Gas station without pumps

2018 September 25

Economics of inflation

Filed under: Uncategorized — gasstationwithoutpumps @ 08:37
Tags: ,

I’ve never understood why economists believe that lowering interest rates causes inflation. (Or why journalists report that they do, anyway.)

It seems to be predicated on the belief that low interest rates leads to companies borrowing more to expand, increasing employment, which leads to labor shortages, which leads to higher pay for workers, which raises the cost of goods. This seems like a rather indirect and roundabout effect, which does not bear much relationship to the current economy.

So far as I can see the price of goods is determined mainly by how monopolistic the market it, which is determined more by mergers and acquisitions than anything else. When interest rates are high, leveraged buyouts result in enormous debt burdens, which get translate to increased prices—the opposite of the low-interest leading to inflation prediction.

I think that problem is that prices today are more determined by the cost of capital and corporate profit taking than by the cost of labor, but the economic models reported on in the popular press are stuck in the 40s and 50s.

Perhaps someone who understands economics better than I do could show me how the models work, and back it up with recent data?

2012 July 2

When did things go wrong?

Filed under: Uncategorized — gasstationwithoutpumps @ 11:10
Tags: , , , ,

For decades, the prevailing belief in the US has been that increases in productivity help everyone—the usual cliché is “a rising tide lifts all boats”.  When I was growing up, this actually seemed to be true, but lately it seems that the rich get richer and the working class stagnate.  Someone has finally put together a very simple graph that illustrates when the social compact started failing.  It looks like workers were paid proportionate to their productivity (on average, not necessarily as individuals) from 1948 to 1972, but from 1972 on there has been no real growth in their compensation, despite continuing increases in productivity.  The tide has continued to rise, but only the boats of the rich have risen.

Note: Hourly compensation is of production/nonsupervisory workers in the private sector and productivity is for the total economy.
Source: The wedges between productivity and median compensation growth | Economic Policy Institute. Lawrence Mishel‘s analysis of unpublished total economy data from Bureau of Labor Statistics, Labor Productivity and Costs program and Bureau of Economic Analysis, National Income and Product Accounts public data series

The nearly linear growth in productivity sustained over 6 decades is amazing, and the sharp change in hourly compensation from tracking productivity to being constant is equally surprising.  What policy change around 1972 affected almost all employment agreements from then on?

Note: the analysis was done in constant dollars (correcting for inflation), but there is an important technical point that the authors point out:

… the output measure used to compute productivity is converted to real, or constant (inflation-adjusted), dollars, based on the components of national output (GDP). On the other hand, average hourly compensation and the measures of median hourly compensation are converted to real, or constant, dollars based on measures of price change in what consumers purchase. Prices for national output have grown more slowly than prices for consumer purchases. Therefore, the same growth in nominal, or current dollar, wages and output yields faster growth in real (inflation-adjusted) output (which is adjusted for changes in the prices of investment goods, exports, and consumer purchases) than in real wages (which is adjusted for changes in consumer purchases only). That is, workers have suffered worsening terms of trade, in which the prices of things they buy (i.e., consumer goods and services) have risen faster than the items they produce (consumer goods but also capital goods). Thus, if workers consumed microprocessors and machine tools as well as groceries, their real wage growth would have been better and more in line with productivity growth.

Mishel breaks up the growing disparity between productivity and wage income into multiple components:

  • Growing compensation inequity: top earners getting relatively more compensation than workers
  • Shrinking labor share: more of the productivity gains going to the owners of capital
  • Terms of trade: divergence in the value of what is produced and what is consumed

He analyzes how much each of the components contributes to the gap:

Over the entire 1973 to 2011 period, roughly half (46.9 percent) of the growth of the productivity-median compensation gap was due to increased compensation inequality and about a fifth (19 percent) due to a loss in labor’s income share. About a third of the gap has been driven by price differences.

He concludes with a stirring call to action:

Reestablishing the link between productivity and pay of the typical worker is an essential component of any effort to provide shared prosperity and, in fact, may be necessary for obtaining robust growth without relying on asset bubbles and increased household debt. It is hard to see how reestablishing a link between productivity and pay can occur without restoring decent and improved labor standards, restoring the minimum wage to a level corresponding to half the average wage (as it was in the late 1960s), and making real the ability of workers to obtain and practice collective bargaining.

This approach will be totally ignored by our politicians, who rely almost entirely on highly compensated CEOs and the owners of capital for their re-election funding. Unfortunately, our populace is too easily manipulated by the rich, and will vote for the politicians most adept at increasing the gap between the rich and the workers.

Incidentally, the average hourly wage in the US was $23.41 in May 2012 according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, so Mishel is arguing for a national minimum wage around $11.70/hour (rather than the current $7.25), undoubtedly with higher minimum wages in more expensive states with higher average compensation. Currently the state of Washington has the highest minimum wage at $9.04/hour, still far short of what Mishel sees as necessary.

(Thanks to Sociological Images for pointing me to this graph, even if they were too sloppy in their scholarship to follow the links to the original report.)

%d bloggers like this: