inflation (because it’s better able to close the gap between Americans’ demand for goods and services and the supply that’s available).

In addition, in the second quarter, labor productivity (which RealityChek regulars know is the narrower but timelier data tracked by Washington) sagged year-on-year by 2.06 percent. That figure for non-farm businesses (the Labor Department’s headline category) was slightly upgraded from the preliminary second quarter result, but that was still, as Labor reminded, “the largest [such] decline in the series, which begins in the first quarter of 1948.”

This morning’s data, the final (for now) numbers for the third quarter, show that  non-farm business labor productivity was off by just 1.25 percent on an annual basis. Moreover, on a sequential basis, labor productivity broke a two-quarter losing streak. After plummeting by 6.02 percent annualized in the first quarter and 4.13 percent at annual rates in the second, it grew by percent.

But the bad news is that this recent, ongoing annual decrease in non-farm business labor productivity has come on the heels of a long period of weakening U.S. performance on this front. Here are the numbers for total non-farm busnesses productivity growth presented for the last few stretches of American economic expansion (which generate the best apples-to-apples statistics):

1990s expansion (2Q 1991-1Q 2001): +23.53 percent

bubble expansion (4Q 2001-4Q 2007): +16.01 percent

pre-CCP Virus expansion: (2Q 2009-4Q 2019): 13.60 percent

And even though since the deep but brief pandemic-induced downturn ended in the second quarter of 2020, and the economy has remained massively distorted by the virus and its after effects, it’s still worth noting that since then, non-farm business productivity has sagged by 1.44 percent. This lower efficiency means, all else equal, that the economy has become less able to increase supply as fast as demand has grown, and therefore is more inflation-prone.

As also known by RealityChek regulars, the productivity statistics should be viewed at least somewhat skeptically, since especially when it comes to the service sector that dominates the U.S. economy, output per hour per worker (which yields the labor productivity numbers) is difficult to quantify. But the recent productivity deterioration has been so marked for so long that it can’t be seriously challenged. And until someone figures out how to get U.S. productivity growing vigorously again, expect too many dollars in the nation’s economy to keep chasing too few goods and services (a classic definition of inflation), and the price of these purchases to remain way too high for comfort – unless and until the Federal Reserve’s efforts to tame inflation really do succeed by crushing consumers’ buying power.      

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: How Much Longer Can U.S. Manufacturers Keep Adding Jobs?

Tags

aircraft, aircraft engines, aircraft parts, automotive, chemicals, Employment, fabricated metals products, food products, Jobs, Labor Department, machinery, manufacturing, non-metallic mineral products, pharmaceuticals, plastics and rubber products, printing, semiconductors, surgical equipment, transportation equipment, vaccines, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Maybe the next sets of official figures will show that U.S.-based manufacturing is finally succumbing to a series of formidable obstacles that have been placed in its way recently and not-so-recently: signs of a slowing U.S. economy, a Federal Reserve whose anti-inflation policies seem certain to undercut growth, major troubles in the big export markets so important to domestic industry, a super-strong dollar that harms its price-competitiveness all over the world, and continuing supply chain snags.

As of the September jobs data released on Friday, however, domestic industry has continued to hire – which is almost always a sign of optimism.

Manufacturers in the United States increased their payrolls by 22,000 on net last month, and revisions overall were positive. The August employment rise was upgraded from 22,000 to 29,000, July’s results were revised up a second time, to 37,000, and the June numbers, originally reported as a gain of 29,000, have been brought down only to 27,000 and finally (for now!) 25,000.

These advances pushed manufacturing headcounts 0.74 percent above their levels in February, 2020 – the last data month before the CCP Virus pandemic began massively weakening and distorting the entire economy. As of last month’s jobs report, the pandemic-era gain had been 0.52 percent.

Industry’s jobs comeback hasn’t been quite as strong as that staged by the overall private sector (where employment is up by 0.86 percent since February, 2020). But that’s partly because domestic manufacturing lost fewer jobs relatively speaking than the rest of the economy (still dominated by the pandemic-devastated service sector) during the CCP Virus-induced nosesdive.

In addition, with government employment at all levels still down 2.61 percent since February, 2020, manufacturing has added more jobs proportionately than the total U.S. non-farm payrolls sector (NFP – Washington’s definition of the American employment universe) – whose workforce is up by just 0.34 percent during this period.

September’s increase left manufacturing employment at the same share of private sector employment as calculable from August’s jobs report (9.85 percent), and up from its 9.83 percent share just before the pandemic struck in full force. But as a percentage of NFP, manufacturing jobs inched up from the 8.41 percent calculable last month to 8.42 percent – a nice improvement from its 8.38 percent share in February, 2020.

Domestic industry’s employment progress is also evident from historical comparisons. At 12.880 million, its workforce remains the biggest since November, 2008’s 13.034 million. Last month’s initially reported 12.852 million manufacturing workers were the highest figure only since July, 2019’s 12.832 million.

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

>transportation equipment, which added 8,400 workers on month. Revisions, moreover, were strongly positive. August’s initially reported 2,400 growth was upgraded all the way up to 10,500. July’s results have now been revised up from 2,200 to 12,600 to and now 13,600 (the best monthly figure since March’s 25,000 burst). And after having been downgraded from 7,200 to 4,300, June’s final jobs improvement stayed at an upgraded 5,700.

These increases mean that employment in this sector is now down just 0.52 percent since immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, versus the 1.52 percent gap that had remained as of last month;

>food manufacturing, whose hiring of 7,800 net new workers was its best monthly performance since February’s 11,100 rise. Revisions were generally positive, too. August’s initially reported 2,400 job loss is now pegged as a drop of just 1,000. After a downward revision from a 1,800 rise to one of 1,600, July’s increase is now pegged at 5,000. But June’s number was downgraded again – from an initially reported 4,800 increase to one of 3,500 to one of 2,400.

Consequently, employment in food manufacturing is now 3.40 percent higher than in February, 2020, versus the 2.64 percent increase calculable last month.

>fabricated metals products, which continued its hiring tear in September by boosting employment by 6,300 – its best such performance since May’s 6,600. Revisions were mized, though. August’s initially reported gain of 4,700 has been dialed back to 2,800, and after having been upgraded from a 4,200 increase to one of 4,600, July’s job creation is now pegged at 4,300. Along with June’s downwardly revised final result of a 200-job gain, these results brought the sector’s employment to within 1.36 percent of its immediate pre-CCP Virus levels, versus the 1.64 percent calculable last month; and

>chemicals, where the headcount climbed by 3,400 on month in September. Revisions, moreover, were positive, with August’s initially reported increase of 3,500 revised up to 3,900, July’s downgraded 2,900 gain revised back up to 4,100 (the best such result since May’s 5,100), and June’s increase staying at an upgraded 3,900.

This big sector has now expanded its employment since February, 2020 by 6.68 percent, versus the 6.09 percent calculable last month.

The biggest September manufacturing jobs losers among these broad categories were:

>printing and related support activities, which lost 4,000 jobs sequentially in September– its worst monthly performance since the 73,100 catastrophe of April, 2020, during the worst of the pandemic. And revisions overall were negative. August’s initially reported 1,100 payroll increase is now pegged at just 700. July’s initially reported 2,000 employment rise was downgraded a second time – to 400. June’s results, though, were upgraded a second time – from a initially reported 900 jobs decrease to an advance of 100.

But all told, this sector’s workforce has now fallen by 11.11 percent since just before the pandemic hit the U.S. economy in full force, versus the 9.78 percent calculable last month

>machinery, whose 1,700 employment reduction in September was its worst such performance since May’s 800 decline, and especially discourgaging since its products are so widely used throughout the economy. Worse, revisions were negative. August’s initially reported 2,800 jobs increase is now pegged at 2,200, July’s gains have been downgraded a second time – from 3,400 to 3,300 to 2,800. But at least June’s improvement remained at an upgraded 2,400.

Employment in this crucial industry is now off by 1.40 percent since February, 2020, versus 1.15 percent calculable last month;

>non-metallic mineral products, where the workforce sank by 1,500 in September for its worst monthly performance since May, 2021’s 5,300 drop. Revisions, however, were slightly positive. August’s initially reported hiring of 2,800 was revised up to 3,400 – the best monthly increase since last December’s identical total. July’s initially reported advance of 1,000 was revised down to one of 700 after having been upgraded to 1,100. But June’s initially reported employment dip of 400 is now juded to have been an increase of 700.

Yet employment in the non-metallic minerals sector dropped back to 1.47 percent below its February, 2020 levels, versus the 1.05 percent calculable last month; and

>plastics and rubber products, whose 1,400 September jobs decline was its worst such performance since payrolls sank by 4,400 in September, 2021. Revisions were negative, too. The initially reported August increase of 900 is now estimated to have been only 100. After being upgraded from a gain of 1,200 to one of 1,400, plastics and rubber employment is now judged to have retreated 400 in July. And June’s increase stayed at a sharply downgraded 2,400.

Whereas last month’s jobs report showed that employment in this sector had climbed by 4.23 percent during the pandemic era, that figure now stands at 3.65 percent.

Most sectors of special interest since the CCP Virus’ early 2020 arrival turned in good recent hiring numbers.

>The automotive sector, whose employment volatility has influenced many of manufacturing’s monthly employment performances during the pandemic period, boosted its payrolls by 8,300 in September, and overall revisions were exceptionally strong. August’s initially reported job loss of 1,900 is now recorded as a gain of 4,000. July’s results have been revised up from a 2,200 drop to a 3,600 rise to an advance of 8,400 (the best such results since March’s 18,400 jump). And June’s initially reported increase of 2,100 has been modestly downgraded to one of 1,700.

Jobs in vehicle- and parts-making is now 2.33 percent above its February, 2020 levels, versus the increase of 0.44 percent calculable last month.

As always, the most detailed employment data for other pandemic-related industries are one month behind those in the broader categories, but most turned in solid August performances, too.

The shortage-plagued semiconductor industry added 1,200 workers on month in August, and revisions were modestly mixed. July’s initially reported 2,300 increase (the best since June, 2020’s 3,000) was downgraded to 2,200, but June’s totals stayed at a slightly upgraded 1,900.

Semiconductor employment is now 5.15 percent higher than in February, 2020, versus the 4.36 percent calculable last month. But don’t forget: These increases have been held down to an extent by the baseline effect, since semiconductor companies kept hiring modestly on net during the worst of the pandemic.

Aircraft manufacturers hired 1,300 workers in August, and revisions were mixed. July’s initially reported employment increase of 2,400 (the best such performance since June, 2021’s 4,400) was revised up to 2,500, but June’s advance stayed at a downgraded 1,200.

As a result, aircraft manufacturing payrolls closed to within 8.11 percent of their February, 2020 totals, versus the 8.69 percent calculable last month.

Aircraft engines- and engine parts-makers hired 400 new workers in August but revisions were negative. July’s initially reported 900 increase is now estimated at 800, and June’s increase stayed at a downwardly revised 700.

Aircraft engines and engine parts-makers now employ just 8.62 percent fewer workers than in February, 2020, versus the 8.94 percent calculable last month.

The 1,100 August employment increase in non-engine aircraft parts and equipment represented its best monthly performance since January’s 1,400. But revisions here were mixed as well, with July’s initially reported 600 jobs decline now pegged at 800 (the worst such performance since last December’s decrease of 900), but June’s totals stayed at an upgraded 900.

These companies’ payrolls are now 14.10 percent lower than in immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020 versus the 14.88 percent calculable last month.

The surgical appliances and supplies category has been in the national spotlight throughout the pandemic era, since it includes personal protective equipment and other anti-virus medical goods. Its August headcount increase totaled 700 and July’s upgrade from 700 new hires to 800 produced its best employment creation month since March’s 1,100. June’s job loss of 800 stayed unrevised, though.

These companies have now boosted their post-February, 2020 workforces by 4.11 percent, versus the 4.36 percent calculable last month.

The large pharmaceuticals and medicines raised employment by 1,700 in August, but revisions were mixed. July’s initially reported job decline of 500 is now judged to be 1,000, but June’s hiring spurt of 4,000 – the industry’s best since the 1990 start of the data series – stayed intact.

These employment ups and downs left job levels in this sector now 11.71 percent higher since February, 2020 versus the 11.32 percent calculable last month.

As for the medicines subsector containing vaccines, it boosted its employees by 900 in August. July’s initially reported 200 job loss was upgraded to one of 100, but June’s improvement stayed at a slightly downgraded 900.

This subsector’s workforce is now 26.90 percent larger than just before the pandemic struck in full force, versus the 25.89 percent calculable last month.

At this point, it’s difficult to imagine domestic industry continuing to overcome the headwinds mentioned in the lead paragraph – at least for much longer. But a few years ago, even keeping in mind the mammoth stimulus poured into the economy recently. it would have been difficult imagining U.S.based manufacturing overcoming a worldwide pandemic, an equally worldwide transport and logistics crisis, a major war in Europe, and raging inflation – not to mention a serious tigthening of credit conditions, aimed at taming that inflation, following decades of super-easy money.

The bottom line seems to be a sector that – like the economy as a whole – is standing on a knife edge, but whose record of resilience lately shouldn’t be forgotten too quickly.

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: America’s Long-Time Productivity Slump Looks Like it’s Deepening

Tags

CCP Virus, coronavirus, COVID 19, inflation, Labor Department, labor productivity, productivity, total factor productivity, wages, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Since strong productivity increases are America’s best hope for improving living standards, sustainable prosperity and robust non-inflationary economic growth, it’s clearly bad news that the nation may be on the edge of a productivity growth cliff – and staring into a canyon. That’s the clear message being sent by the new official U.S. preliminary data on labor productivity for the second quarter of this year released by the Labor Department this morning.

At least as bad: The lousy labor productivity figures strengthen the case that even though U.S. wages aren’t rising nearly as fast as living cost, they still could be fueling some of the torrid inflation of the last year and a half or so.

There’s a possibility that this dreadful performance is just another hangover from the CCP Virus pandemic and related lockdowns and curbs on individuals’ voluntary activity (along with the massive covid relief measures provided by Washington), which has played havoc with the entire economy and the data used to monitor its health. But it’s crucial to remember that the nation is also suffering a long-term productivity growth slump, so any virus distortions aren’t reflected in the numbers may not be game-changing.

As known by RealityChek regulars, labor productivity is the narrower of the two measures of efficiency tracked by Labor, and measures the output of each worker per each hour on the job. The Department itself made clear how awful the second quarter results were for the non-farm business sector – the numbers that are followed most closely:

“The 2.5-percent decline in labor productivity from the same quarter a year ago [actually, it was 2.55 percent] is the largest decline in this series, which begins in the first quarter of 1948.” (Actually, the Department’s own raw data tables go back to the first quarter of 1947.) Let’s all agree that a 75-year all-time worst is really alarming.

The quarterly figures were stomach-turning, too. Labor productivity sank at an annual rate of 4.71 percent sequentially – the fifth biggest such drop ever. Further, this followed on the heels of the first quarter’s sequential 7.64 percent nosedive – the second worst since the 12.26 percent crash of the third quarter of 1947.

And here’s some thoroughly depressing context: Such back-to-back quarterly declines are rare. Before that latest stretch, they – or longer labor productivity losing streaks – had only happened eleven times over the last three quarters of a century.

Two consecutive declines in labor productivity aren’t the longest such stretch on record. That dubious honor belongs to the five-quarter period between the second quarter of 1973 and the third quarter of 1974. But the latest cumulative quarterly deterioration of 12.26 percent at annual rates is the worst of all time. True, it’s just slightly greater than the 12.24 percent cumulative drop suffered during that 1973-74 productivity depression. But don’t forget – the current streak may not be over yet!

As for that 2.51 percent annual decline in labor productivity, the context here is completely gloomy, too. As with the sequential results, it represented the second straight worsening – following the 0.58 percent drop in the first quarter. And two or more straight annual labor productivity decreases have only happened six times before this morning’s release.

Also as with the quarter-to-quarter figures, a stretch of two straight decreases isn’t the longest ever. Between 1973 and 1974, annual productivity fell four consecutive times. But the current annual slump is the deepest since that which lasted between the first and third quarters of 1982. And of course, today’s slump isn’t over yet, either.

As I’ve written previously, productivity is the measure of economic performance in which most economists are least confident (especially in service industries that make up the vast bulk of the U.S. economy). Further, labor productivity is a narrower measure of efficiency than total factor productivity, which measures output as a function of a wide range of inputs used by business (not only workers but capital, technology, materials, etc.) And today’s second quarter results will be revised next month (which recently I mistakenly reported as the date for these preliminary numbers), with the latest set of (annual) revisions coming this fall.

But most legitimate doubts about the productivity data mainly concern their precision, not the direction they show. And all-time worsts and near-worsts surely can’t be mainly attributed to measurement flaws. And as for the total factor results, for decades, they’ve been no great shakes, either, as made clear in the above linked RealityChek post. Maybe the revisions will substantially brighten the picture?

So far, though, that’s just a “maybe.” The best information available indicates that America’s long-time productivity woes are taking a big turn for the worse, and that in combination with recent wage increases could be embedding unacceptably high inflation – and stagnating living standards – into the U.S. economy’s foreseeable future.

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: So Much for the Both the Great Resignation and the Recovery?

Tags

CCP Virus, coronavirus, COVID 19, Employment, Employment to Population Ratio, EPOP, Great Resignation, job openings, Jobs, JOLTS, Labor Department, Labor Force Participation Rate, LFPR, quits, recession, retirement, unemployment, workers, Wuhan virus, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Yesterday’s official U.S. report on job turnover reenforced two important messages that have sent by lots of recent economic data: first, that the nation’s growth rate really has slowed dramatically this year; and second, that the CCP Virus- and lockdowns-led Great Resignation is ebbing significantly. And not surprisingly, these developments look related.  

The job turnover report, (whose jazzy acronym is JOLTS – Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey) takes the story up through June, and shows that the number of vacancies that U.S. private sector employers say they want to fill, preliminarily hit its lowest (9.766 million) since last September’s 9.680 million. Moreover, it’s down 9.67 percent since their peak of 10.275 million from last November. (As known by RealityChek regulars, data focusing on the private sector, whose performance is driven mainly by market forces, reveal more about the economy’s true health than data that include government workers. After all, the public sector’s performance is driven mainly by politicians’ decisions.)

Additional economic slowdown (and even recession) signs: This calendar year so far, when the official statistics on gross domestic product (GDP – the standard measure of the economy’s size and how it changes) have shown two consecutive quarterly drops (a popular definition of recession), private sector job openings are off by 5.58 percent.

Private sector job openings, though, are still a whopping 57.64 percent higher than in February, 2020 – the last full data month before the pandemic and ensuing mandatory and voluntary curbs on economic activity began distorting and roiling the economy. So labor market conditions are still far from having returned to their pre-CCP Virus norm.

In even more important relative terms, a similar though more modest pattern appears as well. The private sector job openings rate – which adds total employment figures and openings figures, and then divides them by the number of openings – hit seven percent in June. That was its lowest level since the previous June’s 6.8 percent, it’s fallen for three straight months, and it’s declined by 6.45 percent during the first two (recession-y looking) quarters of this year. And as with the absolute number of job openings, the openings rate remains much (52.17 percent) higher than just before the virus arrived in force.

The Great Resignation claims have held that the CCP Virus pandemic and resulting curbs on individuals’ economic behavior led unprecedented numbers of Americans to leave the workplace for good – regardless of whatever subsequent ups and downs the economy will wind up experiencing.

The private sector quits numbers contained in each JOLTS report provide some support for idea that this Great Resignation is fading already – but only some. That’s because so many Americans who leave their jobs voluntarily seek and get more desirable jobs. They do, however, buttress the slowdown/recession narrative pretty effectively.

In the private sector in June, job leavers totaled 3.999 million – a decrease of 3.96 percent during this possibly recession-y year, the lowest level since last October’s 3.884 million, as well as the first sub-four million number since then. They’re also down 6.26 percent from their CCP Virus-era high (last November’s 4.266 million.

And although the many more Americans still are leaving their jobs each month than just before the pandemic’s arrival in force, this increase is a not-jaw-dropping 22.86 percent – and of course it’s falling

The private sector quits rate has been drifting down, too. As of June, it was 24 percent higher than in immediate pre-pandemic-y February, 2020 (3.1 percent versust 2.5 percent). But it’s 8.82 percent lower than its peak (3.4 percent last November) and has dropped 6.06 percent so far this calendar year – suggesting that a slowing economy has reduced workers’ confidence that that better job will be there for the asking.

Also throwing cold water on permanent Great Resignation claims – though barely whispering “recession” so far – are the federal government’s two measures of the share of Americans actually working. Both the Labor Force Participation Rate (LFPR) and the Employment to Population Ratio (EPOP) helpfully provide figures for the entire economy (though their definitions are somewhat different), and for different segments of the population (including age groups). So both shed unmistakable light on the Great Resignation question with data sets for the 55-year old and over cohort. (Don’t forget, though, that neither measure separates out public and private sector workers. So the following results apply for the “civilian noninstitutional population.)  

Yet both measures reveal that the share of Americans either at or near retirement age holding jobs has shrunk during the pandemic era – by 4.22 percent for the LFPR and 4.32 percent for the EPOP. But both measures also show that the current percentages who are employed is at the high end of the range of results since 1948, and well within their post-2000 ranges.

In other words, the percentage of these older Americans in the workforce (38.6 percent as of this June according to the LFPR and 37.6 percent according to the EPOP) was steadily shrinking from 1948 (when these data sets begin) through about 2000, and then grew healthily till the CCP Virus came along (by about 25 percent for both the LPFR and EPOP). Once the worst of the pandemic, it edged back up to long-term normal levels, and may only be leveling off or inching down in the last few months because of the current slowdown or recession – not because of any underlying changes in older Americans’ views of work.

Unfortunately, though, because employment levels are one of the economy’s most conspicuously lagging indicators (due to most business’ tendency to view layoffs as a last resort in the face of worsening prospects), we’ll need to wait further to justify a more definitive recession call from the LFPR and EPOP results. Here, the most useful measures are probably those tracking the so-called prime age (for employment purposes) population – the 25 to 54-year olds.

And labor force participation for these folks is actually up by 0.49 percent so far in this seeming period of economic shrinkage. The EPOP is off, but by a modest 0.87 percent. 

Significantly, going forward, I suspect that the growth slowdown and at least quite possible recession will weaken the Great Resignation further – especially since the income supports provided by the Covid relief measures have stopped.  What I also suspect, however, is that the jobs seniors will once again keep seeking won’t enough to secure their financial futures. 

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: The Worst of All Possible Inflation Worlds for U.S. Workers?

Tags

ECI, Employment Cost Index, Federal Reserve, inflation, Jerome Powell, Labor Department, labor productivity, PCE, personal consumption expenditures index, productivity, recession, stagflation, wages, workers, {What's Left of) Our Economy

The newest report on a key official measure of worker compensation has just shown that, during today’s high inflation era, American workers could be both significantly fueling the soaring prices that are dominating the U.S. economy and getting shafted by them.

This measure – called the Employment Cost Index – is tracked by the Department of Labor, and is watched closely by the Federal Reserve (the government’s chief inflation-fighting agency) for two major reasons. First, it includes not just wages, but salaries and non-cash benefits. Second, unlike the Labor Department’s average wage figures, it takes into account what economists call compositional effects.

In other words, the those wage figures report hourly and weekly pay for specific sectors of the economy, but they don’t say anything about labor costs for businesses for the same jobs over time. The ECI tries to achieve this aim by factoring in the way that the makeup of employment between industries can change, and the way that the makeup of jobs within industries can change (e.g., from a majority of lower wage occupations to one of higher wage occupations).

In his press conference last Wednesday following the Federal Reserve’s announcement of a second straight big increase in the interest rate it controls directly, Chair Jerome Powell mentioned that the ECI report coming out on Friday would greatly influence the central banks’ decision on how much more tightening of credit conditions would be needed to slow the economy enough to cool inflation acceptably.

That’s because, as he has explained previously, the supposedly superior insights on worker pay provided by the ECI enable the Fed to figure out whether a major inflation engine has started to rev up – employee compensation rising faster than worker productivity. Industries (or entire economies) in this situation are denied the option of absorbing wage increases by achieving greater efficiencies in their operations Therefore, they face more pressure to maintain earnings and profits by passing pay increases onto their customers, their customers face more pressure to keep up with living costs by pushing for pay hikes themselves, and what economists term a classic and hard-to-break wage-price spiral takes off.

The new ECI results per se looked alarming enough from this perspective. They showed that between the second quarter of 2021 and the second quarter of 2022, total employee compensation for the private sector ose by 5.5 percent. That’s the fastest pace since this data series began in 2001. Moreover, this record represented the third straight all-time high. (RealityChek regulars know that private sector numbers are the most important gauge, since its pay and other indicators are mainly driven by market forces, unlike the statistics for government workers, where the indicators largely reflect politicians’ decisions.)

Sadly, though, according to the Fed’s favorite measure of consumer inflation (the Commerce Department’s Personal Consumption Expenditures price index), living costs increased by 6.45 percent. So workers fell further behind the eight ball.

Perhaps worst of all, however, productivity growth is in the toilet. We won’t get the initial second quarter figures until September 1, but during the first quarter, for non-farm businesses (the most closely followed measure for the private sector), it fell year-on-year by 0.6 percent – the worst such performance since the fourth quarter of 1993.

Nor was this figure a one-off for the current high inflation period. From the time consumer prices began their recent speed up (April, 2021) through the first quarter of this year, labor productivity is off by 1.36 percent, the ECI is up 3.95 percent, and PCE inflation has risen by 4.65 percent. So a strong case can be made that workers, businesses, and the economy as a whole are in the worst of all possible worlds.

Whenever productivity is the subject, it’s important to note that it’s the economic performance measure in which economists probably have the least confidence. And even if it’s accurate, don’t jump to blame workers for sloughing off. Maybe management is doing a lousy job of improving their productivity. Alternatively, maybe managers simply haven’t figured out how to do so in the midst of so many unusual challenges posed by the pandemic and its aftermath – chiefly the stop-go nature of the economy’s early aftermath, and the resulting turbulence that, along with the Ukraine war and China’s Zero Covid policy, is still roiling and stressing supply chains.

Whatever’s wrong, though, unless a course correction comes soon, it looks like the odds of the economy sinking into prolonged stagflation – roaring inflation and weak economic growth – are going up. And ultimately, that matters more to the American future than whether some form of recession is already here, or around the corner.

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: Another Dreadful U.S. Consumer Inflation Report

Tags

Commerce Department, consumer price index, consumers, core inflation, cost of living, CPI, demand, energy, Federal Reserve, food, inflation, Labor Department, monetary policy, PCE, personal consumption expenditures index, prices, supply chains, Ukraine War, Zero Covid, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Optimism about U.S. inflation took another blow yesterday morning – though it shouldn’t have been unexpected – with the release of the latest data on the Federal Reserve’s favorite measure of price changes. I said “shouldn’t have been unexpected” because, as Fed Chair Jerome Powell and others have noted, this gauge and the higher profile Consumer Price Index (CPI) put out by the Labor Department normally track each other pretty closely over the long run, and those CPI results were deeply discouraging.

Nonetheless, latest results from the Price Indexes for Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) monitored by the Commerce Department matter because they strongly confirmed the latest CPI figures – which were pretty awful – starting with the month-to-month changes for the entire economy.

In June, headline PCE inflation shot up sequentially by a full one percent – much faster than May’s 0.6 percent and indeed the fastest rate not only throughout this latest high-inflation period, but the fastest since it increased by one percent in September, 2005.

But another observation should make even clearer how unusual that monthly headline increase was. The Commerce Department has been keeping these data since February, 1959. That’s 749 months worth of results through last month. How many times has monthly headline PCE inflation been one percent or higher? Twelve. And the all-time record is just 1.2 percent, hit in March, 1980, and February and March, 1974.

The annual figures were no better, and RealityChek regulars know that they’re more reliable than the monthlies because they measure changes over a longer time period, and therefore smooth out short-term fluctations.

June’s 6.8 percent rise was the strongest of the current high inflation era, and a significant pickup from May’s 6.3 percent. And it looks even worse when the fading baseline effect is taken into account. The June yearly jump in headline PCE came off a June, 2020-21 increase of four percent. So that year’s June PCE rate was already twice the Federal Reserve’s two percent annual inflation target.

By comparison, headline PCE this March was only a little lower than the June result – 6.6 percent. But the baseline figure for the previous March was only 2.5 percent. That rate was still higher than the Fed target, but not by much. So arguably unlike the price advances of June, this March’s inflation reflected some catching up from price increases that were still somewhat subdued due to the economy’s stop-go recovery from earlier during the pandemic.

Core PCE was lower by both measures, because it strips out the food and particularly energy prices that have spearheaded much headline inflation, and that are excluded supposedly because they’re volatile for reasons having little to do with the economy’s fundamental vulnerability to inflation. But here the monthly figures revealed new momentum, with the June seqential increase of 0.6 percent twice that of May’s 0.3 percent, and the highest such number since May and June of 2021.

Before then, however, core inflation hadn’t seen a monthly handle in the 0.6 percent neighborhood since September and October of 2001, which registered gains of 0.6 and 0.7percent, respectively.

On an annual basis, June’s core PCE increase of 4.8 percent was slightly higher than May’s 4.7 percent, but well below the recent peak of 5.3 percent in February. But the baseline effect should dispel any notions of progess being made. For June-to-June inflation for the previous year was 3.5 percent – meaningfully above the Fed’s two percent target. Core annual PCE inflation for the previous Februarys was just 1.5 percent – meaningfully below the Fed target.

As with most measures of U.S. economic perfomance, an unprecedented number of wild cards that can affect both PCE and CPI inflation has rendered most crystal balls (including mine) pretty unreliable. To cite just a few examples: Will China’s Zero Covid policy keep upending global supply chains and thus the prices of Chinese exports? Will the ongoing Ukraine War have similar impacts on many raw materials, especially energy? Will the Federal Reserve’s tightening of U.S. credit conditions per se bring inflation down significantly in the foreseeable future by dramatically slowing the nation’s growth? Will high and still soaring prices, coupled with vanishing savings rates, achieve the same objective if the Fed’s inflation-fighting zeal wanes? Or will the still huge amounts of money in most consumers’ bank accounts along with continuing robust job creation keep the demand for goods and services elevated for the time being whatever the Fed does?

Here’s what seems pretty certain to me: As long as that consumer demand remains strong, and as long as producer prices keep jumping, businesses will pass these rising costs on to their customers and keep consumer inflation worrisomely high. That seemed to be precisely the case in the last two months, with a torrid May read on producer prices being followed by the equally torrid June consumer inflation reports. So unless this wholesale inflation cooled a great deal this month, I’d expect at least another month of red hot consumer inflation. That producer price report is due out August 11.