Posts Tagged: Keynesian economics


13
Jun 11

The New York Times Finally Discovers Structural Unemployment

We have visited the issue of structural unemployment several times.  See, e.g. Unemployment and the Fall of Labor, Why this May be Worse than the Great Depression and The New Reality: Permanent Job Loss.   Let’s define it again:

Joblessness caused not by lack of demand but by changes in demand patterns or obsolescence of technology, and requiring retraining of workers and large investment in new capital equipment. Source:  Business Dictionary

How incredulous that it took until June 9th, more than three years into the current recession, for The New York Times to finally discover this “new” reality. Companies Spend on Equipment, Not Workers.

What Did the Times Discover?

Workers are getting more expensive while equipment is getting cheaper, and the combination is encouraging companies to spend on machines rather than people. See Companies Spend on Equipment Not Workers

The article at issue focuses on a Minnesota plastic products manufacturer which hired only two workers, but spent almost three times more on new labor saving machinery. The Times attempts to draw from this example some larger societal and economic points:

  • American workers just can’t compete with Chinese and other low cost foreign workers.
  • Since the recovery began, equipment prices have declined 2.4% while labor costs are increasing about 6.7%.
  • The four newly purchased machines mentioned in the article all come from foreign suppliers.
  • Much of the labor cost increase arises from increasing health care costs and other benefits.
  • Hiring has hidden costs:  including days spent culling the resumes of unqualified applicants.
  • Many applicants lack basic writing, mathematical, technical or computer skills.
  • New employees must go through a federally required safety program, be drug tested at a cost of $150 and require ongoing training, which diverts management from other work.
  • “You don’t have to train [or drug test] machines.”  Generous depreciation allowances and tax credits favor investment in machinery rather than people.

I would argue that The Times article misses one key point, zero interest rates.  Holding interest rates at artificially low levels further encourages equipment purchase rather than new employment.

Complete Lack of Journalistic Insight?

The Times has an amazing lack of self awareness.  Perhaps reporters and editors forget their own editorial stance on key issues:

  • Free Trade – We were implored by The Times to support free trade and open our borders to foreign goods.  These goods are often produced by workers earning less than a dollar a day without employment, safety or environmental protections. How could American business hope to complete with this?
  • Economic Stimulus – Among other incentives, The Times has advocated liberal tax breaks for equipment purchases.  Is it surprising that employers indeed invest in labor saving equipment?
  • Zero Interest Rates – Krugman and other Times editorial and op-ed writers have favored Bernanke’s zero interest rate policy.  With ultra low borrowing rates, of course employers purchase equipment rather than higher cost labor.
  • Obamacare – Once again, The Times has supported a government initiative that effectively has put a stranglehold on employer benefit costs.
  • Other Pro-Worker LegislationThe Times has long promoted employment and labor law reforms which make hiring expensive: The Family and Medical Leave Act, The Americans with Disabilities Act, The Older Workers Benefit Protect Act all have hidden costs which make hiring unattractive.  Couple that with attempts to expand union involvement, and employers are compelled to favor machines over people.

Late to the Party Again

Once again, the pre-eminent New York Times is not reporting the news, but rather restating the obvious. Why have they missed another major economic trend?  Their reporters are smart but ideological.  They are ideologically and emotionally wedded to Keynesian nostrums of economic stimulus and ultra loose monetary policy.  If instead they took a holistic view of what is happening in the real economy, following real business people making real hiring and investment decisions, they would be forced to reassess their adherence to old and dubious politics and theory.

If The Times is about all the news that’s fit to print, it should be least be subjected to  intellectual rigor, and critical and honest thinking.  And let’s not forget timeliness; do we really need to clutter Page One with what we already know?

 

 

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark

23
Aug 10

Magical Thinking

Just as in the late stages of the Roman Empire, magical thinking abounds. This is America, the capital of can-do! We are audaciously hopeful because we always arise, newly envigorated by the unquenchable spring of American innovation….” Nothing has Changed, Charles Hughes Smith

How ironic that we live in an age of magical thinking.  We have never had more information and commentary a mere computer keystroke away.   With all this information, one would think that we could easily accept reality and think critically.   Perhaps reality is so discouraging and the consequences of our current path of behavior so awful to contemplate that we prefer magical thinking, hoping against hope that a solution will appear.

Nowhere is magical thinking more evident than in our current economic plight.

The Land of Endless Deficits

Paul Krugman, Professor of Economics, influential Democrat and New York Times columnist, is the high priest of deficit spending.  His philosophy in short:

Spend now, while the economy remains depressed; save later, once it has recovered.  How hard is that to understand? See Now and Later

First, we never save later, as Congress would rather keep spending to buy votes than be fiscally prudent.   Second, the US is absorbing a large portion of the world’s savings to fund the ongoing $1.3 trillion dollar per year deficit.  Third, even Krugman realized that our debts are growing exponentially.  His view is that with high unemployment this is the not the right time to become fiscally prudent.  Fourth, taxpayers have paid $3.7 trillion over the last year to achieve a modest economic recovery which is currently fading.   In the 1950′s one dollar of debt added a dollar to GDP;  recently it took $5.57 to add a dollar to GDP.  Source Contrary Investor. We have reached the point of debt saturation.

Why Not Cut Taxes?

Republicans have an equally magical mantra:  “just cut taxes.”   Back to the Reagan era, Republicans have been enthralled by the Laffer Curve:

Economist Arthur Laffer made a very interesting supposition: If tax rates are high enough, then cutting taxes might actually generate more revenue for the government, or at least pay for themselves. (In one of life’s great coincidences, he first sketched a graph of this idea on Dick Cheney’s cocktail napkin.) If the government cuts taxes, then Uncle Sam gets a smaller cut of all economic activity — but reducing taxes also generates new economic activity. Laffer reasoned that, under some circumstances, a tax cut would stimulate so much new economic activity that the government would end up with more in its coffers — by taking a smaller slice of a much larger pie.  See Debunking One of the Worst Ideas in Economics

If the US had a 99% marginal tax rate,the rate paid on the last dollar of taxable income, Laffer’s theory might work.  But, we do not:

We don’t have a 99 percent marginal tax rate. Or 70 percent. Or even 50 percent. We start with low marginal tax rates relative to the rest of the developed world. (Yes, I understand that it may not feel that way after the check you wrote last month.)

So cutting the tax rate from 36 percent to 33 percent is not going to give you the same kind of economic jolt as slashing a tax rate from 90 percent to 50 percent. There’s no huge black market to be shut down, no big supply of skilled workers to be lured back into the labor market, and so on.  See Debunking One of the Worst Ideas in Economics

The ultimate problem is that even if the economy grows, government revenues shrink, government spending continues and deficits widen.

Bring in the Grown Ups

Former Reagan budget director David Stockman recognizes that, if honestly measured, the budget deficit would be a Greek-like 120% of GDP by 2015.  Stockman excoriates the Republicans for cutting taxes and failing to balance the budget.

…the new catechism, as practiced by Republican policymakers for decades now, has amounted to little more than money printing and deficit finance — vulgar Keynesianism robed in the ideological vestments of the prosperous classes.

This approach has not simply made a mockery of traditional party ideals. It has also led to the serial financial bubbles and Wall Street depredations that have crippled our economy. See Four Deformations of the Apocalypse

His prescription is both simple and logical: “…balanced budgets, sound money and financial discipline — is needed more than ever.”

Without Keynes, Laffer or Friedman

Keynes’ “pump priming” through endless deficit spending and Milton Friedman’s monetarism call for expansion of money supply to ward off deflation.  These flawed strategies have captured our Treasury Secretaries from Republican Henry Paulson to Democrat Timothy Geithner.  Reviving Laffer’s arguments, and ignoring widening deficits, Congressional Republicans argue for extension of the Bush tax cuts.  Unfortunately, these theories have not extricated us from the current economic morass.

Faced with reality, the political elite would rather delude themselves with hope and magical thinking than confront the harder realities of austerity and living within our means.  We appear doomed to repeat these failed policies until it is too late.  Perhaps an economically rational adult will arrive to break the magic spell.

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark

13
Nov 09

The New Reality: Permanent Job Loss

On November 12, 2009, weekly initial reported jobless claims were announced as 502,000. While an improvement from last week initial jobless claims have remained over 500,000 per week for all of 2009.  In response to these continuing dreadful unemployment numbers President Obama announced a job summit to be held in December:

Obama said the White House forum will gather CEOs, small business owners, economists, financial experts and representatives from labor unions and nonprofit groups “to talk about how we can work together to create jobs and get this economy moving again.”

“We all know that there are limits to what government can and should do, even during such difficult times. But we have an obligation to consider every additional, responsible step that we can take to encourage and accelerate job creation in this country,” he said.

Marketwatch, November 12, 2009

By employing classic Keynesian remedies, the White House hopes that the right level of stimulus will overcome economic realities and persuade employers to resume large scale hiring. But, the President and his advisers have missed the basic structural changes in the job market.

Breakfast with Dave

In his letter Breakfast with Dave, David Rosenberg one of the most perceptive practicing economists currently writing, discusses the new labor market paradigm:

There are serious structural issues undermining the U.S. labour market as companies continue to adjust their order books, production schedules and staffing requirements to a semi-permanently impaired credit backdrop. The bottom line is that the level of credit per unit of GDP is going to be much, much lower in the future than has been the case in the last two decades. While we may be getting close to a bottom in terms of employment, the jobless rate is very likely going to be climbing much further in the future due to the secular dynamics within the labour market that need to be discussed

The Big Picture- US Unemployment Rated Headed for 12-13%

Rosenberg points out the unique aspects of this recession.  There has been a structural change where 6.2 million jobs have been permanently eliminated.  The workweek has been reduced to 33 hours per week.   Employers will avoid hiring well into the future, choosing instead to lengthen the workweek.  In a slow top line growth environment, this trend will be exacerbated as companies will be forced to continue slashing labor costs.

Rosenberg is validating the basic thesis in my prior blog entry, Why This May Be Worse than the Great Depression:

The government is still stuck in a 1950’s employer mentality.  Can we implement New Deal-type of public improvement efforts such as road repair or retrofitting government buildings?  How many credit derivative specialists have the ability to perform road paving or asbestos removal?

Similarly, the government is banking on new industries to be engines of growth. Is banking on this type of job growth realistic?  High growth industries such as biotechnology and solar cell companies employ few and highly specialized employees.  Even the modern US military needs fewer soldiers, as technology has revamped war.

The Great Depression ended when large numbers of employees were recalled by auto, steel, chemical and rubber companies to support the war effort.  There is no massive recall or even new industry on the horizon to absorb the unemployed.

Politicians Continue to Fight the Last War

Government intervention has its limits.  The Administration has not convinced banks to lend in the face of poor credit conditions.  To maintain profitability, companies have focused on controlling labor costs. Despite the upcoming jobs summit, the Administration will be equally ineffective in fighting the tide of this new reality: basic structural unemployment.

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Share/Bookmark