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

Tags

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Advertisement

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

Tags

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

Tags

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tags

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Im-Politic: So Fauci Finally Gets It on Lockdowns?

Tags

Anthony S. Fauci, Biden administration, CCP Virus, China, coronavirus, COVID 19, facemasks, Im-Politic, lockdowns, social distancing, Wuhan virus, Xi JInPing, Zero Covid

Retiring U.S. chief infectious disease specialist Dr. Anthony S. Fauci told us over the weekend that he’s just shocked by what he calls China’s pointlessly “draconian” Zero Covid policy to defeat the CCP Virus. And the Biden administration has been critical, too. To which the only reasonable response is, “Seriously?”

Not that Zero Covid hasn’t been an epic fail by Chinese dictator Xi Jinping. But the criticism from Fauci and the Biden presidency sure looks like the pot calling the kettle black.

If you’re skeptical, here’s Fauci’s response to a question noting perceptively that “you’re seeing things that we saw in this country when people didn’t like how Covid response — What is going on in China, and why do they seem to be in a worse place than anyone else in the world?”

“[T]heir approach has been very, very severe and rather draconian in the kinds of shutdowns without a seeming purpose. I mean, if you’re having a situation, if you can recall, you know, almost three years ago when we were having our hospitals overrun, you remember the situation in New York City, you had to do something immediately to shut down that flow. So remember we were talking about flattening the curve and the social distancing and restrictions and shutdown, which was never really complete, is done for a temporary period of time for the purpose of regrouping, getting more personal protective equipment, getting people vaccinated. It seems that in China it was just a very, very strict extraordinary lockdown where you lock people in the house but without any seemingly endgame to it.”

No one can reasonably criticize any public official for urging extreme and sweeping anti-virus measures during the pandemic’s early days – before its nature and especially its highly granular lethality (overwhelmingly concentrated in seniors and others with major health problems) were understood. For it could have been like the Black Death.

But of course Fauci, the rest of the official public health establishment, and left-of-center leaders like Biden, were championing these policies long after these patterns became known.

And more important, when it comes to comparing U.S. policies during his tenure with Chinese policies today, Fauci’s claim that he was only urging “social distancing and restrictions and shutdown” essentially until vaccination was widespread ignores his stated belief in March, 2020 that “It will take at least a year to a year in a half to have a vaccine we can use.” And of course getting enough arms jabbed to turn the CCP Virus tide was always going to take months more even if the rollout went perfectly (which was far from the case). And what if the vaccines were major flops?

So Fauci himself clearly felt that pretty draconian policies – despite their devastating impact on the economy, on education, and on Americans’ mental health – would be needed over a very long haul. Therefore, when it counted, his differences with the approach taken recently by China (which lacks vaccines even as effective as America’s imperfect – especially against transmission – versions) was one of degree, not of kind.

Just as bad, as with Xi Jinping, this conviction of Fauci’s didn’t seem to be greatly affected by the proven potential of natural immunity per se to help end the pandemic (especially as variants, predictably, became more infectious but less lethal), or by the emerging evidence of sharp limits (to put it diplomatically) to the utility of social distancing in and of itself, and masking – and even of widespread lockdowns themselves.

Fauci’s declaration that “a prolonged lockdown without any seeming purpose or end game to it…really doesn’t make public health sense” comes way too late to impact America’s strategy during the pandemic era.  But hopefully it will dissuade both politicians and the public health establishment from repeating these grave mistakes when the next pandemic – inevitably – comes the nation’s way.

Im-Politic: Evidence That the Longest U.S. School Closings Really Did the Most Damage to Students

Tags

CCP Virus, coronavirus, COVID 19, education, Im-Politic, math, NAEP, National Assessment of Educational Progress, National Education Association, reading, remote learning, school closings, school reopenings, schools, teachers unions, Wuhan virus

Although a strong nation-wide consensus has now emerged that CCP Virus-related school closings exerted a devastating and perhaps irreversible effect on the education of America’s children, and even that most of the country’s schools stayed partly or fully shut way too long, one group apparently begs to differ: America’s teachers, or at least one of their major unions.

And their views of course matter greatly because of the major influence they wield over Democratic Party politicians.

But data contained in the just-released latest edition of the U.S. Department of Education’s “nation’s report card” on pupils’ proficiency in key subjects clash loudly with the claim by the National Education Association that “no clear conclusions can be drawn between states and cities that reopened schools sooner than others.”

I haven’t checked all the scores for the thousands of U.S. school districts. What I have done is look into the state-by-state statistics. And they contain strong evidence that overall, those states that reopened schools earlier and more completely saw considerably better learning results than those taking a more cautious approach.

Specifically, I took a list of the ten earliest reopeners and ten latest reopeners as compiled by this “Business Intelligence Platform for School and Community Life,” and then examined the scores they received from that national report card – officially known as the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). I focused on the four measures that received the most attention in the press release announcing the NAEP results – fourth grade reading and math scores in 2019 (just before the pandemic’s arrival) and 2022, and their counterparts for eighth grade reading and math.

And for the best gauges of the impact of school closings, I used the NAEP’s numbers on how each state’s scores in those four subjects compared with the national averages for those two years. That is, I examined whether between 2019 and 2022, the math and reading scores registered by the state’s fourth and eighth graders improved or worsened versus the national averages (which themselves fell).

This method says nothing about which states’ scores were best or worst in absolute terms for either year – because that metric can’t reveal anything about the impact of school closing and reopening policies. In fact, several states that remained leaders in all four student categories, with results above the national averages for both years, moved closer to those (lower) national averages between 2019 and 2022. To me, that’s a clear sign that during a period of severe CCP Virus-related challenges, their performance deteriorated. And several states that remained serious laggards also closed the gaps with the national averages, which justifies in my view concluding that their educational performance improved during this period.

And here’s what I found.

Of the ten states that reopened earliest and most completely, three saw improved student scores compared with the national average on all four fronts: Florida, Texas, and Louisiana. Interestingly, in the ten-state group whose approach was extremely cautious, three states achieved such success as well: California, Hawaii, and Illinois.

But five of the earliest reopening states recorded relative improvement in three of the four categories: Wyoming, Arkansas, South Dakota. Utah, and Montana. Only one of the latest reopening states could make this claim: Washington.

Similarly, among the earliest reopening states, two achieved improvement versus the national average in two student categories: Nebraska and North Dakota. Among the latest reopening states, only one compiled this record: Nevada.

But here’s where the results get especially revealing. Nebraska and North Dakota were the worst performing of the earliest reopening states. But five (fully half) of the latest reopening states performed worse than them. They were Maryland and New Jersey, where three of the four student groups’ performances slumped compared with the national averages; and Oregon, New Mexico, and Massachusetts, in which relative decline took place in all four student groups.

As I’ve noted previously, many states are big, diverse places, and especially for those whose student populations are heavily dominated by one or two big cities, district-by-district analyses will be needed.

One such academic effort reported such results recently, and seems to have reached mixed conclusions. On the one hand, the researchers at a Harvard University-Stanford University collaboration called the “Education Recovery Scorecard” observe that “Within states, achievement losses were larger in districts that spent more time in remote instruction during 2020-21.” On the other, they state that “school closures do not appear to be the primary factor driving achievement losses.”

But more such work clearly needs to be done, since the Harvard-Stanford team had only collected results from 29 states.

In the meantime, though, the National Education Association looks off-base in its attempt to absolve lengthy school closings of any blame for the academic losses suffered by the nation’s school children. So just as war-fighting strategy may be too important to be left to the generals, school closing strategy during pandemics may be too important to be left to the teachers’ unions.

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: No Shortage of U.S. Inflation Fuel

Tags

CCP Virus, consumers, coronavirus, cost of living, COVID 19, debt, Federal Reserve, housing, inflation, interest rates, monetary policy, quantitative tightening, revolving credit, savings, stimulus, stock market, Wells Fargo, Wuhan virus, {What's Left of) Our Economy

As known by RealityChek regulars, I’ve repeatedly written (e.g., here) that sky-high U.S. inflation is going to remain sky high until the prices of the goods and services bought by consumers become genuinely unaffordable – and that their current towering levels make clear that we’re far from that point.

That’s why it’s so great that a team of economists from Wells Fargo bank have so clearly laid out the evidence for how much spending power remains with households – and therefore how much pricing power remains with businesses.

The two key facts entail how much in extra savings households have amassed since the CCP Virus pandemic struck in force in early 2020 and ushered in a period of both greatly reduced spending opportunities and greatly increased stimulus payments from Washington. As shown in this chart, the resulting “excess savings” zoomed up starting then and continued through mid-2021, when they peaked at about $2.5 trillion.

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce and Wells Fargo Economics

They’ve come down since – but still stood at just short of $1.3 trillion as of this past summer. Moreover, don’t forget – that number doesn’t tell us the actual level of consumer savings. It tells us how far above the pre-pandemic normal it stands.

For an idea of the actual amount of cash households have to spend, check out this second graph. It shows that even factoring in inflation, Americans’ checking and savings accounts hold a total of $13.9 trillion (the dark blue line), and that this figure is way up since the beginning of the pandemic, too.

Source: Federal Reserve Board and Wells Fargo Economics

You might have read that one big reason for worrying about the sustainability of consumer spending – and as a result, one big reason for optimism that inflation will soon peak or has already topped out – is that “Inflation is driving consumers to rack up more debt to purchase essentials.” Sounds like a sign of soaring desperation, right? Not if you look at the big picture.

Sure, credit card use has boomed over the last year (a high inflation year) in particular. Indeed, as shown in the third chart, it’s not only above pre-CCP Virus levels. It’s above its levels during the bubble years that preceded the Global Financial Crisis which ended in the worst economic downturn America had suffered to that point since the Great Depression of the 1930s. (The pandemic recession of 2020 was deeper than the Great Depression, but was much shorter.)

Source: Federal Reserve Board and Wells Fargo Economics

But that’s only one side of the credit card story, and not the most important side. The other side is how that “revolving” credit card and other consumer debt compares with consumers’ spend-able incomes. And as the chart below shows, although the “Household Financial Obligations Ratio” has worsened a lot recently, in absolute terms it’s not only considerably below its levels just before the CCP Virus’ arrival in force. It’s still at post-1990s lows – and by a wide margin.

Source: Federal Reserve Board and Wells Fargo Economic

As the Wells Fargo economists point out, this consumer spending power has to run out at some point, especially since households have been buying more than they earn, since their net worth (and therefore their ability to borrow robustly) is down some because both housing and stock prices have been sinking, and since the Federal Reserve’s inflation-fighting interest rate hikes and other tightening measures keep making such borrowing more expensive. Inflation-adjusted wages keep falling, too. 

Nevertheless, rate hikes (which only began this past March) can take up to 18-months to slow spending and the entire economy. The Fed is also reducing its balance sheet, which skyrocketed to astronomical levels as the central bank bought vast quantities of bonds during the worst of the pandemic in order to flood the economy with cheap money and keep it afloat during the worst of the CCP Virus downturn. But for what it’s worth, the consensus among economists to date is that this “quantitative tightening” isn’t severe enough depress economic activity significantly for some time, either. (See, e.g., here.)

And don’t forget – Washington keeps putting more money in consumers’ pockets directly and indirectly, most recently with an increase in Social Security payments to compensate for…high inflation, and another release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to dampen down oil prices.   

So it’s still true that, ultimately, the surest cure for high prices is high prices. But it’s just as true that everything known about consumer finances and the inflation fuel they represent says that these prices have a long way to go before those consumers start crying “Uncle!”

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: U.S. Manufacturing Dispels Recession Fears

Tags

aircraft, aircraft parts, apparel, automotive, CCP Virus, computer and electronics products, coronavirus, Federal Reserve, inflation-adjusted growth, machinery, manufacturing, medical equipment, miscellaneous durable goods, non-metallic mineral products, paper, personal protective equipment, petroleum and coal products, pharmaceuticals, PPE, printing, recession, semiconductors, Wuhan virus, {What's Left of) Our Economy

If the U.S. economy is still in recession, or getting uncomfortably close to one, it seems no one’s told the nation’s manufacturers. Yesterday’s latest figures from the Federal Reserve show that domestic industry expanded its inflation-adjusted output by 0.43 percent on month in September. Moreover, revisions at this 30,000-foot level were modestly positive (as opposed to some for manufacturing sectors which, as you’ll see, were pretty dramatic).

August’s initially reported gain of just 0.09 percent – which seemed to indicate that the sector was heading into a downturn – is now judged to have been one of 0.38 percent. July’s originally reported 0.72 percent advance was revised down slightly again – from 0.62 percent to 0.60 percent. And June’s results were downgraded a third straight time – from an initially reported dip of 0 05 percent to a drop of 0.58 percent.

These new and revised figures pushed real U.S. manufacturing production is up 4.19 percent from 2020 – just before the CCP Virus and assorted mandated and voluntary behavioral curbs sparked a short but scary downturn and touched off waves of distortion that persist to this day. As of last month’s Fed report, industry’s inflation-adjusted production had risen by 3.49 percent during the pandemic period.

Among the broadest manufacturing sub-sectors tracked by the Fed, the biggest September winners in terms of after-inflation output were:

>apparel and leather goods, whose monthly constant dollar output jumped 1.56 percent. Revisions, moreover were strongly positive. August’s initially reported 0.53 percent downturn was lowered to a slump of 1.85 percent. But July’s results rebounded from a 1.46 percent gain to one of 1.66 percent, after having been revised down from 1.60 percent.

And get a load of the June figures! The initially reported 1.44 percent drop was revised to a boom of 6.09 percent (which would have been the best such increase since August, 2020’s 8.04 percent), then back down to a rise of just 1.46 percent, and finally (for now) back up to a 5.98 percent advance.

Apparel and leather goods’ real output is now 5.39 percent higher than in immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, versus the 4.98 percent calculable last month;

>non-metallic mineral products, where inflation-adjusted production was up 1.41 percent for these companies’ best month since May’s 1.69 percent. Revisions, though, were moderately negative, with August’s initially reported 0.09 percent monthly dip being downgraded to a drop of -0.22 percent; July’s initially reported 0.52 percent increase revised down to a slip of 0.09 percent to a fractional decline; and June’s initially reported 1.07 percent fall-off significantly upgraded to a 0.48 percent increase, then revised down to growth of 0.46 percent, to a fractional decrease.

Still, price-adjusted output in non-metallic mineral products is now 1.48 percent higher than just before the CCP Virus arrived in force, versus the 0.12 percent calculable last month;

>petroleum and coal products, which grew inflation-adjusted output by 1.13 percent in September, and which saw overall positive revisions. August’s initially reported 3.54 percent is now judged to be an advance of 4.13 percent (the strongest since March, 2021’s 11.49 percent). July’s initially estimated 0.94 percent decrease has now been upgraded first to one of 0.25 percent and now to one of 0.23 percent. And June’s results stayed at a significantly downgraded 2.80 percent tumble.

Real output in these sectors is now 3.20 percent higher than in February, 2020, versus the 1.45 percent calculable last month; and

>computer and electronics products, whose constant-dollar production climbed 1.07 percent – now the best growth since February’s 1.20 percent. Yet revisions were negative, as August’s initially reported increase of 1.27 percent (which had been the best since May, 2021’s 2.44 percent) has been downgraded to one of 1.05 percent; July’s initially reported drop of 0.65 percent downgraded to one of 0.68 percent and now to one of 0.89 percent; and June’s results settling in at a 0.45 percent increase after the initially reported 0.21 rise was upgraded to 0.67 percent and then revised down to 0.46 percent.

After inflation production in these industries is now 6.78 percent higher than in that last pre-CCP virus data month of February, 2020 versus the 6.11 percent calculable last month.

September’s biggest price-adjusted growth losers were:

>printing and related support activities, where real output sank by 1.67 percent – its worst such perfomance since January’s 2.09 percent retreat. Just as bad, revisions were negative on net. August’s initially reported 0.27 percent decrease was revised up all the way to a 0.59 percent gain, but July’s loss is now judged to have been 1.60 percent after having been upgraded from on of 1.67 percent to one of 1.50 percent. And June’s initially reported 1.68 increase (then the best such performance since February’s 3.13 percent advance) has been revised since to a decrease of 0.51 percent, 0.40 percent, and 0.41 percent.

Conseqently, this hard-hit sector’s output is 11.81 percent smaller than in February, 2020, versus the 11.02 calculable last month.

>miscellaneous durable goods, the broad category that includes the personal protective equipment and other medical devices used so widely to fight the CCP Virus. Its inflation-adjusted production fell by 1.29 percent in September – the first decrease since March’s fractional dip. Even better, this decline comes off overall positive revisions of already excellent results.

August’s initially reported 1.71 percent increase is now estimated to have been one of 2.86 percent the – best since growth rate since July, 2020’s 5.96 percent, as the economy recovered from the pandemic’s first wave and medical equipment production was prioritiezed. July’s initially reported 1.23 percent improvement was downgraded to one of 0.89 percent and then back up to 0.95 percent, and June’s initially reported 2.25 percent growth stayed at a downwardly revised 0.67 percent following a downgrade to 0.87 percent.

Still, in constant dollar terms, production in this broad category is now 13.78 percent greater than in immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, versus the 13.92 percent calculable last month; and

>paper, where real output in September sank by 0.92 percent. Revisions were mixed, with August’s initially reported 0.80 percent increase (the best such performance since February’s 2.26 percent jump) revised down to 0.69 percent; July’s initially reported 0.64 percent decrease upgraded for a second time, to one of 0.58 percent and now to 0.51 percent; and June’s numbers following a similar pattern, with an initially reported shrinkage of 0.88 percent revised up to losses of 0.62 percent and 0.57 percent, respectively.

Yet paper’s real output is now down by 3.78 percent since just before the pandemic arrived, versus the 2.83 percent worse calculable last month.

Good Septembers were also recorded in two manufacturing sectors of long-time special importance to the economy.

Machinery’s economic role is critical because of how widely its products are used throughout the economy and because its output largely reflects business’ expectations of future demand and growth. So it was good news that this diverse sector’s constant dollar output rose by 0.32 percent in Sept, and that revisions were positive on net.

August’s initially reported 0.99 percent increase (mistakenly reported in my last post as 0.91 percent), which had been the best such growth since April’s 1.97 percent was upgraded all the way up to 2.64 percent! That’s now the best production month since July, 2021’s 2.76 percent. This July’s initially reported 0.50 percent growth was upgraded again – from 0.68 percent to 0.78 percent – but June’s data has been revised down overall from a drop of 1.49 pecent to one of 1.27 percent, and back down to 1.75 percent and 1.83 percent.

These developments have now pushed up machinery’s post-February, 2020 real output to 7.23 percent, versus the 5.07 percent calculable last month.

The automotive sector has greatly influenced the manufacturing production statistics throughout the pandemic era, and its volatility continued in September, with after-inflation output up by one percent. Yet that result followed an August whose production decrease was revised down from 1.44 percent to one of 1.48 percent; a July whose output increase was downgraded from an initially reported 6.60 percent to one of 3.24 percent and now back up to 3.57 percent; and a June whose results have changed from -1.49 percent to -1.27 percent to -1.31 percent to -1.84 percent.

Real vehicle and parts production, however, is now back in the black since February, 2020, now aving risen by 0.89 percent, versus the 0.89 percent slippage calculable last month.

The news also was generally good in September for industries prominent in the news during the CCP Virus era.

Constant-dollar production in the shortage-plagued semiconductor sector rose by 0.45 percent, and revisions overall were mixed. August’s initially reported decline of 0.57 percent (the first in three months) is now judged to have been only 0.39 percent. July’s initially reported 1.16 percent growth has been revised down to 0.77 percent and now a measly 0.02 percent. But June’s initially reported 0.18 percent advance is now judged to have been one of 0.86 percent, after being revised way up to 2.09 percent, and then back down to 0.88 percent.

Real semiconductor production is now 17.29 percent higher since February, 2020, versus the 17.46 percent improvement calculable last month.

Inflation-adjusted production of aircraft and parts grew 0.59 percent in September, and revisions were mixed. August’s initially reported 3.11 percent surge (the best since January, 2021’s 8.61 percent) was downgraded significantly to 1.69 percent. But July’s numbers have been upgraded from an initially reported gain of 1.02 percent to one of 1.52 percent and now to one of 1.90 percent. And June’s initially reported 0.26 percent growth has been revised to a 0.18 percent advance, back up to a rise of 0.24 percent, and again to one of 0.56 percent.

Aircraft and parts production, therefore, has now increased by 31.18 percent since just before the pandemic’s arrival, versus the 30.60 percent rise calculable last month.

Pharmaceutical and medicines companies boosted their real monthly production by 0.64 percent in September, and revisions were mixed. August’s initially reported 1.62 percent improvement (the best since August, 2021’s 1.96 percent) was upgraded to 1.81 percent. But July’s initially reported 0.29 percent increase, which had been revised up to 0.30 percent, is now judged to have been a 0.55 percent loss – the first such setback since February’s 1.35 percent fall). And June’s results have gone from 0.39 percent to unrevised to a gain of 0.32 percent and now a rise of 0.43 percent.

As of last month, phamaceuticals’ and medicines’ after-inflation production level had grown by 16.56 percent since February, 2020.  Now the figure is 16.58 percent.

The lone exception to these good September results was medical equipment and supplies – where the personal protective devices and other pandemic fighting equipment is found. Its 1.33 percent after-inflation production fall-off last month was its first since last December (0.71 percent) and the worst such performance since the 15.08 percent crash dive in April, 2020 – at the height of the CCP Virus’ devastating first wave.

But August’s initially reported three percent increase was revised up to 4.40 percent – the best such result since July, 2020’s 9.84 percent. This July’s initially reported 1.90 percent rise was downgraded to 1.58 percent but then upgraded to 1.69 percent. And although June’s figure was revised down from an initially reported 3.12 percent to 1.01 percent and then to 0.67 percent, it was nudged back up to 0.68 percent yesterday.

These net gains pushed medical equipment and supplies’ real production to 17.95 percent above their February, 2020 levels, versus the 17.81 percent improvement calculable last month.

For what it’s worth, the normally pretty reliable forecasters at the Atlanta branch of the Federal Reserve system believe that the economy has now exited the recession it experienced in the first half of this year, and that will grow at a very respectable 2.9 percent after inflation at annual rates in the third quarter of this year. We’ll find out for sure starting October 27, when the first official read on third quarter growth comes out. But at this point, these new manufacturing production data support the idea that economic expansion is back for the time being – and certainly augur well for domestic industry’s prospects at least for the short term.

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

Tags

aircraft, aircraft parts, appliances, automotive, CCP Virus, computer and electronics products, coronavirus, COVID 19, electrical components, electrical equipment, fabricated metal products, Federal Reserve, furniture, housing, inflation-adjusted growth, machinery, manufacturing, medical devices, miscellaneous durable goods, petroleum and coal products, pharmaceuticals, real growth, recession, semiconductor shortage, semiconductors, transportation equipment, wood products, Wuhan virus, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Yesterday’s figures from the Federal Reserve showed that U.S.-based manufacturing is still growing – by the barest of margins.

The data, covering August, revealed that domestic industry expanded in inflation-adjusted terms by just 0.09 pecent. Revisions were slightly negative.

As a result, after adjusting for prices, U.S. manufacturing output is 3.49 percent higher than in February, 2020 – just before the CCP Virus and assorted mandated and voluntary behavioral curbs sparked a short but scary downturn and touched off waves of distortion that persist to this day. As of last month’s Fed report, industry’s inflation-adjusted production had risen by 3.69 percent during the pandemic period.

Among the broadest manufacturing sub-sectors tracked by the Fed, the biggest August winners were:

>petroleum and coal products, whose 3.54 percent constant dollar monthly output surge was its best since the 11.49 percent jump of March, 2021, when the industry was bouncing back from the damage inflicted by that winter’s Texas blizzards. Revisions were mixed. July’s originally reported after-inflation drop of 0.94 percent upgraded to one of 0.25 percent. June’s preliminary figure, revised up last month from a real decrease of 1.92 to one of 1.50 percent revised back down to a 2.80 percent decline. But May’s initially reported 2.33 percent constant dollar sequential monthly shrinkage of 2.61 pcerent now standing as a fall of 1.30 percent.

Since immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, inflation-adjusted production by these companies is up by 1.45 percent, versus the 1.27 decrease calculable last month;

>aerospace and miscellaneous transportation equipment, which rose month-to-month by 2.08 percent in real terms for its best such performance since February’s 2.52 percent. Revisions were slightly positive. June’s initially reported 1.54 percent improvement is now pegged at 1.55 percent. June had advanced from a fractional increase to a 0.14 percent dip to a 0.20 percent increase. But May’s results have deteriorated here, too – from an initially reported 0.85 percent decrease to a 1.25 percent drop.

In price-adjusted terms, this cluster is now 24.07 percent larger than in February, 2020, versus the 21.30 percent calculable last month;

>miscellaneous durable goods, a diverse sector containing the personal protective equipment and other medical gear used to widely to fight the CCP Virus saw inflation-adjusted production grow by 1.71 on month in August, its best such performace since last December’s 1.85 percent. Revisions, however, were negative. July’s initially reported 1.23 percent increase was revised down to one of 0.89 percent. June’s results have been downgraded from an advance of 2.25 percent to one of 0.87 percent to the 0.67 percent reported yesterday. And May’s improvement, first estimated at 1.17 percent, is now just to have been 0.63 percent.

Consequently, real production in miscellaneous durable goods has now increased by 13.92 percent since February, 2020, just before the pandemic’s arrival in force, versus the 13.38 percent calculable last month; and

>computer and electronics products, where constant dollar output climbed by 1.27 sequentially for their best month since May, 2021 (2.44 percent). Revisions were slightly negative, July’s results were downgraded from a decrease of 0.65 percent to one of 0.68 percent. June’s initially reported 0.21 percent was upgraded to a 0.67 percent gain before dropping back to one of 0.46 percent. And the initially reported May monthly rise of 0.50 percent is now recorded as a decrease of 0.11 percent.

After-inflation growth in this broad sector is now reported at 6.11 percent since that last CCP Virus data month of February, 2020 versus the 5.93 percent calculable last month.

Not so coincidentally, August’s two worst manufacturing production losers among the biggest manufacturing sub-sectors were closely related to the nation’s hard-pressed housing sector:

>furniture and related products, which suffered it sixth straight monthly price-adjusted production decrease. Moreover, the 2.13 percent shrinkage was the worst since February, 2021’s 2.77 percent. Moreover, revisions were overall negative. July’s initially reported retreat of 1.57 percent was revised up to one of 0.80. percent. But the June losses have been downgraded from one of 0.55 percent to one of 1.33 percent and then to one of 1.87 percent. And May’s initially reported 0.94 percent increase is now judged to have been a 0.96 percent decrease.

The furniture cluster is now 7.30 percent smaller after accounting for inflation since February, 2020, versus the 5.56 percent calculable last month’

>wood products, whose inflation-adjusted production slip of 1.70 percent was its second month-to-month decrease in a row and its worst since April’s 1.89 percent. Revisions were mixed. July’s initially reported 0.72 percent increase is now pegged as a -0.03 decline. June’s initially reported 0.73 percent rise has been revised down to one of 0.42 percent and yesterday to a 0.62 loss. But May’s results have been upgraded from a 2.64 plunge to a decrease of just 0.28 percent.

Whereas last month’s Fed release showed this sector to be 6.79 percent bigger since just before the pandemic began roiling and distorting the economy, this month’s estimates this increase to have been just 2.67 percent;

>automotive, whose roller-coaster ride continued with real output sinking by 1.44 percent in August. Worse, July’s initially reported 6.60 percent monthly production burst was cut by more than half – to an increase of 3.24 percent. June’s initially reported 1.49 percent decrease was first upgraded to one of 1.27 percent but now stands at 1.31 percent. And May’s initially reported 0.06 percent on month real output dip is now judged to have been a decrease of 1.96 percent.

As of last month’s Fed report, inflation-adjusted vehicle and parts production was recorded as being up by 4.73 percent since February, 2020. Now it’s pegged as being off by 0.20 percent; and

>electrical equipment, appliances (also related to housing), and components, whose inflation-adjusted production contraction (1.01 percent) was its second straight. Revisions, though, were overall positive. July’s initially reported 1.41 percent fall-off is now estimated as one of 1.44 percent., but June’s results have been upgraded a second consecutive time – from an advance of 1.34 percent to one of 1.42 percent to yesterday’s 1.45 percent. And although May remained an output loser, the decrease has been upgraded from an initially reported 1.83 percent to one of 1.68 percent (which was still its worst results since December’s 2.48 percent slump).

All told, though, this cluster’s price-adjusted shrinkage since that last pre-pandemic data month of February, 2020 fell to just 4.53 percent, versus the 4.83 percent fall-off calculable last month; and

>fabricated metal products, another volatile industry. After-inflation production was off by 0.95 percent sequentially in August, after improving by a figure of 1.79 percent that was revised down from an initially reported 2.05 percent but was still the best such result since February’s 2.49 percent jump. Other revisions were mixed, with June’s initially reported decrease of 0.83 percent revised down first to one of 1.40 percent and now to one of 1.59 percent, and May’s initially reported drop of 1.16 percent now pegged at just 0.98 percent.

As of last month’s Fed report, fabricated metals products’ constant dollar output had closed to within 0.14 percent of its immediate pre-CCP virus level. Now it’s off by 1.42 percent.

Better news came from the big and diverse machinery sector, which is a bellwether for both the rest of manufacturing and the rest of the entire economy, since so many industries use its products. It grew in real terms sequentially in August by 0.91 percent – its best such result since April’s 1.97 percent. Revisions were mixed. July’s initially reported 0.50 percent increase is now estimated to have been 0.68 percent. June’s results, first downgraded from a 1.14 percent decrease to one of 2.16 percent were revised back up to one of 1.75 percent. And May’s initially reported drop-off of 2.55 percent is now recorded as one of 3.20 percent – the worst since the 18.64 percent nosedive of April, 2020, during the height of the pandemic’s first wave.

Machinery has now grown by 5.07 percent during the pandemic period, versus the 2.82 percent calculable last month.

Interestingly, except for the still-shortage-plagued semiconductor industry, August was a banner output month for the sectors that consistently have made headlines during the pandemic.

Real output of microchips and related products did decrease by 0.57 percent, but the decline was the first in three months. Revisions were negative, though. July’s initially reported 1.16 percent rise has been downgraded to one of 0.77 percent and following a major upward revision from 0.18 percent growth to 2.09 percent, June’s real output now stands at 0.88 percent. But after a massive downgrade from 0.52 growth to 2.24 percent shrinkage, May’s performance is now recorded as a just a 0.72 percent loss.

After-inflation semiconductor production is now up 17.46 percent since pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, versus the 21.98 percent calculable last month.

Aircraft and parts surged by 3.11 percent sequentially in August after inflation, these industries’ strongest such performance since the 8.61 percent burst in January, 2021. Revisions were mixed, as July’s initially reported 1.02 percent real monthly output rise to one of 1.52 percent, but June’s initially reported 0.26 percent advance revised down to one of 0.18 percent and then back up to just 0.24 percent, and May’s initially reported 0.33 percent advance now judged to be have been a 0.47 percent retreat.

Even so, constant dollar aircraft and parts output is up by 30.60 percent since February, 2020, versus the 26.67 percent calculable last month.

In pharmaceuticals and medicines, real production was up month-to-month in August by 1.62 percent, these sectors’ best such performance since last August’s 1.96 percent. Revisions here, too, were mixed. July’s initially reported 0.29 percent increase was bumped up to growth of 0.30 percent. June’s results stayed at a 0.32 percent increase after being downgraded from 0.39 percent. But May’s initial growth figure of 0.35 percent now stands at 1.20 percent after some ups and downs.

Since just before the CCP Virus’ arrival in force, pharmaceuticals and medicines output (including vaccines) is now up 16.56 percent in real terms, versus the 14.69 percent calculable last month.

And medical equipment and supplies firms (including those that make anti-CCP Virus products) boosted their price-adjusted production in August by three percent in constant dollar terms – their best such performance since January’s 3.15 percent. Revisions were negative on net. July’s initially reported inflation-adjusted improvement of 1.90 percent was downgraded to an increase of 1.58 percent. June’s original 3.12 percent real growth figure has now been revised down twice – to 1.01 and 0.67 percent. May’s initial estimate of 1.44 percent real growth is now pegged at 1.36 percent.

Yet real production in this sector is now 17.81 percent higher than in immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, versus the 16.15 percent calculable last month.

At this point, it’s easy to make the case that the headwinds facing domestic manufacturing are stronger than the tailwinds. There’s not only continued tighter inflation-fighting and growth-slowing monetary policies being pursued by the Fed along with mounting evidence that America’s overall economic growth will remain slow at best. There’s the end of the mammoth government deficit spending that’s also supported that growth for so long, and especially during the CCP Virus emergency. And don’t forget the continually darkening outlook for the global economy – and for the export markets on which U.S.-based industry relies significantly (nearly 18 percent of its gross output in 2021 by my calculations).

U.S.-based industry has been resilient since the pandemic arrived, but it wasn’t able to escape the undertow of the domestic and overseas economic downturns it generated. That seems like as good a forecast as any for domestic manufacturing output over the next few months, too.   

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: More Evidence That Stimulus-Bloated Demand is the Main U.S. Inflation Driver

Tags

CCP Virus, China, consumer price index, consumers, coronavirus, COVID 19, Covid relief, CPI, demand, inflation, Jobs, population, retirement, stimulus, Sun Belt, supply, supply chains, The New York Times, Ukraine War, workers, Wuhan virus, Zero Covid, {What's Left of) Our Economy

The New York Times just provided some important evidence on the big role played by super-charged consumer demand in super-charging inflation – this article showing that the Sun Belt has been the U.S. region where prices have been rising fastest.

The finding matters because a debate has been raging among politicians and economists over the leading causes of multi-decade high inflation rates with which Americans have been struggling over the last year and a half or so.

On one side are those who claim that overly generous government stimulus spending is the main culprit, because it’s increased U.S. buying power much faster than the supply of goods and services has grown. On the other side are those who focus on the inadequate amount of goods and services that companies are turning out, stemming from supply chain disruptions rooted in the stop-and-go nature of the American economy from successive waves of pandemic downturns and slowdowns to the Ukraine war to China’s ridiculously draconian Zero Covid policies.

Clearly, all these developments deserve blame, but the regional disparities in inflation rates provide pretty convincing support for emphasizing bloated demand.

Here’s the latest annual disparity in the headline Consumer Price Index as presented in the Times article:

U.S. total:    8.5 percent

South:          9.4 percent

Midwest:     8.6 percent

West:          8.3 percent

Northeast:   7.3 percent

It correlates roughly, by the way, with the data in this report last spring from the Republican members of Congress’ Joint Economic Committee.

And here’s a principal, demand-related reason: The Sun Belt states of the South and West have been the U.S. states that have gained the most population during the pandemic period. Indeed, according to the latest U.S. Census data, eight of the ten states with the fastest overall population growth between July, 2020 and July, 2021 was a southern or southwestern state, and the same holds for five of the ten states with the fastest population growth in percentage terms.

It’s true that population growth often increases supply, too – by boosting numbers of workers. The U.S. government doesn’t break out job creation along the above regional lines, but a look at individual state totals doesn’t conclusively brand the Sun Belt as an national employment leader. On average, relatively speaking, Arizona, California, Florida, Nevada, and Texas have created more jobs from the pandemic-period bottom in April, 2020 through last month, as shown in this table:

U.S. total:    +16.87 percent

California:   +17.98 percent

Florida:        +21.05 percent

Texas:          +17.31 percent

Arizona:       +16.02 percent

Nevada:        +30.92 percent

But don’t forget – many of these states have outsized travel and tourism sectors, and you know what happened to those activities during the worst of the pandemic. So in part, their employment bounced back so quickly because they had plummeted so dramatically as the CCP Virus’ first wave spread.

Moreover, many of these states are big retirement destinations, too, and as their overall population increase makes clear, this trend has intensified since the pandemic arrived. Of course, the workers in any given state don’t only sell goods and services to that state’s population, and a given state’s residents don’t only buy goods and services from providers in that state. Yet it’s certainly noteworthy that the number of the Sun Belt states’ consumers rose faster relative to the national average than the number of Sun Belt workers.

And in this vein, Sun Belt inflation probably is also particularly hot partly because so many of the newcomers are wealthy. Indeed, one recent study found that, early in the pandemic, “Of the 10 states with the largest influx of high-earning households, nine are located in the Sun Belt, including the six-highest ranked states, starting with Florida.”

Because they bring so much spending power to their new home states, these wealthier Americans naturally tend to drive prices up unusually fast.

As the Times article notes, some prominent reasons for scorching Sun Belt inflation are unrelated to population-driven demand growth – notably much lower population densities that generate more gasoline-using driving.  But the impact of population movement and all the disproportionately high inflation it’s clearly creating is hard to ignore.  And if a consumption shock has spurred so much inflation in the Sun Belt, why wouldn’t it be affecting prices this way in the rest of the nation, too?