Category Archives: Income & Consumption

Inflation?

The increase in average hourly earnings (AHE) was taken as a sign of economic strength. Well, no. AHE is aggregate earnings divided by aggregate hours worked. So if hours worked is declining faster than earnings, AHE goes up. But is a sign of weakness. From ECRI.

In another case of up means down, the NOPE index is signalling trouble.

Savings And Confidence – Hmmm

Thanks to Zero Hedge

Credit Impulse

The credit impulse isn’t the sudden urge to borrow – it is the additional income and concomitant spending that results from an increase in aggregate debt. Spending capacity = net income + credit impulse. Credit impulse (annual) = current debt amount – year ago debt amount. Not complicated.

The credit impulse is how easy money creates economic expansion as economic entities – households, corporations, governments, etc. are able to spend more than they earn.

The downside is that, sooner or later, the entities reach the limit of their ability to borrow. The credit impulse disappears and the economy shrivels. Incomes diminish and defaults begin as entities can no longer service their debt. Credit becomes very difficult to obtain, lenders fail as capital losses mount and the economy accelerates downhill as the credit impulse goes negative as borrowers are unable to roll over their debt.

Let’er Rip, Potato Chip

Larry Kudlow, newly minted economic advisor, was on CNBC last night, advising that the Fed should “Let the economy rip.”

Larry, if you want to see what happens when a country monetizes its deficits, look south.

Credit Impulse

US household debt ended the year at $13.15 billion, a y-o-y increase of $402 billion and a record. This means that about 2% of GDP came from the increase in household debt alone. It is likely that when corporate and government debt increases are taken into account that the economy is operating at a substantial loss.

Universal Basic Income

The left continues to be fascinated with the idea of re-distribution. It believes that the whole notion of some people being paid more than others is fundamentally unfair, that they must have had some advantage – skin color, parents, brains, whatever – which was just a matter of luck. “You didn’t build that,” as Obama famously said.

So the latest brainchild of this idea is the notion of a monthly check from the government that is sufficient to provide a comfortable lifestyle regardless of whether or not the recipient chooses to work.

A single program that replaced the myriad of transfer payment programs, from welfare through Social Security, would save an enormous amount of administration costs at all levels of government and help to pay for the program. The “poverty trap” would be eliminated as the payment could be “universal” that is, not means tested. Minimum wage laws would need to be abolished, of course, since the “living wage” would be redundant. Might not work, but there seems to be some potential anyway.

But that is not what is proposed. In general, it seems that this would be yet another program which would be funded by even more government borrowing. This, it is claimed, would “grow the economy by $2 trillion.” Please.

There are only two ways to grow the economy. One of these is to increase labor utilization, the number of hours worked in a given period. The other is to increase the productivity of that labor, that is the amount of output produced for each hour of labor. That’s it.

Existing programs already provide a major disincentive for work – the “poverty trap.” This would add another. Productivity is improved by investment – in technology, skills, infrastructure, etc. More spending on consumption would not help this, but would certainly provide more inflation, which would act to deter investment. If you want to see the outcome of this kinf of program, just check the news from Venezuela.

 

 

Government Shutdown?

Many voices are being raised to warn of the danger of a government “shutdown” should Congress fail to raise the debt limit.

Why, one might ask, is this so dangerous? It is simply the fact that U.S. Federal deficit is still running about 3% of GDP. Cut Federal spending back to match its income and recession will certainly ensue.

Of course, the steady accumulation of debt is even more dangerous, but less immediate. So the voices hope.

A “shutdown” would not need to be anything more than a modest 15% reduction in run rate. Inconceivable.

The Economy In One Chart

Source: WSJ

Unexpected Outcome

People seem to be surprised that the Fed’s rate hikes have resulted in rates declining. Really? It seems pretty clear that the Fed’s outlook is at odds with reality, and that rates are responding to the real outlook, which is that Fed rate hikes are a negative for an economy that is already tanking.

The Future Is Now

Debt pulls demand forward in time. Borrowers use debt to pay for consumption today and commit future income to service the debt.

The amount available for consumption today represents the present value of that committed income, discounted by the prevailing interest rates.

The further that borrowers reach into the future, the more that discount lessens the amount available today. The Fed wants consumption today, so it attempts to induce inflation in order that borrowers are more confident of their future nominal incomes, while holding interest rates low so that the discounting of that income is minimized.

This strategy has sustained consumption in the short term, at the expense of reducing future income available for consumption.

The problem is that the future is now.

As consumption slows, so does production and inflationary pressure. Defaults rise – just look at the subprime auto loans. Yes, defaults eliminate debt – but only at the expense of the creditor who takes an immediate hit to income, charged against net worth or equity capital. Lenders are forced to reduce their assets.  Borrowers find that debt service takes more of their income than they had expected. Purchasing power erodes and deflation sets in. Spending capacity falls even more rapidly and the economy slides into recession and depression.

The larger the accumulation of debt, the longer it takes to purge the financial system and restore it to stability. Debt – credit – is a necessary and healthy part of the economic system. But the economy cannot depend on consumption funded by the continuous growth of debt. Debt must revolve, expanding and contracting within limits proportional to the size of the economy.