(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.       

Advertisement

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: A Deeper U.S. Contraction and a Bigger Trade Bite

Tags

{What's Left of) Our Economy, trade deficit, GDP, exports, gross domestic product, imports, goods, services, inflation-adjusted growth, real growth, real trade deficit, real GDP

This morning Americans and the rest of the world found out that the U.S. government now believes that the American economy shrank a little more during the first quarter of this year than first estimated. And the details show that the nation’s towering and still-soaring trade deficit was a major culprit.

According to today’s release from the Commerce Department, the combined goods and services trade gap for the quarter totaled $1.5435 trillion at annual rates adjusted for inflation. That new record total – the seventh straight such all-time high – was 0.12 percent greater than the $1.5417 trillion dollar gap reported by Commerce in its first look at the changing size of the economy (termed the gross domestic product, or GDP).

And accompanying this finding was the news that the first quarter’s inflation-adjusted contraction was 1.52 percent at annual rates – not the 1.42 percent previously reported. So last month’s thoroughly depressing picture of an economy shrinking as its trade deficit surges (which last occurred in the first quarter of 2020) became slightly grimmer.

The swelling trade deficit reduced first quarter real GDP by 3.23 percentage points – more than the 3.20 percentage point subtraction estimated in the initial first quarter GDP report. For good measure, this growth loss was the worst in absolute terms since the 3.25 percentage point hit suffered during the third quarter of 2020 – when the economy roared back from the short but deep CCPVirus-induced downturn earlier that spring.

Yet that lost growth figure was dwarfed by the actual expansion that occurred (an a blazing 30.19 percent annualized in real terms). The trade deficit’s impact on the first quarter of this year helped turn slow growth into shrinkage. Specifically, had the already astronomical trade shortfall simply not gotten worse between the fourth quarter of last year and this year’s first quarter, the economy would have expanded by 1.71 percent

Worse, the growth toll exacted by the ballooning trade deficit in relative terms reached a new record. The 3.23 percentage point drag on an economy that shriveled by a total of 1.52 percent was slightly bigger than the 3.22 percent drag on the 1.53 percent total contraction recorded in the second quarter of 1982 – the previous all-time high.

Moreover, the quarter-to-quarter swing in the trade gap’s growth impact – from a 0.23 percentage point hit during the fourth quarter – was the biggest since mid-2020, when the 1.53 percentage point boost to growth in the second quarter became a 3.25 percentage point subtraction in the third quarter.

Because the real trade deficit during the first quarter was rising faster than first thought even as the overall economy was shrinking faster, the gap’s share of real GDP set a new record, too – 7.82 percent, compared with the 7.81 percent calculable from last month’s initial first quarter numbers. And the increase in this figure over its fourth quarter counterpart was a full percentage point.

In line with that latter result, the latest first quarter trade deficit figure now exceeds the fourth quarter level by 14.32 percent, not the 14.19 percent calculable from last month’s GDP release. That sequential increase remained the biggest since the 31.81 percent jump between the second and third quarters of 2020 – again, when the economy was bouncing back rapidly from that pandemic-induced cratering, not getting smaller.

And all told, the after-inflation trade deficit is now up 82.10 percent since the fourth quarter of 2019, the last quarter before the CCP Virus’ arrival began seriously affecting and especially distorting the economy.

The first quarter U.S. constant dollar goods trade deficit actually came in fractionally smaller in this morning’s government release than reported last month – $1.6680 trillion at annual rates versus $1.6685 trillion. Still a seventh straight record, this total now tops that of the fourth quarter by 13.61 percent, not the 13.65 percent calculable last month. Nonetheless, that increase remained the biggest since the 20.40 percent surge between that second and third quarter of 2020. And since that last pre-pandemic fourth quarter of 2019, the goods trade deficit has swelled by 55.58 percent.

By contrast, the new estimate shows that the chronic U.S. services trade surplus reached only $119 billion – 1.57 percent lower than the initially reported $120.9 billion. This new figure produced the first sequential decline in this surplus since the second quarter of 2021. Since the fourth quarter of 2019, this surplus has been cut nearly in half – by 47.51 percent, to be precise – as the virus has hit global activity in this sector unusually hard.

As for total inflation-adjusted exports, they’re now judged to be 0.14 percent higher in the first quarter than initially reported – $2.3577 trillion annualized versus $2.3545 trillion. But they’re still 1.38 percent lower than in the fourth quarter, and the sequential decrease remained the fourth in the nine quarters since that first pandemic-affected quarter – the first quarter of 2020. Moreover, in real terms, combined goods and services exports are still off by 7.66 percent since pre-pandemic-y fourth quarter, 2019.

Total inflation-adjusted first quarter imports are also now estimated as higher than initially reported (by 0.13 percent). Therefore, the $3.9012 trillion annual level still represents the fifth consecutive quarterly record. Meanwhile, the new 4.29 percent quarterly increase was the biggest since the 7.04 percent recorded between the third and fourth quarters of 2020 – when the economy was growing. As a result, total real imports are now 14.71 percent greater than in the fourth quarter of 2019.

After-inflation goods exports of $1.7519 trillion were slightly (0.12 percent) higher in the first quarter than previously reported, but still down 2.29 percent from the fourth quarter level. That decrease, moreover, was still the biggest since the 23.08 percent nosedive between the first and second quarters of 2020 – when the CCP Virus-induced downturn hit. And they, too, have fallen on a quarterly basis for four of the nine quarters that have passed since the pandemic first arrived in force in early 2020. In all, goods exports are now 1.72 percent lower than their immediate pre-pandemic levels.

Price-adjusted goods imports were also slightly (0.09 percent) higher in the first quarter than initially reported. The $3.4199 trillion annualized total was still the second straight all-time high and the second straight increase, and the 4.87 percent quarterly rate of increase still the fastest since the 6.80 percent rise in the fourth quarter of 2020. These overseas purchases have now increased by 19.83 percent since that final pre-pandemic fourth quarter of 2019.

Real services exports, however, were 0.05 percent weaker in the first quarter than initially judged – $633.3 billion at annual rates as opposed to $633.6 billion. Even so, that total climbed for the second quarter in a row (by 0.89 percent), and represented the best level since the $695.3 billion annualized recorded for the first quarter of 2020. All the same, and again, reflecting the outsized CCP Virus blows taken by the sector, constant dollar services exports have fallen by 18.15 percent since the last pre-pandemc quarter.

Yet price-adjusted services imports were revised up by a significant 0.31 percent during the first quarter, and the $514.3 bi1lion annualized level was 1.32 percent higher than the fourth quarter total and represented the strongest real services import total since the $547 billion annualized figure for the fourth quarter of 2019.

These new overall GDP numbers confirm that the U.S. economy’s growth has been slowing markedly (as does this usually pretty on-target forecast for the second quarter). But with one possible exception, all the forces and developments cited in my trade and GDP post last month pointing to continued increases in the inflation-adjusted U.S. trade deficit remain in place, ranging from the strong dollar, the Federal Reserve’s stated determination to reduce growth in order to fight inflation, and continued economic troubles in major U.S. trade partners like the European Union and China – which, along with the robust greenback, figures to curb American exports.

The possible exception – recent stock market declines start to crimp American consumer spending in a reversal of the wealth effect. But even if such caution appears, purchases of imports would need to fall much faster than buys of domestically produced goods and services in order even to retard the trade deficit’s surge, and this kind of favorable outcome for the economy is hardly a guarantee.

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: A (Lasting?) Turn for the Better in U.S. Trade Flows

Tags

CCP Virus, coronavirus, COVID 19, exports, GDP, goods trade, gross domestic product, imports, inflation, inflation-adjusted growth, real GDP, real trade deficit, services, services trade, Trade, trade deficit, Wuhan virus, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Here’s how bad America’s recent trade performance has been – at least in inflation-adjusted terms: Yesterday’s first official read on real economic growth in the fourth quarter of 2021 showed that the sequential change in the price-adjusted trade deficit neither added to nor subtracted from the 6.71 percent increase in the price-adjusted gross domestic product (GDP) at annual rates. And that was the best such trade-related result since the second quarter of 2020 – when the peak of the first wave of the CCP Virus stateside tanked the trade deficit because the entire economy crashed.

For the full year last year, the story was much different and much worse – indeed historically so. More on that later. For now, let’s just observe that the latest, better quarter-to-quarter numbers are still noteworthy. Nonethless, although because the CCP Virus isn’t yet in the rearview mirror, and America’s public health authorities are showing little recognition that the decreasing severity of successive strains safely permits faster progress toward normalizing economic and other aspects of life again, it’s still too early to declare that a normalization of trade flows is truly in sight.

The combined goods and services trade deficit rose by 1.63 percent between 2021’s third and fourth quarters, from $1.3166 trillion to $1.3380 trillion. The latter is the sixth straight quarterly record, but the 1.63 percent rate of increase was the second slowest of the pandemic period – behind only the 1.50 percent widening between the first and second quarters of last year.

Moreover, that quarterly increase was too small to either speed up the economy’s growth or slow it down. And this zero effect was also the best in this series since that second quarter of 2020 – when the recession-induced drop in the gap added 1.53 percentage points to growth. (That said, this boost was awfully modest given that the economy shrank by a nauseating 31.2 percent at annual rates that was by far the worst such performance since the Commerce Department began putting out quarterly GDP statistics in 1947.)

Much better – the sequential improvement in the real trade gap’s impact on growth (from the 1.26 percentage point subtraction during the third quarter) was the biggest since the 1.58 percentage point turnaround between the first and second quarters of 2020.

And perhaps best of all in this vein – between the third and fourth quarters, the economy’s constant dollar growth sped up strongly (from the 2.28 annualized rate in the third quarter) with hardly any deterioration in the trade shortfall. Nonetheless, the real trade deficit as a share of real GDP dipped only fractionally from the record 6.76 percent reached in the third quarter.

Total price-adjusted exports advanced sequentially in the fourth quarter from $2.2730 trillion annualized to $2.4009 trillion. This 5.63 percent surge was the greatest since the 11.49 percent jump in the third quarter of 2020, when the economy was bouncing back strongly from the deep slump triggered by the virus’ first wave. But the absolute level is still significantly below the record of $2.5829 trillion in the second quarter of 2018.

The much greater amount of total imports increased as well, but by a slower 4.16 percent. The $3.7389 trillion annualized total, however, was the fourth straight quarterly record,

The fourth quarter goods trade deficit of $1.4601 trillion annualized was a more discouraging result. It was not only the sixth straight quarterly record, but the 2.72 percent increase was the fastest since the first quarter’s 6.36 percent.

Goods exports improved by 5.61 percent sequentially in the fourth quarter, from $1.7013 trillion to $1.7967 trillion annualized. The increase was the best since the 5.87 percent achieved in the fourth quarter of 2020, but the total was still somewhat below the all-time high of $1.8203 trillion in the second quarter of 2018.

Goods imports of $3.2586 trillion annualized, however, were a record, Their 4.29 percent sequential growth rate was strong, too, and also the highest since the fourth quarter of 2020 (6.80 percent).

In contrast to goods, the after-inflation service trade surplus registered its first expansion since the pandemic’s arrival in the United States in the second quarter of 2020,with the fourth quarter’s $124.4 billion annualized total coming in 16.04 percent better than the third quarter’s $107.2 billion.

Even so, the fourth quarter figure makes clear how hard services trade has still been hit by the pandemic when adjusted for price changes. That third quarter figure stemmed from an utterly unprcedented 29.66 percent sequential collapse of the surplus. Indeed, during the first quarter of 2020, the final data quarter before the pandemic began roiling the U.S. economy, the annualized services surplus stood at $200.9 billion.

Real services exports led the way, growing by 5.69 percent on quarter – the best such performance since the 5.83 percent of the fourth quarter of 2006.  Yet the $633.9 billion total at annual rates was still 18.82 percent below the peak of $780.9 billion, reached in the first quarter of 2018.

Constant dollar services imports rose as well, but only by 3.51 percent.  And at $509.5 billion annualized, this latest quarterly total remained 7.75 percent less than these purchases all-time high – the $552.3 billion in the third quarter of 2019. 

Turning to the annual results, the 2021 combined goods and services trade gap of $1.2813 trillion smashed the old record of $942.7 billion set in 2020 by 36.62 percent. The all-time high was the third straight, and the rate of increase by far the fastest ever (at least going back to 2002, when the Commerce Department began presenting the combined deficit figure), topping 2015’s 25.45 percent runner-up.

Further, the bite out of the change in real GDP taken by this deficit increase swelled in both relative and absolute terms. In 2020, the shortfall’s increase worsened that year’s 3.40 percent slump in price-adjusted GDP by 0.29 percent points. In other words, the trade gap’s rise accounted for 8.53 percent of the decline.

Last year, the rise of the trade deficit cut 1.39 percentage points out of constant dollar growth of 5.67 percent. In other words, it reduced that year’s growth by 19.69 percent. In these relative terms, that’s the biggest subtraction from growth since the deficit’s increase in 2015 sliced 0.78 percentage points out of that year’s 2.71 advance in real GDP , thus reducing the increase by 22.35 percent.

But it’s still a far cry from 1958, where the price-adjusted trade deficit’s increase reduced growth by 117.57 percent – literally overwhelming all the other parts of the economy that were expanding (though on net modestly). Specifically, without the 0.87 percentage point trade deficit hit, real GDP would have eaked out a 0.13 percent annual expansion rather than a 0.74 percent dip.

In absolute terms, that 1.39 percentage point drag on real growth in 2021 was the biggest annual total since 1984’s 1.54 percentage points out of 7.24 percent growth.

At 6.60 percent of real GDP, the full-year 2021 inflation-adjusted combined trade deficit easily topped the previous mark of 6.14 percent set in 2005, and the 28.65 percent rise in this figure was the fastest rate going back to 2002.

Inflation-adjusted total exports did climb by 4.64 percent in 2021 – from $2.2076 trillion to $2.3101 trillion. The rate of increase was the best since 2011’s 7.17 percent. But the total is still 9.61 percent below the record of 2,5556 trillion set in 2018.

Constant dollar combined goods and services imports did reach an all-time high in 2021, with the $3.5914 trillion total breaking the previous record of $3.5492 (set in 2019) trillion by a healthy 3.82 percent. And the 14 percent yearly rise the fastest since the 16.21 percent pop in 1988.

The real goods trade deficit of $1.4198 trillion in 2021 was 24.17 percent higher than 2020;s $1.1434 trillion figure. Both the latest total and the yearly increase were records (again, going back to 2002).

Inflation-adjusted goods exports rose by 7.64 percent on year in 2021, from $1.6068 trillion to $1.7296 trillion. The rate of increase was the fastest since the 15.14 percent recorded in 2010 – early in the recovery from the Great Recession that followed the global financial crisis. But the absolute level is 3.36 percent below 2018’s all-time high of $1.7897 trillion.

After-inflation goods imports did set a record in 2021 – $3.1494 trillion – while the 14.51 percent annual increase was the fastest since the 15.38 percent, also reached in 2010.

The ongoing pain in services trade was visible in the 1.30 percent annual decline in services exports in 2021, from $617.2 billion to $609.2 billion. The total was the lowest since the $572.7 billion during the Great Recession year of 2009, and the drop was the first since a fractional loss in 2016 – the only other year on record seeing a decrease. These transactions, moreover, are off 20.90 percent from the 2018 peak of $770.2 billion.

Last year actually saw a record annual 11.56 percent rise in services imports – from $423.8 billion to $472.8 billion. But the annual total was the second lowest since 2013, and 13.63 percent below the all-time high of $547.4 billion, set in the final pre-pandemic year 2019.

As mentioned near the beginning, between the persistence of the CCP Virus and of federal mitigation approaches that seem increasingly outdated, it’s tough to read too much into the relatively good trade numbers of the fourth quarter. Add to that great uncertainty about how much monetary policy tightening the Federal Reserve is really willing to impose over any serious length of time, and about how long global supply chains will remain snagged for so many reasons (e.g., the difficulty of adding new worldwide semiconductor production capacity quickly, China’s stubborn, lockdowns-obsessed Zero Covid policy) and the future of the inflation-adjusted trade deficit and its effects on growth seem as murky as ever.

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: Little to Like Trade-Wise in the New U.S. GDP Report

Tags

CCP Virus, coronavirus, COVID 19, digital services tax, exports, GDP, goods trade, gross domestic product, imports, inflation-adjusted growth, real GDP, services, services trade, trade deficit, Wuhan virus, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Today’s first official report on U.S. economic growth in the third quarter of this year was not only much worse than the final results revealed for the second quarter. It was also a near-mirror image of its predecessor estimate of the increase in the gross domestic product (GDP) in terms of its trade figures – and not in a good way.

Chiefly, during the second quarter, the economy grew at a strong clip (6.56 percent after inflation at an annual rate) while the real trade deficit practically stabilized versus the first quarter figure. In fact, this progress prompted me to venture that a pretty encouraging post-CCP Virus trade normal could be settling in for Americans.

But third quarter inflation-adjusted annualized growth was just two percent – the worst such performance since the pandemic-induced nosedive of last year’s second quarter – and the trade deficit increased sequentially by 5.40 percent. The $1.3117 trillion annualized total, moreover, was the fifth straight record quarterly high. And just for good measure this level also represented an all-time high for the real deficit as a share of price-adjusted GDP (6.74 percent).

The quarterly trade gap growth rate was still the second slowest of the current (still CCP Virus-distorted) economic recovery. But it’s much faster than the 1.50 percent increase between the second and third quarter. Worse, the prospect of stronger future GDP growth (assuming the pandemic resumes easing), and an untangling of the supply chain bottlenecks that have dramatically impacted both import and export flows, could well create a renewed trade shortfall surge in the coming quarters.

That possibility should concern more than just trade watchers, because that sequential increase in the deficit reduced third quarter growth for the total economy by 1.14 percentage points. So if the trade gap hadn’t increased at all, GDP would have expanded by 3.14 percent in real annualized terms. That’s still not spectacular, but it would have been an improvement of fully 57 percent. And it’s the biggest relative trade hit to growth since the third quarter of 2018, when the deficit’s increase sliced 1.66 percent points off of the 1.93 percent total growth figure – cutting it by 86.01 percent.

The only small bright spot in the new GDP report came in goods trade – which accounts for the vast bulk of U.S. trade flows. Its after-inflation annualized third quarter trade deficit of $1.4234 trillion was just 1.53 percent higher than the second quarter figure. And although it represented an acceleration ove the second quarter’s sequential increase of just 0.44 percent, the speed-up was far from alarming.

The big problem with the third quarter real trade figures came on the services side. The sector has suffered the most virus-related damage of any in the economy, but the plunge in its long-time surplus of 25 percent, to $114.3 billion, was stunning nonethless. The level was the lowest level since the $110.9 billion recorded in the second quarter of 2007, and the sequential drop by far the biggest ever on a relative basis– surpassing those during the Great Recession following the financial crisis of 2007-08, and even during the early CCP Virus and lockdowns period.

Services exports actually rose a bit sequentially – by 0.94 percent, to $614.7 billion. The total was the best of the pandemic era, but still 20.55 percent below pre-pandemic (fourth quarter, 2019) levels. Services imports, however, jumped by 9.59 percent. The new $500.4 billion total was also the highest of the CCP Virus period and 8.52 percent below that of the fourth quarter of 2019. In addition, the quarterly increase was the biggest of all time. (Detailed service trade figures only go back to 2002.)

If it lasts, the heavy concentration of the economy’s trade problems in services industries could provide the real deficit’s growth with some extra oomph.  The problem isn’t just that the virus’ resilience could keep the sector under continuing and unusual pressure, which would mean that it won’t be nearly as much of a trade winner as before 

It’s also that there seems to be only a slim chance that trade policy can make much of a difference – since so many countries view service sectors like telecommunications and finance (and now digital services) as crucial to their own futures, and want to maintain and increase their own players’ advantages.  That’s mainly why services trade liberalization has made so much less progress than goods trade liberalization. Indeed, the United States and five European countries have just managed to avoid a trade war fought over and with digital services taxes – which would have been new trade barriers. 

At this point, it seems, the nation will have its hands full simply preventing higher trade deficits from becoming major drags on growth.  Anyone awaiting significant reductions in the shortfall, even as a share of GDP, will likely need lots of patience.              

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: Why Biden’s Immigration-Enabling Goals Couldn’t be Worse Timed

Tags

asylum seekers, California, CCP Virus, coronavirus, COVID 19, Department of Labor, Eduardo Porter, illegal aliens, illegal immigration, Immigration, Jobs, Joe Biden, NAFTA, North American Free Frade Agreement, Open Borders, path to citizenship, Pew Research Center, recession, refugees, services, The New York Times, The Race to the Bottom, wages, Wuhan virus, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Apparent President-elect Joe Biden emphatically and repeatedly told the nation that he’s determined to increase the flow of immigrants to America – whether we’re talking about his promises that will greatly strengthen the immigration magnet (like creating a “roadmap to citizenship” for America’s illegal alien population, tightly curbing immigation law enforcement activities, and offering free government-funded healthcare to anyone who can manage to cross the border lawfully or not), or his promises to boost admissions of refugees, speed systems for processing applications for asylum and (legal) green card applications, and generally “to ensure that the U.S. remains open and welcoming to people from every part of the world….”

During normal recent times such pledges – and the fallout of pre-Trump efforts to keep them – had proven troublesome enough for the U.S. economy and for working class Americans in particular. Inevitably, they pumped up the supply of labor available to U.S.-based businesses, and created surpluses that enabled companies to cut wages with the greatest of ease – exactly as the laws of supply and demand predict.

During the CCP Virus pandemic and its likely economic aftermath, however, this quasi-Open Borders strategy looks positively demented, as emerging trends most recently described by New York Times economics writer Eduardo Porter should make painfully obvious.

According to Porter in a December 1 piece, “The [U.S.] labor market has recovered 12 million of the 22 million jobs lost from February to April. But many positions may not return any time soon, even when a vaccine is deployed.

“This is likely to prove especially problematic for millions of low-paid workers in service industries like retailing, hospitality, building maintenance and transportation, which may be permanently impaired or fundamentally transformed. What will janitors do if fewer people work in offices? What will waiters do if the urban restaurant ecosystem never recovers its density?”

What’s the connection with immigration policy? As it happens, the service industries the author rightly identifies as sectors apparently vulnerable to major employment downsizing are industries that historically have employed outsized shares of immigrant workers (including illegals). And along with other personal service industries, they’re kinds of sectors whose modest skill requirements would continue to offer newcomers overall their best bets for employment.

The charts below, from the Pew Research Center, show just how thoroughly dominated by both kinds of immigrants these sectors, and present similar data broken down by occupation. (The U.S. Department of Labor tracks employment according to both kinds of categories.)

Twenty years ago, in my book The Race to the Bottom, I wrote about news reports making clear that

“immigrants were flooding into California in hopes of landing jobs in labor-intensive industries such a apparel and electronics assembly that NAFTA [the North American Free Trade Agreement] had steadily been sending to Mexico — where most of the immigrants come from! In other words, the state was importing people while exporting their likeliest jobs.” 

And not surprisingly, wages throughout the southern California in particular stagnated.  

If a Biden administration proceeds with its stated immigration plans as quickly as it’s promised (with many actions scheduled for the former Vice President’s first hundred days in office), this epic blunder will wind up being repeated — but this time on a national scale.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: Records and More Puzzles in the GDP Report’s Trade Numbers

Tags

(What's Left of) Our Economy, CCP Virus, Commerce Department, coronavirus, COVID 19, exports, GDP, global financial crisis, goods, Great Recession, imports, inflation-adjusted growth, real GDP, real trade deficit, recession, services, Trade, trade deficit, Wuhan virus

So many all-time and multi-year and even decade worsts revealed by the trade data revealed in the official U.S. economic growth figures released this morning! And even though these data on changes in the gross domestic product (GDP) for the third quarter of this year are pretty meaningless from an economic standpoint – because they’re so thoroughly distorted by the government-ordered shutdowns and reopenings due to the CCP Virus – they’re worth noting for the record, anyway.

But here’s something else worth noting – as with the last batch of GDP figures (the final-for-now results for the second quarter), the trade figures don’t seem to add up.

Let’s start with the records. Largely due to the strongest sequential U.S. growth on record (33.1 percent after inflation on an annualized basis), fueled by significant reopening plus massive government stimulus or relief funds (choose your own label), the quarterly inflation adjusted trade deficit hit an astounding $1.0108 trillion annualized. (The inflation-adjusted, or “real,” statistics are the ones most closely followed; therefore, unless otherwise specified, they’ll be the ones used from hereon in.)

Not only was that total a record in absolute terms. The 30.41 percent increase from the final second quarter level of $775.1 billion was the biggest since the Commerce Department began presenting trade deficit figures (as opposed to the simple export and import findings) in 2002. For context, the next greatest such jump was only 13.18 percent, between the first and second quarters of 2010.

The economy was recovering then, too – from the Great Recession that followed the global financial crisis – but that quarter’s annualized growth rate was only 3.69 percent.

As known by RealityChek regulars, the GDP reports treat increases in the trade deficit as subtractions from growth, and the third quarter’s was the worst in absolute terms (3.09 percentage points from that 33.1 percent annualized growth total) since the 3.22 percentage points sliced from growth in the third quarter of 1982. (For some reason, these data go back even further than that.)

In relative terms, though, the trade effect in 1982 couldn’t have differed more from the situation this year, as during that third quarter, the economy shrank in price-adjusted terms by 1.5 percent on an annual basis.

But those internal numbers!

According to the Commerce Department, exports in the third quarter added up to $2.1667 trillion annualized. But if you actually add the separate goods and services numbers provided, you get a sum of $2.1921 trillion. On the import side, the separate figures add up to a total of $3.2123 trillion, not the reported $3.1775 trillion. Therefore, the quarterly deficit would seem to be $1.0202 trillion, not the $1.0108 trillion presented.

As with the previous discrepancies, although this batch’s aren’t big enough to change the overall picture, they do raise some questions about the reliability of the rest of the data. So I’ll be hoping that the apparent confusion will be cleared up a month from now, when Commerce releases its second estimate for third quarter GDP – but not holding my breath.

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: U.S. Manufacturing’s Jobs Recovery Continues Strongly

Tags

automotive, CCP Virus, coronavirus, COVID 19, exports, Jobs, manufacturing, NFP, non-farm jobs, non-farm payrolls, private sector, services, Trade, Wuhan virus, {What's Left of) Our Economy

The big question raised by today’s second straight expectations-clobbering official monthly U.S. jobs report (for June) is whether the surge in recovered employment can withstand whatever second CCP Virus wave of infections, or resurgence of the first wave, numerous states have been seeing lately.

I can’t answer that knowledgeably – and I suspect few others can, either. What I can do is note that the June numbers roughly repeat or confirm some of the patterns visible for May. Mainly, manufacturing held up better than the rest of the American jobs market, and within manufacturing, the swings have been dominated by the automotive sector.

Domestic industry added a net 356,000 workers to its payrolls in June, and revisions for the last two months – as with non-farm jobs as a whole (the U.S. government’s jobs universe) – were slightly positive (virtually unchanged at a 1.32 million net loss for April, upgraded from a 225,000 to a 250,000 net gain in May).

Fully 55 percent (195,800) of those 356,000 new June manufacturing jobs came in the automotive sector – a rubber band-like comeback surely reflecting the outsized hit this industry has taken since the CCP Virus threw the entire economy into a deep downturn. Even with this improvement, since February, combined vehicle and parts employment is down more than twice as much relatively speaking (12.11 percent) as overall manufacturing employment (5.89 percent).

Further, overall manufacturing’s record of pandemic-era resilience continued in June. Its monthly jobs growth was only 3.03 percent – slower than the rate for the total non-farm sector (3.61 percent) and the private sector (4.27 percent).

But a main reason is that manufacturing has taken a much smaller CCP Virus hit than the rest of the economy. That 5.89 percent employment loss since February has been considerably less than that of the non-farm sector (9.62 percent) or the private sector (10.17 percent).

Manufacturing employment could face some intriguing crosswinds in the months ahead. A second virus wave or a re-strengthening first wave may well slow its jobs rebound going forward, since U.S.-based industry sells so much to those domestic service industries that have borne the brunt of the pandemic-created economic damage. At the same time, domestic manufacturers were selling just under 18 percent of their gross output overseas as of the end of last year, so if recoveries quicken overseas, U.S.-based manufacturers and their workers could benefit significantly.

In this vein, one possibly hopeful sign is that as of May, according to this morning’s monthly U.S. trade report from the Census Bureau, manufacturing exports are down a whopping 15.74 percent year-to-date. And they fell 5.28 percent in May alone. Therefore, precisely because the “comps” have been so lousy, domestic manufacturers could experience something of a rubber-band-like bounceback of their own – at least in the near-term future.

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: A Major Virus-Related U.S. Economy Hit Confirmed – With Much Worse Numbers Sure to Come

Tags

CCP Virus, coronavirus, COVID 19, exports, GDP, goods, Great Recession, gross domestic product, imports, inflation-adjusted output, lockdown, real exports, real GDP, real imports, recession, services, shutdown, Wuhan virus, {What's Left of) Our Economy

This is a catch-up post on the CCP Virus-induced contraction of the U.S. economy growth, as well as a report on today’s latest update from the Commerce Department. The big news this morning: During the first quarter of this year, the economy’s sequential shrinkage for the first quarter of this year was pegged in this morning’s third, and final (for now) estimate at 5.09 percent at an annual rate in inflation-adjusted terms. That compares with the 4.87 percent drop in real output recorded in the first estimate, and a 5.15 percent decline estimated in the second estimate, which yours truly missed when it came out last month.

So things economic are looking slightly less terrible than previously thought – but still pretty terrible. In fact, this first quarter economic downturn was America’s most severe since the fourth quarter of 2008’s 8.66 percent – when the Great Recession spurred by the financial crisis was at its low point.

And there’s no doubt much worse to come in the second quarter figures, whose initial release will be a month from now (along with a regularly scheduled revision of all the data on the gross domestic product [GDP] and its changes going back to 2015). After all, the first quarter numbers only include the first month (March) during which the CCP Virus and its growth-killing effects began to be fully suffered.

Before delving into the trade-related details, a cautionary/explanatory note should be repeated: The phrases “at an annual rate” and “annualized” mean that an economic contraction of this historic scale didn’t take place al at once. Instead, they mean that in the economy contracted at a rate that would add up to the current 5.09 percent if the shrinkage continued at this pace for an entire year. This qualification is especially important because of the tremendous expected worsening of the slump in the second quarter.

Today’s GDP report revealed that the after-nflation annualized combined goods and services trade deficit during the first quarter was $815.5 billion. That’s a bit worse than the $816.0 billion figure reported last month but a bit better than the $817.4 billion calculated in the first estimate. And this so-far-final number represents a 9.34 percent decline from the $900.7 billion level reported for the fourth quarter of last year.

These results leave the drop-off the steepest since the 18.13 percent quarter-to-quarter nosedive during the second quarter of Great Recession-y 2009. And because the gap between these two results remains so big, it will be fascinating to see the numbers for the second quarter, when impact of mandated shutdown of much of the economy will first become apparent.

The quarterly decrease in total real exports for the first quarter is now judged to be 2.33 percent (non-annualized – as are the following numbers). This decline is worse than that estimated in the two previous first quarter GDP reports (2.24 percent and 2.25 percent, respectively). But as with the trade deficit figures, this slump pales with that suffered the last time constant dollar goods and services exports dropped significantly – the 8.08 percent crash dive during the first quarter of 2009, during the depths of that Great Recession.

On the import side, the 4.17 percent sequential price-adjusted fall-off reported this morning was bigger than either the 4.12 percent decrease previously judged and the 4.08 percent initially estimated. Again, however, that was the biggest such decline since a Great Recession result that was much greater – the 9.88 percent recorded in the first quarter of 2009.

The “final” first quarter figure for the inflation-adjusted goods deficit ($996.8 billion annualized) was 7.64 percent lower than the fourth quarter figure. But in services, the real surplus widened by 1.22 percent – even though the super-sector’s exports plummeted by nine percent. The first quarter annualized total of $714.9 billion annualized was the meagerest since the $706.2 billion level for the fourth quarter of 2013, and the rate of decline (much greater than the 0.49 percent in goods exports) was the fastest ever in a data series going back to 2002. In fact, the previous record was only 2.95 percent (during the Great Recession-y first quarter of 2009) – as with the export figures underscoring the outsized impact of the CCP virus’ impact on the travel industry.

Similar trends can be seen in after-inflation services imports. which sank by a record 8.06 percent in the quarter – much faster than the 3.19 percent fall in goods imports.

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: Through the Looking Glass With the New US GDP Report?

Tags

CCP Virus, coronavirus, COVID 19, durable goods, exports, GDP, goods, Great Depression, Great Recession, gross domestic product, imports, inflation-adjusted growth, non-durable goods, oil, real GDP, real trade deficit, services, trade deficit, Wuhan virus, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Today’s U.S. government report on the shrinkage of the American gross domestic product (GDP) in the first quarter of the year is fascinating not because it can provide any idea about how bad the CCP Virus-induced economic downturn is right now, much less how bad it will get. Instead, it’s fascinating because it provides (and confirms) some insights on which sectors of the economy have been the biggest winners and losers, and which could fare best and worst going forward.

First, a vitally important explanatory point: When you read that the economy contracted by 4.8 percent between the last three months of 2019 and the first three months of 2020 after factoring in inflation, remember that this figure is an annualized figure. That is, it doesn’t mean that the nation’s output of goods and services (the definition of GDP) fell by that amount all at once during the first quarter. It means that if the contraction that did occur continued at the same pace over the course of a full year, the cumulative drop would add up to 4.8 percent. (NB: The real decline was 4.87 percent, even though the Commerce Department rounded it down to 4.8 for some reason.)

The same cautionary note goes for all the terrifying predictions for the second quarter in particular, to the effect that inflation-adjusted GDP would plummet by 20 percent of 30 percent. They’re annualized rates, too.

No doubt about it – even the new annualized numbers are terrible. (And unless otherwise specified, all the following statistics will represent sequential – i.e., quarter-to-quarter – rates of change.) That’s not because they’re the worst that Americans have seen lately. That dubious honor goes to the fourth quarter of 2008, during the Great Recession, when real GDP sank at an 8.66 percent annual rate. Instead, it’s because the main shutdowns of business didn’t start until mid-March. Since the first quarter ended on March 31, a genuinely appalling amount of damage took place in a very short period of time.

As a result, surely the numbers for the second quarter will be much worse, as the lockdowns themselves spread for weeks thereafter, and their effects have had time to sink in (even though the second quarter figures presumably will reflect some of the cautious easing and reopening that’s begun). Also possibly leading to more depressing future results: Today’s first quarter figures are the first of three reports for the first quarter we’ll be getting this year. As Washington gathers more complete information, the reported nosedive could well get steeper.

The principal ray of hope comes in the nature of the downturn. It was literally ordered by America’s national, state, and local governments. Whatever recession or depression that’s begun says little about the fundamentals of the economy pre-virus – unlike typical recessions, which result from weaknesses in expansions that for various reasons finally come to light, or are brought to light by the Federal Reserve (in many cases) – which in modern times, has reacted to signs of economic excesses (like accelerating inflation), by raising interest rates (that is, increasing the cost of borrowing for everyone) and trying to bring price changes back under control. (And yes, a big exception was the Fed’s record during the previous, so-called Bubble Decade, when its principal aim seemed to be to juice growth at all costs – in that case, at the risk of scary degrees of financial instability.)

All the same, the biological roots of this economic slump create great uncertainties about the rate of recovery, since no one can know how quickly Americans will return to patronizing service sector business in particular, which comprise the vast bulk of the economy, and so many of which largely serve customers in person.

In that vein, it’s more than a little interesting that output in services shrank in the first quarter at a much faster annual rate (10.63 percent) than goods output (1.35 percent). Dig a little deeper, though, and you see that the numbers for goods are sharply divided. After-inflation output of durables (products supposed to last for three years or more either in use or on the shelf – like autos and appliances) plunged by 17.12 percent at annual rates. But constant dollar production of non-durables (notably processed food but also chemicals and paper and textile and plastics and others) actually increased – by 6.77 percent.

Those goods and services figures are contained in the “personal consumption expenditures” category of each GDP report. And overall, such consumption dropped by 7.78 percent annualized in the first quarter. Notably, that’s a much worse result than anything seen during the last, Great, recession (which, by the way, was the previous deepest economic slump experienced in the United States since the Great Depression of the 1930s). During that most recent downturn, personal spending’s decrease bottomed out with a 3.72 percent annualized fall in the fourth quarter of 2008.

No – to get to a worse consumption figure than just recorded, you need to go all the way back to the second quarter of 1980, during a horrible period marked by a painful recession and roaring inflation partly produced by sharp oil price increases. Then, such spending cratered at a 9.01 percent annual rate, and the entire economy shrank by 8.23 percent annualized.

Of course, the American economy entails more than just personal consumption (although, as known by RealityChek regulars, such spending represented a big majority of all economic activity– 69.27 percent of real GDP at present – even after the big decreases in the first quarter). Business investment amounted to 14.03 percent of GDP after inflation, and its levels were off considerably, too, in the first quarter – by 8.92 percent.

No doubt, that’s going to worsen, since the lower personal spending, as well as the lower business spending itself, mean that so many businesses will be short of customers for the time being. Even so, the Great Recession numbers were much worse. From the fourth quarter of 2008 through the second quarter of 2009, this “non-residential fixed investment” tumbled at double-digit quarterly rates, with the bottom coming during the first quarter of 2009 (a 30.14 percent plummet!).

And what about America’s trade performance? The constant dollar trade deficit narrowed by 9.25 percent – from $900.7 billion (again, that’s an annualized figure) to $817.4 billion. That deficit number is the lowest quarterly figure since the $761.4 billion recorded in the fourth quarter of 2016. Yet the rate of decrease was almost matched by that of the fourth quarter of last year (9.03 percent). To find a comparable result, you’d have to go back to the fourth quarter of 2013 (9.24 percent).

One big question: How much of this latest drop was due to oil? We know that the general answer is “a lot” – even though in principle these results take into account (i.e., factor out) the recent crash in oil prices. Nonetheless, a dramatically slowed U.S. economy is going to consume less oil overall (ditto for a recessed global economy, something to ponder since the United States is now an oil exporter). So we’ll need to look at the volume numbers and then compare them with those of previous quarters when the trade deficit dropped significantly for a fuller picture.

What is clear so far, though – in terms of the real overall trade deficit, the first quarter 2020 decline pales before those experienced during the Great Recession. In particular, the real trade gap decreased by 15.08 percent annualized during the first quarter of 2009 and by 18.13 percent during the following quarter.

In line with the consumption findings, moreover, services trade performed worse than (the much greater amount of) goods trade. The goods deficit was 7.39 percent narrower in the first quarter of 2020 ($0.9995 trillion annualized) than during the fourth quarter of 2019 ($1.0792 trillion annualized). But the services surplus rose by only 2.07 percent (from $188.2 billion annualized to $192.1 billion).

Especially revealing were the import and export findings. For goods, exports were off by only 0.30 percent – from $1.7823 trillion annualized to $1.7769 trillion. But for services, they dropped by 5.85 percent (from $758.6 billion annualized to $714.2 billion).

The services export and imports decreases were the biggest on record – by far. And although figures only go back to the first quarter of 2002, can anyone seriously doubt that these results reflect the numerous international travel bans sparked by the United States – and so many other countries?

Because services play such a predominant role in the economy, and because services that need to be delivered in person, like dining out and travel, represent such big shares of the economy (just short of 3.25 percent of all private sector output for restaurants, bars, and lodging places alone as of late 2019, and a much bigger 11.06 percent of the private sector workforce), it seems reasonable at this point to expect these sectors to keep taking particularly powerful blows at least as long as the virus remains a pandemic.   

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: US Growth Remains Solid Despite a Notable Boeing Drag

Tags

Boeing, exports, GDP, General Motors strike, goods, gross domestic product, imports, real GDP, real trade deficit, services, Trade, trade deficit, {What's Left of) Our Economy

This morning’s first official read on U.S. economic growth in the third quarter not only beat expectations. Inflation-adjusted gross domestic product (GDP) expanded nicely despite potholes dug by the General Motors strike and Boeing’s ongoing safety woes.

Bad news wasn’t entirely absent, especially from a trade policy standpoint, as the overall U.S. trade gap edged up to a new record in absolute terms. But even here, mitigating circumstances can be cited – namely, foreign reluctance to purchase Boeing planes, which surely weighed on exports, and tariff front-running sparked by importers’ desire to buy products from China in particular to beat the imposition of threatened tariffs.

The third quarter’s 1.91 percent annualized increase in real GDP – the first of three near-term growth figures that will be issued – handily surpassed the latest 1.6 percent consensus of the forecasts tracked by CNBC and Moody’s Analytics. Moreover, the Boeing effect looks anything but negligible. As noted by Harvard University economist Megan Greene, the Trump administration believes that the aerospace giant’s troubles cut 0.40 percentage points from third quarter GDP, and private sector economists peg the cost at 0.25 percentage points.

The real trade deficit, however, was clearly no help. It wasn’t nearly as big a drag on inflation-adjusted growth as in the second quarter (when it subtracted 0.68 percentage points from that two percent annualized constant dollar expansion). But it still depressed the third quarter’s real growth by 0.08 percentage points – and edged up by 0.58 percent to a new record $986.4 billion on an annual basis. (The previous all-time high was the $983.0 billion level reached in the fourth quarter of 2018).

This after-inflation trade deficit as a share of the entire economy stayed virtually unchanged from quarter to quarter – at 5.16 percent. But these are the kinds of levels that haven’t been seen since late during the last, bubble-decade expansion (in the third quarter of 2007). Their only saving grace is that they’re still well off the current record of 6.10 percent of GDP, also set during that bubble decade (in the third quarter of 2005).  Nonetheless, the Boeing effect shouldn’t be discounted here, either, as demonstrated in my recent RealityChek post. 

As for other trade-related highlights of the new GDP report:

>Total annualized real exports increased by 0.19 percent, from $2.5175 trillion in the second quarter to $2.5222 trillion.

>Inflation-adjusted goods exports rose at a somewhat faster rate – 0.39 percent sequentially, from $1.7753 trillion to $1.7823 trillion.

>Constant dollar services exports fell on-quarter for the second straight quarter – from $748 billion annualized to $746.3 billion. That total was their lowest since the second quarter of 2017’s $740.7 billion.

>Combined after-inflation goods and services imports were up by 0.29 percent, from $3.4982 trillion annualized to $3.5085 trillion – the second highest total on record after the $3.5116 trillion record in the fourth quarter of 2018.

>Constant dollar goods imports inched up by 0.11 percent sequentially, from $2.9417 trillion annualized to $2.9450 trillion.

>Inflation-adjusted services imports rose quarter to quarter from $557.2 billion annualized to $563.2 billion. That total represents a new record, surpassing the previous all-time high of $558.1 billion set in the first quarter of this year.