Thursday, August 18, 2011

Professor Romers Op Ed



I have copied Professor Christina Romer's op ed piece from the Sunday NYT  below.  The emphasis is mine

August 13, 2011

The Hope That Flows From History

AFTER the grim economic developments of the last few weeks, it’s easy to lose hope. Could the Great Recession of 2008 drag on for years, just as the Great Depression did in the 1930s? Adding to the despair is the oft-repeated notion that it took World War II to end the economic nightmare of the ’30s: If a global war was needed to return the economy to full employment then, what is going to save us today?
Look more closely at history and you’ll see that the truth is much more complicated — and less gloomy. While the war helped the recovery from the Depression, the economy was improving long before military spending increased. More fundamentally, the wrenching wartime experience provides a message of hope for our troubled economy today: we have the tools to deal with our problems, if only policy makers will use them.
As I showed in an academic paper years ago, the war first affected the economy through monetary developments. Starting in the mid-1930s, Hitler’s aggression caused capital flight from Europe. People wanted to invest somewhere safer — particularly in the United States. Under the gold standard of that time, the flight to safety caused large gold flows to America. The Treasury Department under President Franklin D. Roosevelt used that inflow to increase the money supply.
The result was an aggressive monetary expansion that effectively ended deflation. Real borrowing costs decreased and interest-sensitive spending rose rapidly. The economy responded strongly. From 1933 to 1937, real gross domestic product grew at an annual rate of almost 10 percent, and unemployment fell from 25 percent to 14. To put that in perspective, G.D.P. growth has averaged just 2.5 percent in the current recovery, and unemployment has barely budged.
There is clearly a lesson for modern policy makers. Monetary expansion was very effective in the mid-1930s, even though nominal interest rates were near zero, as they are today. The Federal Reserve’s policy statement last week provided tantalizing hints that it may be taking this lesson to heart and using its available tools more aggressively in coming months.
One reason the Depression dragged on so long was that the rapid recovery of the mid-1930s was interrupted by a second severe recession in late 1937. Though many factors had a role in the “recession within a recession,” monetary and fiscal policy retrenchment were central. In monetary policy, the Fed doubled bank reserve requirements and the Treasury stopped monetizing the gold inflow. In fiscal policy, the federal budget swung sharply, from a stimulative deficit of 3.8 percent of G.D.P. in 1936 to a small surplus in 1937.
The lesson here is to beware of withdrawing policy support too soon. A switch to contractionary policy before the economy is fully recovered can cause the economy to decline again. Such a downturn may be particularly large when an economy is still traumatized from an earlier crisis.
The recent downgrade of American government debt by Standard & Poor’s makes this point especially crucial. It would be a mistake to respond by reducing the deficit more sharply in the near term. That would almost surely condemn us to a repeat of the 1937 downturn. And higher unemployment would make it all that much harder to get the deficit under control.
Military spending didn’t begin to rise substantially until late 1940. Once it did, fiscal policy had an expansionary impact. Some economists argue that the effect wasn’t very large, as real government purchases (in 2005 dollars) rose by $1.4 billion from 1940 to 1944, while real G.D.P. rose only $0.9 billion.
But this calculation misses two crucial facts: Taxes increased sharply, and the government took many actions to decrease private consumption, like instituting rationing and admonishing people to save. That output soared despite these factors suggests that increases in government spending had a powerful stimulative effect. Consistent with that, private nonfarm employment — which excludes active military personnel — rose by almost eight million from 1940 to 1944.
The lesson here is that fiscal stimulus can help a depressed economy recover — an idea supported by new studies of the 2009 stimulus package. Additional short-run tax cuts or increases in government investment would help deal with our unemployment crisis.
What of the idea that monetary and fiscal policy can do little if unemployment is caused by structural factors, like a mismatch between workers’ skills and available jobs? As I discussed in a previous column, such factors are probably small today.
But World War II has something to tell us here, too. Because nearly 10 million men of prime working age were drafted into the military, there was a huge skills gap between the jobs that needed to be done on the home front and the remaining work force. Yet businesses and workers found a way to get the job done. Factories simplified production methods and housewives learned to rivet.
Here the lesson is that demand is crucial — and that jobs don’t go unfilled for long. If jobs were widely available today, unemployed workers would quickly find a way to acquire needed skills or move to where the jobs were located.
Finally, what about the national debt? Given the recent debt downgrade, it might seem impossible for the United States to embark on fiscal stimulus that would increase its ratio of debt to G.D.P.
Well, at the end of World War II, that ratio hit 109 percent — one and a half times as high as it is now. Yet this had no obvious adverse consequences for growth or our ability to borrow.
This isn’t hard to explain. Everyone understood then why the nation was racking up so much debt: we were fighting for survival, and for the survival of our allies. No one doubted that we would repay our debts. We had done it after every other war, and raising taxes even before the attack on Pearl Harbor showed our leaders’ fiscal resolve.
Today, we can do much more to aid recovery, including a near-term increase in our debt. But we need to make the reasons clear and make concrete our commitment to deal with the debt over time.
In place of the tepid budget agreement now in place, we could pass a bold plan with more short-run spending increases and tax cuts, coupled with much more serious, phased-in deficit reduction. By necessity, the plan would tackle entitlement reform and gradually raise tax revenue. This would be the World War II approach to our problems.
Equally important, someone needs to explain to the nation and to world markets just why we must increase the debt in the short run. Unemployment of roughly 9 percent for 28 months and counting is a national emergency. We must fight it with the same passion and commitment we have brought to military emergencies in our past.

Christina D. Romer is an economics professor at the University of California, Berkeley, and was the chairwoman of President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

US Employment History by Sector

 In the last half century US policies have profoundly changed the way Americans earn their daily bread.  This post quantifies a few of those changes.  The data comes from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Nonfarm labor payroll surveys.  Previous posts here and here summarize the difference between the  BLS "nonfarm" and BLS "total" labor reports.
 Chart 1:  Total "Nonfarm" US employment showing Government and Private sectors
____________

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Measuring Unemployment and Job Growth

A Long Road Ahead .... NYTimes

Monday, October 11, 2010

US Employment and GDP


We are a nation of 308 million souls of which approximately 140 million or so are "employed" full time or part time.  Chart 1 shows some of the major categories the US Bureau of Labor uses to monitor America's labor situation  (Click for larger charts)
Chart 1 US Employment Categories

Friday, October 8, 2010

There’s Class Warfare, All Right,” Mr. Buffett said...

There’s class warfare, all right,” Mr. Buffett said, “but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”

This is the first post in what I plan to be a series of posts on the history, status and immediate future of the welfare of average American citizens and households. 
I will start with two extracts -- the first from a conversation with Warren Buffet reported in the NYT, the second from "Sudden Debt", one of my favorite bloggers:

In a conversation with Mr Buffett  (NYT 2006)

BLS Employment Report Today

I will be publishing a series of "Unemployment 101" posts in the next few weeks.  Meanwhile here is data published today by the BLS with commentary from a few sources

From the Economist
TODAY, the Bureau of Labour Statistics released the last set of American employment numbers to come ahead of the November Congressional elections.

ProfessorBrad DeLong on Macroeconomics

 DeLong summarizes Jean Baptiste Say, JS Mill, Malthus and Niall Ferguson

Copied completely from Professor DeLongs site

 What Does Cutting-Edge Macroeconomics Tell Us About Economic Policy for the Recovery?


 (Emhasis mine)

Let us start with one of the first economists, Jean-Baptiste Say.
Say wanted to be a technocrat, and was well on the way—special assistant to Girondist Party Finance Minister Etienne Claviere in the early days of the first French Republic. His patron was fired, purged, arrested, imprisoned, probably tortured, sentenced to the guillotine, which he cheated by committing suicide the day before his scheduled execution.

Monday, September 27, 2010

Myths de Jour, Krugman and Me

 Krugman has a piece which resonates.  My comments precede his oped below.

The mythology of the "invisible hand" of "free market competition" working in "an efficient market" was pushed when it was profitable for American corporations and banks.

Friday, September 17, 2010

Fifteen Non GDP Measures of US Economic Health

Most of my posts discuss US economic health.  I almost always use GDP growth as a measure, and will continue to do so.

Though GDP as a yardstick of economic health is deeply flawed, it is the only  measure universally recognized by politicians and economists, and is a not unreasonable measure of economic growth, albeit not economic health.  

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Bloomberg--U.S. Home Prices Face 3-Year Drop as Inventory Surge Looms

The slide in U.S. home prices may have another three years to go as sellers add as many as 12 million more properties to the market.
Shadow inventory -- the supply of homes in default or foreclosure that may be offered for sale -- is preventing prices from bottoming after a 28 percent plunge from 2006, according to analysts from Moody’s Analytics Inc., Fannie Mae, Morgan Stanley and Barclays Plc. Those properties are in addition to houses that are vacant or that may soon be put on the market by owners.
“Whether it’s the sidelined, shadow or current inventory, the issue is there’s more supply than demand,” said Oliver Chang, a U.S. housing strategist with Morgan Stanley in San Francisco. “Once you reach a bottom, it will take three or four years for prices to begin to rise 1 or 2 percent a year.”

Tuesday, September 7, 2010

Iraq War Costs Exceed $3 Trillion


Stiglitz in the Washington Post

Writing in these pages in early 2008, we put the total cost to the United States of the Iraq war at $3 trillion. This price tag dwarfed previous estimates, including the Bush administration's 2003 projections of a $50 billion to $60 billion war.

Monday, September 6, 2010

Krugman -- "...It's all downhill from here"

NYT Sept 6th 
Krugman -- Delusions of Recovery

"  I’ve had a couple of conversations lately with people who follow politics and public affairs, but aren’t that close to the economic discussion — and I’ve discovered that there are two comforting delusions still out there.

Delusion #1 is that we’re on the road to recovery, just more slowly than we’d like; to be fair, the White House keeps saying this.
But it’s not at all true. GDP is growing below potential; employment, even if you focus just on private employment, is growing more slowly than the working-age population. If you ask how long it will take us to return to, say, 5 percent unemployment on the current track, the answer is forever.

Delusion #2 is the belief that the stimulus may yet do the trick, because there are still substantial funds unspent. I tried to deal with this last year. The level of GDP depends not on total funds spent, but on the rate at which funds are being spent, which has already peaked; GDP growth on the rate of change in the rate at which funds are being spent, which peaked last year. It’s all downhill from here. "
Emphasis mine