Connect with us

Uncategorized

The Fed should stand pat on further interest rate hikes at this week’s meeting: Inflation is easing even as the labor market remains strong

Inflation and all of its main drivers sharply decelerated in the last half of 2022. This was the case even though the pace of economic growth accelerated…

Published

on

Inflation and all of its main drivers sharply decelerated in the last half of 2022. This was the case even though the pace of economic growth accelerated in the second half of the year and unemployment remained very low.

The Federal Reserve’s “dual mandate” is meant to balance the risks of inflation versus the benefits of fast growth and low unemployment. Right now, the benefits of low unemployment are enormous, and the risks of inflation are retreating rapidly. If the Fed lets the current recovery continue apace by not raising interest rates further at this week’s meeting, 2023 could turn out to be a great year for the economic fortunes of American families.

It is time for the Fed to stand pat on interest rate increases and wait to see how the lagged effects of past increases enacted in 2022 will filter through to the economy. Continuing to raise rates in the early stretches of 2023 will be a clear mistake and pose an unneeded threat to growth in the next year. In particular, the Fed should note the following:

  • Rapidly decelerating inflation in the last quarter of 2022 happened even in the absence of a strong disinflationary effect everybody knows is coming quickly in 2023: falling housing cost inflation.
  • Wage growth is normalizing quickly—average wage growth for the last three months of 2022 relative to the previous three months was just 4.3% at an annualized rate. This is down from a peak growth rate of 6.1% seen earlier in 2022.
    • Crucially, this proves that wage growth can normalize without a steep rise in unemployment. This should settle one of the key debates over monetary policy going forward.
  • Corporate profit margins—one of the key drivers of inflation—will likely stabilize or even contract in the coming year. This means labor’s share of income will rise, which has the potential to absorb any wage growth that exceeds its long-run targets for years to come. Past experience suggests strongly that this is not just a vague hope, but will actually happen.

Housing costs are the shoes that haven’t dropped yet

Much of the acceleration in core inflation seen in late 2021 and 2022 was in housing. However, even as overall core inflation decelerated strongly in the last quarter of 2022, housing costs did not. That is changing—all close observers of real estate markets are flagging industry data that show beyond any real doubt that housing cost inflation (both prices of homes and rental costs) is falling rapidly.

However, because of well-known issues in how housing costs are measured and reported in official government price indices, this lower inflation will not be seen in official data until later in 2023. But they are all but guaranteed to show up.

Figure A below, for example, shows the tight fit between one often-cited industry measure of housing prices (the Case-Shiller home price index) lagged one period and the current reading of shelter inflation in the Consumer Price Index. The tight fit between these measures shows, for example, that developments in the Case-Shiller index in 2022 are likely to predict shelter inflation in 2023. Because this relationship indicates that a dose of significant disinflation is clearly in the pipeline even as overall inflation measures are normalizing, the Fed should feel far more comfortable standing pat on further rate hikes.

Figure A

Wage growth has normalized quickly

A key concern of inflation hawks over the past year has been rapid growth in nominal wages. They have called attention to the relatively uncontroversial fact that an overall price inflation target of 2% is consistent with nominal wage growth of only about 3.5% when the economy is in equilibrium, and that this wage growth has been as high as 6.1% in 2022. However, there are plenty of reasons why this is misleading about the threat that fast nominal wage growth might pose to inflation today.

For one, wage growth has been decelerating rapidly. In the last three months, annualized wage growth has been running at a 4.3% (annualized) rate, a pace consistent with inflation below 3%. This represents a sharp deceleration even as the unemployment rate has remained very low.

Figure B below shows the unemployment rate and the three-month change (expressed as an annualized rate) of wage growth in recent years. The dashed lines smooth out the extreme ups and downs of both unemployment and wage growth during the pandemic recession and early recovery. (In the case of wage growth, these extreme ups and downs were largely due to compositional effects that gave very little information about the actual state of labor market tightness one way or the other.)

Figure B
Figure B

Falling corporate profit margins will put further downward pressure on prices in 2023

The claim that 3.5% wage growth is the fastest rate consistent with 2% inflation “in equilibrium” assumes that the share of overall income claimed by workers’ pay rather than corporate profits remains constant. However, wage growth can exceed 3.5% for a spell of time while still being consistent with 2% inflation if the labor share of income is allowed to rise. Importantly, the labor share of income has shrunk significantly throughout the recovery from the COVID-19 recession. This means that by definition the economy is not in equilibrium on this score, and just returning to the pre-COVID labor share of income would allow lots of wage growth without feeding through to price inflation.

This is, of course, the mirror image of saying that rising corporate profit margins have been a prime driver of inflation throughout this business cycle, but these margins will stabilize or even contract in the coming year, clearing the way for non-inflationary wage growth.

Some have argued that, while arithmetically true, claims that a rising labor share of income will absorb some of the inflationary impact of faster wage growth are just wishful thinking. Empirically, that’s flat-out wrong. In essentially every single business cycle since World War II, when unemployment moved close to pre-recession levels late in recoveries, further labor market tightening has been strongly associated with a rising labor share of income. This means that the rising labor share absorbed lots of potential inflation and kept it from happening.

Figure C below shows the slightly complicated cyclical dynamics of the labor share of income over business cycles. Its local peak occurs during recessions, as profits fall faster than wage incomes in the recessionary phase of the business cycle. But the labor share trough tends to follow quickly after its recessionary peak, and the latter stages of business cycles universally show a rapid rise in the labor share. Sometimes this labor share increase is snuffed out by another recession before it regains its previous peak, but the pattern is very clear: As labor markets remain relatively hot, much of the potential inflationary impact of this tight labor market is absorbed by a rising labor share of income. This post provides some regression evidence that further labor market tightening is associated with labor share increases.

Figure C
Figure C

Just how much room do we have from potential labor share increases to absorb wage increases without generating upward pressure on inflation? Figure D below shows how long the pace of wage growth seen in the last quarter of 2022 could be sustained with inflation rising at 2% and the labor share of income reaching the pre-recession peaks it saw in 2019, 2007, and 2000, respectively.

Essentially, this figure shows that labor share peaks seen in the past few business cycles provide many years of room for wages to grow as fast as they are currently without pushing inflation above the Fed’s 2% target. If we use 2019 as the benchmark, we could see current wage growth being fully absorbed by a rising labor share until the second half of 2026. If 2007 is the benchmark, this can happen until the end of 2029. Finally, if 2000 is our benchmark, wage growth at its current pace is possible without seeing inflation above 2% all the way until the end of 2036.

Figure D
Figure D

Conclusion

The balance of risks faced by the Fed has moved decisively away from spiraling inflation. Key sources of disinflation—especially housing costs and a rising labor share of income—have yet to kick in, and inflation still decelerated rapidly in the last quarter of the year. The Fed should stand pat on interest rate increases. If they instead insist on raising rates, this will pose a dire threat to what could be an excellent 2023 for the economic prospects of America’s working families.

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

February Employment Situation

By Paul Gomme and Peter Rupert The establishment data from the BLS showed a 275,000 increase in payroll employment for February, outpacing the 230,000…

Published

on

By Paul Gomme and Peter Rupert

The establishment data from the BLS showed a 275,000 increase in payroll employment for February, outpacing the 230,000 average over the previous 12 months. The payroll data for January and December were revised down by a total of 167,000. The private sector added 223,000 new jobs, the largest gain since May of last year.

Temporary help services employment continues a steep decline after a sharp post-pandemic rise.

Average hours of work increased from 34.2 to 34.3. The increase, along with the 223,000 private employment increase led to a hefty increase in total hours of 5.6% at an annualized rate, also the largest increase since May of last year.

The establishment report, once again, beat “expectations;” the WSJ survey of economists was 198,000. Other than the downward revisions, mentioned above, another bit of negative news was a smallish increase in wage growth, from $34.52 to $34.57.

The household survey shows that the labor force increased 150,000, a drop in employment of 184,000 and an increase in the number of unemployed persons of 334,000. The labor force participation rate held steady at 62.5, the employment to population ratio decreased from 60.2 to 60.1 and the unemployment rate increased from 3.66 to 3.86. Remember that the unemployment rate is the number of unemployed relative to the labor force (the number employed plus the number unemployed). Consequently, the unemployment rate can go up if the number of unemployed rises holding fixed the labor force, or if the labor force shrinks holding the number unemployed unchanged. An increase in the unemployment rate is not necessarily a bad thing: it may reflect a strong labor market drawing “marginally attached” individuals from outside the labor force. Indeed, there was a 96,000 decline in those workers.

Earlier in the week, the BLS announced JOLTS (Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey) data for January. There isn’t much to report here as the job openings changed little at 8.9 million, the number of hires and total separations were little changed at 5.7 million and 5.3 million, respectively.

As has been the case for the last couple of years, the number of job openings remains higher than the number of unemployed persons.

Also earlier in the week the BLS announced that productivity increased 3.2% in the 4th quarter with output rising 3.5% and hours of work rising 0.3%.

The bottom line is that the labor market continues its surprisingly (to some) strong performance, once again proving stronger than many had expected. This strength makes it difficult to justify any interest rate cuts soon, particularly given the recent inflation spike.

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Mortgage rates fall as labor market normalizes

Jobless claims show an expanding economy. We will only be in a recession once jobless claims exceed 323,000 on a four-week moving average.

Published

on

Everyone was waiting to see if this week’s jobs report would send mortgage rates higher, which is what happened last month. Instead, the 10-year yield had a muted response after the headline number beat estimates, but we have negative job revisions from previous months. The Federal Reserve’s fear of wage growth spiraling out of control hasn’t materialized for over two years now and the unemployment rate ticked up to 3.9%. For now, we can say the labor market isn’t tight anymore, but it’s also not breaking.

The key labor data line in this expansion is the weekly jobless claims report. Jobless claims show an expanding economy that has not lost jobs yet. We will only be in a recession once jobless claims exceed 323,000 on a four-week moving average.

From the Fed: In the week ended March 2, initial claims for unemployment insurance benefits were flat, at 217,000. The four-week moving average declined slightly by 750, to 212,250


Below is an explanation of how we got here with the labor market, which all started during COVID-19.

1. I wrote the COVID-19 recovery model on April 7, 2020, and retired it on Dec. 9, 2020. By that time, the upfront recovery phase was done, and I needed to model out when we would get the jobs lost back.

2. Early in the labor market recovery, when we saw weaker job reports, I doubled and tripled down on my assertion that job openings would get to 10 million in this recovery. Job openings rose as high as to 12 million and are currently over 9 million. Even with the massive miss on a job report in May 2021, I didn’t waver.

Currently, the jobs openings, quit percentage and hires data are below pre-COVID-19 levels, which means the labor market isn’t as tight as it once was, and this is why the employment cost index has been slowing data to move along the quits percentage.  

2-US_Job_Quits_Rate-1-2

3. I wrote that we should get back all the jobs lost to COVID-19 by September of 2022. At the time this would be a speedy labor market recovery, and it happened on schedule, too

Total employment data

4. This is the key one for right now: If COVID-19 hadn’t happened, we would have between 157 million and 159 million jobs today, which would have been in line with the job growth rate in February 2020. Today, we are at 157,808,000. This is important because job growth should be cooling down now. We are more in line with where the labor market should be when averaging 140K-165K monthly. So for now, the fact that we aren’t trending between 140K-165K means we still have a bit more recovery kick left before we get down to those levels. 




From BLS: Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 275,000 in February, and the unemployment rate increased to 3.9 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Job gains occurred in health care, in government, in food services and drinking places, in social assistance, and in transportation and warehousing.

Here are the jobs that were created and lost in the previous month:

IMG_5092

In this jobs report, the unemployment rate for education levels looks like this:

  • Less than a high school diploma: 6.1%
  • High school graduate and no college: 4.2%
  • Some college or associate degree: 3.1%
  • Bachelor’s degree or higher: 2.2%
IMG_5093_320f22

Today’s report has continued the trend of the labor data beating my expectations, only because I am looking for the jobs data to slow down to a level of 140K-165K, which hasn’t happened yet. I wouldn’t categorize the labor market as being tight anymore because of the quits ratio and the hires data in the job openings report. This also shows itself in the employment cost index as well. These are key data lines for the Fed and the reason we are going to see three rate cuts this year.

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Inside The Most Ridiculous Jobs Report In History: Record 1.2 Million Immigrant Jobs Added In One Month

Inside The Most Ridiculous Jobs Report In History: Record 1.2 Million Immigrant Jobs Added In One Month

Last month we though that the January…

Published

on

Inside The Most Ridiculous Jobs Report In History: Record 1.2 Million Immigrant Jobs Added In One Month

Last month we though that the January jobs report was the "most ridiculous in recent history" but, boy, were we wrong because this morning the Biden department of goalseeked propaganda (aka BLS) published the February jobs report, and holy crap was that something else. Even Goebbels would blush. 

What happened? Let's take a closer look.

On the surface, it was (almost) another blockbuster jobs report, certainly one which nobody expected, or rather just one bank out of 76 expected. Starting at the top, the BLS reported that in February the US unexpectedly added 275K jobs, with just one research analyst (from Dai-Ichi Research) expecting a higher number.

Some context: after last month's record 4-sigma beat, today's print was "only" 3 sigma higher than estimates. Needless to say, two multiple sigma beats in a row used to only happen in the USSR... and now in the US, apparently.

Before we go any further, a quick note on what last month we said was "the most ridiculous jobs report in recent history": it appears the BLS read our comments and decided to stop beclowing itself. It did that by slashing last month's ridiculous print by over a third, and revising what was originally reported as a massive 353K beat to just 229K,  a 124K revision, which was the biggest one-month negative revision in two years!

Of course, that does not mean that this month's jobs print won't be revised lower: it will be, and not just that month but every other month until the November election because that's the only tool left in the Biden admin's box: pretend the economic and jobs are strong, then revise them sharply lower the next month, something we pointed out first last summer and which has not failed to disappoint once.

To be fair, not every aspect of the jobs report was stellar (after all, the BLS had to give it some vague credibility). Take the unemployment rate, after flatlining between 3.4% and 3.8% for two years - and thus denying expectations from Sahm's Rule that a recession may have already started - in February the unemployment rate unexpectedly jumped to 3.9%, the highest since February 2022 (with Black unemployment spiking by 0.3% to 5.6%, an indicator which the Biden admin will quickly slam as widespread economic racism or something).

And then there were average hourly earnings, which after surging 0.6% MoM in January (since revised to 0.5%) and spooking markets that wage growth is so hot, the Fed will have no choice but to delay cuts, in February the number tumbled to just 0.1%, the lowest in two years...

... for one simple reason: last month's average wage surge had nothing to do with actual wages, and everything to do with the BLS estimate of hours worked (which is the denominator in the average wage calculation) which last month tumbled to just 34.1 (we were led to believe) the lowest since the covid pandemic...

... but has since been revised higher while the February print rose even more, to 34.3, hence why the latest average wage data was once again a product not of wages going up, but of how long Americans worked in any weekly period, in this case higher from 34.1 to 34.3, an increase which has a major impact on the average calculation.

While the above data points were examples of some latent weakness in the latest report, perhaps meant to give it a sheen of veracity, it was everything else in the report that was a problem starting with the BLS's latest choice of seasonal adjustments (after last month's wholesale revision), which have gone from merely laughable to full clownshow, as the following comparison between the monthly change in BLS and ADP payrolls shows. The trend is clear: the Biden admin numbers are now clearly rising even as the impartial ADP (which directly logs employment numbers at the company level and is far more accurate), shows an accelerating slowdown.

But it's more than just the Biden admin hanging its "success" on seasonal adjustments: when one digs deeper inside the jobs report, all sorts of ugly things emerge... such as the growing unprecedented divergence between the Establishment (payrolls) survey and much more accurate Household (actual employment) survey. To wit, while in January the BLS claims 275K payrolls were added, the Household survey found that the number of actually employed workers dropped for the third straight month (and 4 in the past 5), this time by 184K (from 161.152K to 160.968K).

This means that while the Payrolls series hits new all time highs every month since December 2020 (when according to the BLS the US had its last month of payrolls losses), the level of Employment has not budged in the past year. Worse, as shown in the chart below, such a gaping divergence has opened between the two series in the past 4 years, that the number of Employed workers would need to soar by 9 million (!) to catch up to what Payrolls claims is the employment situation.

There's more: shifting from a quantitative to a qualitative assessment, reveals just how ugly the composition of "new jobs" has been. Consider this: the BLS reports that in February 2024, the US had 132.9 million full-time jobs and 27.9 million part-time jobs. Well, that's great... until you look back one year and find that in February 2023 the US had 133.2 million full-time jobs, or more than it does one year later! And yes, all the job growth since then has been in part-time jobs, which have increased by 921K since February 2023 (from 27.020 million to 27.941 million).

Here is a summary of the labor composition in the past year: all the new jobs have been part-time jobs!

But wait there's even more, because now that the primary season is over and we enter the heart of election season and political talking points will be thrown around left and right, especially in the context of the immigration crisis created intentionally by the Biden administration which is hoping to import millions of new Democratic voters (maybe the US can hold the presidential election in Honduras or Guatemala, after all it is their citizens that will be illegally casting the key votes in November), what we find is that in February, the number of native-born workers tumbled again, sliding by a massive 560K to just 129.807 million. Add to this the December data, and we get a near-record 2.4 million plunge in native-born workers in just the past 3 months (only the covid crash was worse)!

The offset? A record 1.2 million foreign-born (read immigrants, both legal and illegal but mostly illegal) workers added in February!

Said otherwise, not only has all job creation in the past 6 years has been exclusively for foreign-born workers...

Source: St Louis Fed FRED Native Born and Foreign Born

... but there has been zero job-creation for native born workers since June 2018!

This is a huge issue - especially at a time of an illegal alien flood at the southwest border...

... and is about to become a huge political scandal, because once the inevitable recession finally hits, there will be millions of furious unemployed Americans demanding a more accurate explanation for what happened - i.e., the illegal immigration floodgates that were opened by the Biden admin.

Which is also why Biden's handlers will do everything in their power to insure there is no official recession before November... and why after the election is over, all economic hell will finally break loose. Until then, however, expect the jobs numbers to get even more ridiculous.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/08/2024 - 13:30

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending