Connect with us

International

What Do Consumers Think Will Happen to Inflation?

This post provides an update on two earlier blog posts (here and here) in which we discuss how consumers’ views about future inflation have evolved in…

Published

2 years ago

on

Olivier Armantier, Fatima Boumahdi, Gizem Kosar, Jason Somerville, Giorgio Topa, Wilbert van der Klaauw, and John C. Williams

This post provides an update on two earlier blog posts (here and here) in which we discuss how consumers’ views about future inflation have evolved in a continually changing economic environment. Using data from the New York Fed’s Survey of Consumer Expectations (SCE), we show that while short-term inflation expectations have continued to trend upward, medium-term inflation expectations appear to have reached a plateau over the past few months, and longer-term inflation expectations have remained remarkably stable. Not surprisingly given recent movements in consumer prices, we find that most respondents agree that inflation will remain high over the next year. In contrast, and somewhat surprisingly, there is a divergence in consumers’ medium-term inflation expectations, in the sense that we observe a simultaneous increase in both the share of respondents who expect high inflation and the share of respondents who expect low inflation (and even deflation) three years from now. Finally, we show that individual consumers have become more uncertain about what inflation will be in the near future. However, in contrast to the pre-pandemic period, they tend to express less uncertainty about inflation further in the future.

The SCE is a monthly, internet-based survey produced by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York since June 2013. It is a twelve-month rotating panel (respondents are asked to take the survey for twelve consecutive months) of roughly 1,300 nationally representative U.S. household heads. Since the inception of the SCE, we have been eliciting consumers’ inflation expectations at the short- and medium-term horizons on a monthly basis. The short-term horizon corresponds to the year-ahead (with the survey question phrased as “over the next 12 months”), while the medium-term horizon corresponds to the three-year-ahead one-year rate of inflation (“0ver the 12-month period between M+24 and M+36,” where M is the month in which the respondent takes the survey). So, for instance, a respondent taking the survey in April 2022 is asked about inflation “over the 12-month period between April 2024 and April 2025.” Recently, we have on occasion elicited longer-term inflation expectations, by asking respondents to report their expected five-year-ahead one-year rate of inflation (“over the 12-month period between M+48 and M+60”). For each horizon, SCE respondents are asked to report their density forecasts by stating the percent chance that the rate of inflation will fall within pre-specified bins. These density forecasts are used to calculate the two measures that we focus on in this blog: the individual inflation expectation (the mean of a respondent’s density forecast), and the individual inflation uncertainty (measured as the interquartile range of a respondent’s density forecast).

The Median Consumer Expects Inflation to Fade over the Next Few Years

SCE respondents think the current high inflation environment will not fade over the next twelve months, but that it will taper off in the next three years and not persist beyond that. The chart below shows the monthly median individual inflation expectation at each horizon since January 2020. As can be seen here, inflation expectations in January 2020 were similar to the average readings during 2018-19 and are therefore representative of the period directly before the COVID-19 pandemic. Short- and medium-term inflation expectations increased slightly and at a similar pace during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. In the spring of 2021, as readings of actual inflation started to surge, short-term and, to a lesser extent, medium-term inflation expectations started to increase at a faster rate, reaching levels not seen previously in the nearly ten years since the inception of the SCE. Note that, unlike one-year-ahead inflation expectations which are still on an increasing trajectory, three-year-ahead inflation expectations have leveled off in recent months and even started decreasing slightly after reaching a peak of 4.2 percent in September and October 2021. Looking now at the few data points we have for the longer horizon, five-year-ahead inflation expectations have been remarkably stable in recent months and substantially lower than short- and medium-term inflation expectations.

Inflation Expectations at the Longer Horizon Are Stable and Much Lower

Source: Survey of Consumer Expectations.

Consumers’ Medium-Term Inflation Expectations Have Become More Divergent

At the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, respondents disagreed about what impact the pandemic would have on short-term inflation, but most of them now believe inflation will be high over the next year. The chart below shows the distribution of individual inflation expectations across respondents in a given month. The left panel shows the share of respondents with low inflation expectations in a given month (that is, with an individual inflation expectation below 0 percent, which corresponds to deflation). The right panel shows the share of respondents with high inflation expectations (that is, with an individual inflation expectation above 4 percent). Starting with the short-term horizon, the chart shows that at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the spring of 2020, there was a sharp increase in the share of respondents who expected deflation (left panel) and, simultaneously, an increase in the share of respondents who expected high inflation (right panel). Hence, consumers’ short-term inflation expectations became more divergent at the onset of the pandemic, with some consumers expecting COVID-19 to be an inflationary supply shock over the subsequent twelve months, and other consumers expecting COVID-19 to be a large deflationary demand shock. Starting in the second half of 2020, the share of respondents with low short-term expectations declined, while the share of the respondents with high short-term expectations continued to increase, consistent with the overall increase in short-term inflation expectations discussed in the previous paragraph.

The divergence in inflation beliefs we observed for short-term expectations at the onset of the pandemic has shifted to medium-term expectations during the past eight months. The chart below shows little change in the share of respondents with extreme (high or low) medium-term inflation beliefs at the onset of the pandemic. This suggests that consumers initially thought the pandemic would not have a strong persistent effect on inflation. After the fall of 2020, the share of respondents who expect high inflation in the medium-term started to increase steadily (see right panel). However, the rate of increase over the past year was slower than at the short-term horizon. Furthermore, after reaching a plateau last fall, the share of respondents who expect high inflation has declined slightly in the past few months. Perhaps more surprisingly, the left panel of the chart below shows that the share of respondents who expect deflation in the medium-term started to increase sharply in the fall of last year, moving from about 10 percent in August 2020 to nearly 20 percent in March and April 2022.

Although we caution against drawing strong conclusions from only a few data points, it seems that the distribution of longer-term inflation expectations has shifted to the left (toward lower inflation outcomes) in recent months. The chart below indicates that the recent increase in the share of respondents with low inflation expectations is similar at the medium- and longer-term horizons. In contrast, the share of respondents who expect high inflation five years from now is substantially lower than at the short- and medium-term horizons and it has remained mostly stable over the past eight months.

The Distribution of Longer-Term Inflation Expectations Has Shifted toward Lower Inflation Outcomes

Source: Survey of Consumer Expectations.
Note: An inflation expectation below 0 percent (as in the left panel) corresponds to deflation.

Individual Consumers Have Become More Uncertain about Future Inflation

Finally, we find that consumers have become more uncertain about future inflation, especially at shorter horizons. The final chart shows the median of individual inflation uncertainty across respondents in a given month. As can be seen in this staff study, inflation uncertainty exhibited two main patterns prior to the pandemic. First, inflation uncertainty at both the short- and medium-term horizons had been declining slowly and steadily since the start of the SCE in 2013. Second, SCE respondents almost always expressed more uncertainty for three-year-ahead inflation than for one-year-ahead inflation, perhaps reflecting the fact that predicting inflation further into the future tends to be more difficult. The chart below shows a complete reversal of these two trends after the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 to be a pandemic in March 2020: inflation uncertainty at both horizons has since increased steadily to record levels, and short-term inflation uncertainty has generally been higher than medium-term inflation uncertainty. The few observations we have for longer-term inflation uncertainty seem to confirm these trends. Indeed, five-year-ahead inflation uncertainty has increased over the past eight months, but has remained substantially lower than at the one- and three-year horizons.

Inflation Uncertainty Is Lower at a Longer-Term Horizon

Chart: Inflation Uncertainty Is Lower at a Longer-Term Horizon
Source: Survey of Consumer Expectations (SCE).
Note: The SCE measures disagreement across respondents as the difference between the 75th and 25th percentile of inflation expectations.

To conclude, the results presented in this blog post provide fresh evidence that consumers still do not expect the current spell of high inflation to persist long into the future. While median one-year-ahead inflation expectations have continued to rise over the past six months, three-year-ahead expectations have declined slightly, and five-year-ahead inflation expectations have remained remarkably stable and at a level well below recent inflation readings. However, there is now a divergence in consumers’ medium-term inflation expectations: a larger share of consumers expects high inflation three years from now, while simultaneously a growing share of consumers expects low inflation and even deflation. Finally, we have shown that consumers have become increasingly uncertain about future inflation, especially at shorter horizons. We are now conducting new research aimed at better understanding the factors driving these changes in consumer beliefs.

Olivier Armantier is head of Consumer Behavior Studies in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Research and Statistics Group.

Fatima Boumahdi is a senior research analyst in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group.

Gizem Kosar is a research economist in Consumer Behavior Studies in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group.

Jason Somerville is a research economist in Consumer Behavior Studies in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group.

Giorgio Topa is an economic research advisor in Labor and Product Market Studies in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group

Wilbert van der Klaauw is an economic research advisor on Household and Public Policy in the Bank’s Research and Statistics Group.

John C. Williams is the president and chief executive officer of the Bank. 

How to cite this post:
Olivier Armantier, Fatima Boumahdi, Gizem Kosar, Jason Somerville, Giorgio Topa, Wilbert van der Klaauw, and John C. Williams. “What Do Consumers Think Will Happen to Inflation?,” Federal Reserve Bank of New York Liberty Street Economics, May 26, 2022, https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2022/05/what-do-consumers-think-will-happen-to-inflation/.

Related reading:                                                                 
What Are Consumers’ Inflation Expectations Telling Us Today? (February 2022)
Have Consumers’ Long-Run Inflation Expectations Become Un-Anchored? (September 2021)
How Economic Crises Affect Inflation Beliefs: Evidence from the COVID-19 Pandemic (November 2020)
Survey of Consumer Expectations

Disclaimer
The views expressed in this post are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or the Federal Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the authors.

Read More

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Government

Problems After COVID-19 Vaccination More Prevalent Among Naturally Immune: Study

Problems After COVID-19 Vaccination More Prevalent Among Naturally Immune: Study

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis…

Published

1 hour ago

on

March 15, 2024

By

Problems After COVID-19 Vaccination More Prevalent Among Naturally Immune: Study

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

People who recovered from COVID-19 and received a COVID-19 shot were more likely to suffer adverse reactions, researchers in Europe are reporting.

A medical worker administers a dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine to a patient at a vaccination center in Ancenis-Saint-Gereon, France, on Nov. 17, 2021. (Stephane Mahe//Reuters)

Participants in the study were more likely to experience an adverse reaction after vaccination regardless of the type of shot, with one exception, the researchers found.

Across all vaccine brands, people with prior COVID-19 were 2.6 times as likely after dose one to suffer an adverse reaction, according to the new study. Such people are commonly known as having a type of protection known as natural immunity after recovery.

People with previous COVID-19 were also 1.25 times as likely after dose 2 to experience an adverse reaction.

The findings held true across all vaccine types following dose one.

Of the female participants who received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, for instance, 82 percent who had COVID-19 previously experienced an adverse reaction after their first dose, compared to 59 percent of females who did not have prior COVID-19.

The only exception to the trend was among males who received a second AstraZeneca dose. The percentage of males who suffered an adverse reaction was higher, 33 percent to 24 percent, among those without a COVID-19 history.

“Participants who had a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (confirmed with a positive test) experienced at least one adverse reaction more often after the 1st dose compared to participants who did not have prior COVID-19. This pattern was observed in both men and women and across vaccine brands,” Florence van Hunsel, an epidemiologist with the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb, and her co-authors wrote.

There were only slightly higher odds of the naturally immune suffering an adverse reaction following receipt of a Pfizer or Moderna booster, the researchers also found.

The researchers performed what’s known as a cohort event monitoring study, following 29,387 participants as they received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. The participants live in a European country such as Belgium, France, or Slovakia.

Overall, three-quarters of the participants reported at least one adverse reaction, although some were minor such as injection site pain.

Adverse reactions described as serious were reported by 0.24 percent of people who received a first or second dose and 0.26 percent for people who received a booster. Different examples of serious reactions were not listed in the study.

Participants were only specifically asked to record a range of minor adverse reactions (ADRs). They could provide details of other reactions in free text form.

“The unsolicited events were manually assessed and coded, and the seriousness was classified based on international criteria,” researchers said.

The free text answers were not provided by researchers in the paper.

“The authors note, ‘In this manuscript, the focus was not on serious ADRs and adverse events of special interest.’” Yet, in their highlights section they state, “The percentage of serious ADRs in the study is low for 1st and 2nd vaccination and booster.”

Dr. Joel Wallskog, co-chair of the group React19, which advocates for people who were injured by vaccines, told The Epoch Times: “It is intellectually dishonest to set out to study minor adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination then make conclusions about the frequency of serious adverse events. They also fail to provide the free text data.” He added that the paper showed “yet another study that is in my opinion, deficient by design.”

Ms. Hunsel did not respond to a request for comment.

She and other researchers listed limitations in the paper, including how they did not provide data broken down by country.

The paper was published by the journal Vaccine on March 6.

The study was funded by the European Medicines Agency and the Dutch government.

No authors declared conflicts of interest.

Some previous papers have also found that people with prior COVID-19 infection had more adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, including a 2021 paper from French researchers. A U.S. study identified prior COVID-19 as a predictor of the severity of side effects.

Some other studies have determined COVID-19 vaccines confer little or no benefit to people with a history of infection, including those who had received a primary series.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention still recommends people who recovered from COVID-19 receive a COVID-19 vaccine, although a number of other health authorities have stopped recommending the shot for people who have prior COVID-19.

Another New Study

In another new paper, South Korean researchers outlined how they found people were more likely to report certain adverse reactions after COVID-19 vaccination than after receipt of another vaccine.

The reporting of myocarditis, a form of heart inflammation, or pericarditis, a related condition, was nearly 20 times as high among children as the reporting odds following receipt of all other vaccines, the researchers found.

The reporting odds were also much higher for multisystem inflammatory syndrome or Kawasaki disease among adolescent COVID-19 recipients.

Researchers analyzed reports made to VigiBase, which is run by the World Health Organization.

“Based on our results, close monitoring for these rare but serious inflammatory reactions after COVID-19 vaccination among adolescents until definitive causal relationship can be established,” the researchers wrote.

The study was published by the Journal of Korean Medical Science in its March edition.

Limitations include VigiBase receiving reports of problems, with some reports going unconfirmed.

Funding came from the South Korean government. One author reported receiving grants from pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/15/2024 - 05:00

Read More

Continue Reading

International

‘Excess Mortality Skyrocketed’: Tucker Carlson and Dr. Pierre Kory Unpack ‘Criminal’ COVID Response

‘Excess Mortality Skyrocketed’: Tucker Carlson and Dr. Pierre Kory Unpack ‘Criminal’ COVID Response

As the global pandemic unfolded, government-funded…

Published

13 hours ago

on

March 14, 2024

By

'Excess Mortality Skyrocketed': Tucker Carlson and Dr. Pierre Kory Unpack 'Criminal' COVID Response

As the global pandemic unfolded, government-funded experimental vaccines were hastily developed for a virus which primarily killed the old and fat (and those with other obvious comorbidities), and an aggressive, global campaign to coerce billions into injecting them ensued.

Then there were the lockdowns - with some countries (New Zealand, for example) building internment camps for those who tested positive for Covid-19, and others such as China welding entire apartment buildings shut to trap people inside.

It was an egregious and unnecessary response to a virus that, while highly virulent, was survivable by the vast majority of the general population.

Oh, and the vaccines, which governments are still pushing, didn't work as advertised to the point where health officials changed the definition of "vaccine" multiple times.

Tucker Carlson recently sat down with Dr. Pierre Kory, a critical care specialist and vocal critic of vaccines. The two had a wide-ranging discussion, which included vaccine safety and efficacy, excess mortality, demographic impacts of the virus, big pharma, and the professional price Kory has paid for speaking out.

Keep reading below, or if you have roughly 50 minutes, watch it in its entirety for free on X:

"Do we have any real sense of what the cost, the physical cost to the country and world has been of those vaccines?" Carlson asked, kicking off the interview.

"I do think we have some understanding of the cost. I mean, I think, you know, you're aware of the work of of Ed Dowd, who's put together a team and looked, analytically at a lot of the epidemiologic data," Kory replied. "I mean, time with that vaccination rollout is when all of the numbers started going sideways, the excess mortality started to skyrocket."

When asked "what kind of death toll are we looking at?", Kory responded "...in 2023 alone, in the first nine months, we had what's called an excess mortality of 158,000 Americans," adding "But this is in 2023. I mean, we've  had Omicron now for two years, which is a mild variant. Not that many go to the hospital."

'Safe and Effective'

Tucker also asked Kory why the people who claimed the vaccine were "safe and effective" aren't being held criminally liable for abetting the "killing of all these Americans," to which Kory replied: "It’s my kind of belief, looking back, that [safe and effective] was a predetermined conclusion. There was no data to support that, but it was agreed upon that it would be presented as safe and effective."

Carlson and Kory then discussed the different segments of the population that experienced vaccine side effects, with Kory noting an "explosion in dying in the youngest and healthiest sectors of society," adding "And why did the employed fare far worse than those that weren't? And this particularly white collar, white collar, more than gray collar, more than blue collar."

Kory also said that Big Pharma is 'terrified' of Vitamin D because it "threatens the disease model." As journalist The Vigilant Fox notes on X, "Vitamin D showed about a 60% effectiveness against the incidence of COVID-19 in randomized control trials," and "showed about 40-50% effectiveness in reducing the incidence of COVID-19 in observational studies."

Professional costs

Kory - while risking professional suicide by speaking out, has undoubtedly helped save countless lives by advocating for alternate treatments such as Ivermectin.

Kory shared his own experiences of job loss and censorship, highlighting the challenges of advocating for a more nuanced understanding of vaccine safety in an environment often resistant to dissenting voices.

"I wrote a book called The War on Ivermectin and the the genesis of that book," he said, adding "Not only is my expertise on Ivermectin and my vast clinical experience, but and I tell the story before, but I got an email, during this journey from a guy named William B Grant, who's a professor out in California, and he wrote to me this email just one day, my life was going totally sideways because our protocols focused on Ivermectin. I was using a lot in my practice, as were tens of thousands of doctors around the world, to really good benefits. And I was getting attacked, hit jobs in the media, and he wrote me this email on and he said, Dear Dr. Kory, what they're doing to Ivermectin, they've been doing to vitamin D for decades..."

"And it's got five tactics. And these are the five tactics that all industries employ when science emerges, that's inconvenient to their interests. And so I'm just going to give you an example. Ivermectin science was extremely inconvenient to the interests of the pharmaceutical industrial complex. I mean, it threatened the vaccine campaign. It threatened vaccine hesitancy, which was public enemy number one. We know that, that everything, all the propaganda censorship was literally going after something called vaccine hesitancy."

Money makes the world go 'round

Carlson then hit on perhaps the most devious aspect of the relationship between drug companies and the medical establishment, and how special interests completely taint science to the point where public distrust of institutions has spiked in recent years.

"I think all of it starts at the level the medical journals," said Kory. "Because once you have something established in the medical journals as a, let's say, a proven fact or a generally accepted consensus, consensus comes out of the journals."

"I have dozens of rejection letters from investigators around the world who did good trials on ivermectin, tried to publish it. No thank you, no thank you, no thank you. And then the ones that do get in all purportedly prove that ivermectin didn't work," Kory continued.

"So and then when you look at the ones that actually got in and this is where like probably my biggest estrangement and why I don't recognize science and don't trust it anymore, is the trials that flew to publication in the top journals in the world were so brazenly manipulated and corrupted in the design and conduct in, many of us wrote about it. But they flew to publication, and then every time they were published, you saw these huge PR campaigns in the media. New York Times, Boston Globe, L.A. times, ivermectin doesn't work. Latest high quality, rigorous study says. I'm sitting here in my office watching these lies just ripple throughout the media sphere based on fraudulent studies published in the top journals. And that's that's that has changed. Now that's why I say I'm estranged and I don't know what to trust anymore."

Vaccine Injuries

Carlson asked Kory about his clinical experience with vaccine injuries.

"So how this is how I divide, this is just kind of my perception of vaccine injury is that when I use the term vaccine injury, I'm usually referring to what I call a single organ problem, like pericarditis, myocarditis, stroke, something like that. An autoimmune disease," he replied.

"What I specialize in my practice, is I treat patients with what we call a long Covid long vaxx. It's the same disease, just different triggers, right? One is triggered by Covid, the other one is triggered by the spike protein from the vaccine. Much more common is long vax. The only real differences between the two conditions is that the vaccinated are, on average, sicker and more disabled than the long Covids, with some pretty prominent exceptions to that."

Watch the entire interview above, and you can support Tucker Carlson's endeavors by joining the Tucker Carlson Network here...

Tyler Durden Thu, 03/14/2024 - 16:20

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Delta Air Lines adds a new route travelers have been asking for

The new Delta seasonal flight to the popular destination will run daily on a Boeing 767-300.

Published

19 hours ago

on

March 14, 2024

By

Those who have tried to book a flight from North America to Europe in the summer of 2023 know just how high travel demand to the continent has spiked.

At 2.93 billion, visitors to the countries making up the European Union had finally reached pre-pandemic levels last year while North Americans in particular were booking trips to both large metropolises such as Paris and Milan as well as smaller cities growing increasingly popular among tourists.

Related: A popular European city is introducing the highest 'tourist tax' yet

As a result, U.S.-based airlines have been re-evaluating their networks to add more direct routes to smaller European destinations that most travelers would have previously needed to reach by train or transfer flight with a local airline.

The new flight will take place on a Boeing 767-300.

Shutterstock

Delta Air Lines: ‘Glad to offer customers increased choice…’

By the end of March, Delta Air Lines  (DAL)  will be restarting its route between New York’s JFK and Marco Polo International Airport in Venice as well as launching two new flights to Venice from Atlanta. One will start running this month while the other will be added during peak demand in the summer.

More Travel:

“As one of the most beautiful cities in the world, Venice is hugely popular with U.S. travelers, and our flights bring valuable tourism and trade opportunities to the city and the region as well as unrivalled opportunities for Venetians looking to explore destinations across the Americas,” Delta’s SVP for Europe Matteo Curcio said in a statement. “We’re glad to offer customers increased choice this summer with flights from New York and additional service from Atlanta.”

The JFK-Venice flight will run on a Boeing 767-300  (BA)  and have 216 seats including higher classes such as Delta One, Delta Premium Select and Delta Comfort Plus.

Delta offers these features on the new flight

Both the New York and Atlanta flights are seasonal routes that will be pulled out of service in October. Both will run daily while the first route will depart New York at 8:55 p.m. and arrive in Venice at 10:15 a.m. local time on the way there, while leaving Venice at 12:15 p.m. to arrive at JFK at 5:05 p.m. on the way back.

According to Delta, this will bring its service to 17 flights from different U.S. cities to Venice during the peak summer period. As with most Delta flights at this point, passengers in all fare classes will have access to free Wi-Fi during the flight.

Those flying in Delta’s highest class or with access through airline status or a credit card will also be able to use the new Delta lounge that is part of the airline’s $12 billion terminal renovation and is slated to open to travelers in the coming months. The space will take up more than 40,000 square feet and have an outdoor terrace.

“Delta One customers can stretch out in a lie-flat seat and enjoy premium amenities like plush bedding made from recycled plastic bottles, more beverage options, and a seasonal chef-curated four-course meal,” Delta said of the new route. “[…] All customers can enjoy a wide selection of in-flight entertainment options and stay connected with Wi-Fi and enjoy free mobile messaging.”

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending