Must-Read: Scott Sumner: The Case for Tightening Is Getting Weaker and Weaker

Graph 10 Year Breakeven Inflation Rate FRED St Louis Fed

Scott Sumner: The Case for Tightening Is Getting Weaker and Weaker: “The recent plunge in TIPS spreads is reaching frightening proportions…

…5 year = 1.09%. 10 year = 1.42%. 30 year = 1.61%. Yes, I know they can be distorted by illiquidity, but they are not THAT far off market expectations. And don’t forget they predict CPI inflation, which runs about 0.3% above the Fed’s preferred PCE. In essence, the Fed has a 2.3% inflation target. They aren’t likely to hit it. Also recall that since 2007 the Fed’s been consistently overly optimistic… markets have been more pessimistic, and more accurate. Also recall that Fed policy has a big impact on the global economy. Also recall that the global economy seems to be moving into a disinflationary cycle…. Given there is basically no upside from tightening now, the Fed’s got to ask itself one question: “Do I feel lucky today?”

Must-Read: Ben Thompson: What is Medium Doing?

Must-Read: I had written, apropos of Medium: “I keep hoping that someone like Ben Thompson will write a dazzling piece on his daily newsletter to make everything clear to me.”

Lo and behold! Ben Thompson delivers!

What a strange new world, that has such people the ability to order up on whim a 2000-word essay from one of keenest of analysts exactly prepared to write on exactly the topic I am curious about in it!

Ben Thompson: What is Medium Doing?: “There are a huge number of publishers on the Internet….

…I believe [Medium’s] goal is to collate…. If the company can get the long tail to publish on their platform… a massive amount of really crappy posts… a not-insignificant number of really compelling pieces… from a theoretically endless supply of authors… if edited and curated properly… a very compelling stream of content…. Medium is suddenly a big publisher with an attractive proposition for advertisers….

That’s part one: the other part is… publisher of choice for the future John Grubers or Ben Thompsons… hosting, design, ad sales, subscription management… efficiently done at scale…. I do think this type of blogging has a bright future, but for now… [largely] inaccessible…. A platform that handles everything but the writing could make this path much more accessible…. It’s a vision I’m really excited about, particular the last segment….

That said, success is by no means assured…. [The] elephant in the room…. Facebook’s… redesign of its blog-like Notes tool… is now rolling out… [with] a design that will look familiar to anyone who has ever read a post on Medium…. The most potential readers are on Facebook. The most potential writers are on Facebook. Advertisers are on Facebook…. Facebook isn’t just the long tail, it’s the entire damn curve…. Notes is simply another piece of Facebook’s efforts to colonize the entire Social-Communication map. The company already mostly killed… blogging… because… most blog posts were little more than status updates, links, or photos. Notes is simply coming for the essays.

Must-Read: Ken Pomeranz: Review of Li Bozhang: Agricultural Development in Jiangnan

Must-Read: The extremely-sharp Kenneth Pomeranz reviews Li Bozhang. It is another point for the coal-empire-metalworking view of the causes of the British Industrial Revolution, and against mentalité- or political institutions-based interpretations…

Ken Pomeranz:

Agricultural Development in Jiangnan, 1620-1850: “Chinese… economic history suffered badly during the 1960s and 1970s…

…In the generation that began rebuilding… probably the single most productive scholar has been Li Bozhong…. Yet only a fraction of Li’s massive scholarly output is available to those who do not read Chinese….

The economy of the Yangzi Delta (or Jiangnan)… the richest region in China… among the richest regions in the world from roughly 1000 until the mid-nineteenth century…. Li argues forcefully against two basic views of the Delta’s agriculture in the Ming (1368-1644) and Qing (1644-1912) periods: 1) the claims of some Chinese Marxist scholars that the Delta remained a subsistence-oriented “feudal” economy in which most peasants had very limited contact with the market until the nineteenth century; 2) the claim of some Western scholars that Malthusian pressures and very limited technological change produced a slow but steady trend of immiseration… from roughly 1250 (when the rate of technological progress seems to have slowed considerably) until at least the mid-nineteenth century…. In contrast to an older version of Chinese economic history… which saw an enormous spurt of technological change during the Song dynasty (960-1279), followed by stagnation or even regression thereafter…. Li argues that the combination of proto-industrialization and rising yields in agriculture (discussed above) propelled a significant improvement in per capita income and standard of living between 1550 and 1850… disagree[ing] with the still-regnant Chinese Marxist orthodoxy, which insists that China remained essentially a subsistence economy until the Opium War… [and] with American partisans of “involution,” who maintain that the late imperial period was characterized by miniscule gains in income achieved at the expense of very large increases in labor inputs….

Why [did not] the highly productive agriculture, commerce and handicrafts he describes… spawn something more like classical English industrialization[?]… He argues that institutional structure, surplus available for investment, and the educational level of the workforce were all quite adequate, and that there was widespread interest in productivity-enhancing technological change…. [He] finds his answers in geography and the supply of natural resources. In particular, he emphasizes a dearth of energy sources that he says gave Jiangnan production a marked bias away from anything energy-intensive, creating what he calls “a super light industrial” economy… few trees… not very many large work animals… no coal or peat, and, being at sea level, relatively little water power. Conditions were even unfavorable for the large-scale use of wind…. Thus, Jiangnan did what it was best at: sustaining a very productive agriculture (especially in rice: cotton yields do not seem to have been outstanding), mobilizing the large numbers of people it could feed to produce handicrafts, and taking advantage of its location at the mouth of a river system draining roughly a third of China, plus the coastline and the one thousand mile Grand Canal…

Here’s how high levels of household debt affect economic growth

The Great Recession and its aftermath sparked a lot of rethinking about economics and economic policy. One recurring theme in this rethinking is the danger of debt.

In “This Time Is Different,” a recent book that explores financial crises throughout history, Harvard University economists Carmen Reinhart and Ken Rogoff show how run-ups in debt are key to setting up crises. But what kind of debt should set off alarms for economists and policymakers? A new working paper by economists Atif Mian and Emil Verner of Princeton University and Amir Sufi of the University of Chicago points to household debt as a source of instability and lower economic growth.

The working paper looks at the relationship between household debt and economic growth in 30 countries from 1960 to 2012. Earlier research found that recessions driven by household debt—particularly mortgage debt—are particularly nasty. But Mian, Sufi, and Verner push this research a bit further to find that high levels of household debt, measured as the ratio of household debt to gross domestic product, predict lower economic growth.

The three economists can’t say exactly why household debt has a negative effect on growth and stability. Instead they point out that their results are consistent with models of the economy where the supply of credit expands, lenders are more likely to lend, or a decline in risk allows households to take out more loans to finance consumption.

The dynamics of how household debt affects economic growth are quite interesting. Higher debt results in more consumption by households and a larger share of economic output coming from consumption. At the same time, this results in the country running a larger current account deficit with the rest of the world as imports increase, with consumption goods making up a larger share of those imports. Once the economy enters a recession, however, imports fall dramatically and the country starts to export more than it imports. This mechanism allows the country that ran up debt to bounce back by selling goods to the global economy.

But that mechanism only works if the rest of the global economy is doing well and other countries didn’t also see an increase in the household debt. If the entire global economy has more household debt, then individual countries will have nowhere to export their goods when growth stalls. Mian, Sufi, and Verner find that an increase in global household debt is also predictive of lower economic growth for individual countries, and that countries particularly dependent on trade are affected even more by this global buildup.

A lot of these dynamics sound a lot like what happened during the 2000s in the run up to the Great Recession of 2007-2009, so it’s plausible that the general results are artifacts of what happened over the past 15 years and are not symptomatic of a more systemic issue. But when Mian, Sufi, and Verner look at the data before 2000, they find very similar results. And using those results, they can show that the run-up in household debt during the 2000s indicated a recession of the size and severity of the Great Recession.

These results seem almost obvious given what’s happened over the past decade, but the idea that household debt is bad for economic growth runs counter to quite a few economic models. Mian, Sufi, and Verner show that both the International Monetary Fund and the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development have consistently been overly optimistic about economic growth because they have seen increasing household debt as a positive for economic growth. The evidence now points to just the opposite.

These results are important not for shaming certain institutions, but rather to show how important it is to consider the role of household debt in economic stability and growth.

Noted for the Evening of September 28, 2015

Must- and Should-Reads:

Might Like to Be Aware of:

Must-Read: Marshall Steinbaum: Why Is so Much Wealth hidden? Failed Democracy

Must-Read: Marshall Steinbaum: Why Is so Much Wealth hidden? Failed Democracy: “It’s worth noting that few economists would support the existence or proliferation of tax havens…

… [which] impair both efficiency and equity. Zucman proposes… first and foremost, to create a public database of the ownership of registered securities… straightforward, but… still radical: the nationalization of quasi-administrative data for the public benefit. We already do that for the property and housing market in the United States…. Doing the same for financial wealth is straightforward, but it would challenge the interests of an even wealthier demographic…. Zucman further proposes to move to a global apportionment system for corporate taxation…. If the economics is so clearly against tax havens and the policy solutions are straightforward, then how did we get to where we are? The answer is not that a few villainous, self-serving countries act as parasites…. U.S. policymakers tacitly encourage the proliferation of tax havens…. Even now, Congress is debating a ‘Repatriation Holiday’….

Moving beyond tax havens in particular, the ideological justification for low and falling rates of taxation on capital is the Chamley-Judd Theorem, which ‘proves’ that the optimal tax rate on capital is zero in the long run…. The intellectual influence of the theorem has been strong…. Policymakers [tend] to be too credulous about formal ‘optimal policy’ results in theoretical economics. But the worse tendency is to enshrine those theoretical results in the policymaking apparatus at the expense of democratic control…. Subverting democratic control of economic policy is a big reason why inequality has gotten so high across the developed world…

Must-Read: Mark Kleiman: The Moral Universe of the Corporate Killers

Must-Read: I have long thought that both Forbes and the Wall Street Journal have in mind as their target audiences that small segment of the human race that actually enjoys being free-riders, rather than that much larger segment of the human race that wants to engage in win-win reciprocal gift-exchange as a mode of social interaction…

Mark Kleiman: The Moral Universe of the Corporate Killers: “Daniel Fisher… writes for Forbes… hates plaintiffs’ lawyers…

…his first reaction to the VW emissions-cheating scandal was to criticize–not VW–but a class-action law firm threatening to sue VW on behalf of consumers. His point is that the buyers… weren’t in any direct sense harmed by VW’s fraud…. Therefore, the plaintiffs’ lawyers are being silly again. Tort reform, tort reform, sis, boom, bah!… Of course an individual car buyer isn’t directly harmed by driving a car that pollutes a lot, unless that buyer is burdened with a conscience ….

VW managers [have] committed a rather horrible set of crimes…. Fisher offers an ignorant sneer about the health effects of what VW did: “The Volkswagen defeat software is hardly deadly, unless one thinks the marginal nitrogen oxide it allowed into the atmosphere was enough to kill innocent bystanders.” Well, actually, “deadly” is precisely the correct word. Increasing NOx increases particulate emissions, and particulates kill…. Somewhere between 50 and 150 deaths per year (times six years) seems like a good first approximation, well above any single mass-murder incident in the U.S. save 9/11…

Must-Read: Paul Krugman: Economics: What Went Right

Must-Read: Let me underscore this: economists–especially economists who work for the Federal Reserve system–seem to strongly believe, unless they have themselves tried to estimate Phillips Curves, all three of:

  1. The slope of the Phillips Curve is a lot higher than actual statistical estimates suggest–unless you put your thumb on the scale and pick the single specification that generates the highest slope estimate.

  2. The gearing between recent past inflation and the expected-inflation measure that best forecasts is a lot higher than actual statistical estimates suggest–unless, once again, you put your thumb on the scale and pick the single specification that generates the highest slope estimate.

  3. The confidence intervals of parameters are a lot smaller than actual statistical estimates suggest.

Thus rising inflation in 2017 is a very real thing to the Federal Reserve system–but not to those outside the Federal Reserve who are working with the numbers without having as their goal finding a specification that generates such a forecast…

Paul Krugman: Economics: What Went Right: “One piece of the conventional story hasn’t worked that well…

…namely the Phillips curve, where the ‘clockwise spirals’ of previous protracted large output gaps haven’t materialized. Maybe it’s about what happens at very low inflation rates. What’s notable about the Fed’s urge to raise rates, however, is that Fed officials, including Janet Yellen, are acting as if they have high confidence in their models of inflation dynamics –which is the one thing we really haven’t done well at recently. I really fear that we’re looking at incestuous amplification here.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/krugman/2015/09/26/economics-what-went-right/?_r=0&referer=http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2015/09/economics-what-went-right.html

Must-Read: Matthew Yglesias: Thoughtful opponents of the welfare state have generally avoided…

Must-Read: I sometimes wonder: would Matthew Yglesias be a better economist and moral philosopher now if he had been an Economics rather than a Philosophy major at Harvard College? If the answer is–as I think it is–“no”, then some people have a lot of ‘splainin to do…

Matthew Yglesias: Thoughtful opponents of the welfare state have generally avoided making the argument that capitalism is good because it promotes human well-being…

…Since capitalism does promote human well-being, ‘capitalism promotes human well-being’ sounds like a good argument in its favor. But it turns out that capitalism plus a large welfare state promotes human well-being even more. So you either need to embrace the welfare state (the correct answer) or come up with another justification of capitalism. One that frequently arises is what Greg Mankiw has referred to as the ‘just deserts’ perspective in which ‘people should receive compensation congruent with their contributions’ and we should aim for a society in which public policy ought to ensure that ‘every individual would earn the value of his or her own marginal product.’ So if… you are blind and… [thus find] hard for you to earn a living in an unregulated market that’s too bad for you… your ability to contribute… is limited… [so] it is morally appropriate that your living standards be limited as well…. If… genetics and childhood living conditions have left you with an IQ… 2 standard deviations below average… you deserve to have a much lower standard of living than [if] society… were willing to do… redistribution.

Mankiw’s moralized capitalism seems bone-chilling to me, but I don’t really think I can prove him wrong…. Mankiwism isn’t a Christian worldview. Jesus didn’t preach ‘blessed are those with high marginal products, for they shall inherit incomes proportionate to their contributions.’ The practical benefits of capitalism are something that maybe a Christian should care about, but the practical benefits of capitalism-plus-welfare-state are bigger. To justify the tax-cutter policy agenda, you need some thicker ethical theory, and it ends up being a distinctly non-Christian one.

Pay Attention to Gabriel Zucman on Tax Havens

J. Bradford DeLong and Michael M. DeLong

Over at Project Syndicate: Pay attention to U.C. Berkeley’s newly-hired Gabriel Zucman, author of the just-released The Hidden Wealth of Nations: The Scourge of Tax Havens (Chicago: University of Chicago Press) http://amzn.to/1KziL29.

His figures are the hardest figures about tax havens–Switzerland, Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, Singapore, Luxembourg, and so forth–and about the quantity of money stored in them that we are likely to get. His estimate? 8% of the world’s financial wealth. $7.6 trillion. That is more wealth than is owned by the poorer half of the world. And this is money that is not in the tax base, but should be in the tax base–and would be if we had sufficient international tax harmonization to close off loopholes that allow for (legal) tax avoidance and sufficient cooperation and enforcement to make (illegal) tax evasion not worth the risk. READ MOAR


Zucman’s estimates are largely based on discrepancies in the international accounts we have. He is undertaking the hazardous leap of assuming that what are usually classified as “errors and omissions” have meaning. So how solid are his estimates? The Swiss Central Ban reports that $2.4 trillion in funds are held by foreigners in Swiss banks. Switzerland is the jurisdiction that has made living as a tax haven for the longest period of time, but it is not the most advantageous place for a plutocrat to park money. Thus we can be confident that $7.6 trillion is in the ballpark.

The North Atlantic has no chance of using national governments’ taxing powers to preserve social democracy and offset the great upward leaps in income and wealth inequality that have afflicted it over the past generation and continue to afflict it if its governments cannot tax. Emerging markets have no chance of instituting the progressive taxes needed to fund social democracy if they cannot find their plutocrats’ money. Tax havens are right now a small problem for a center or a left-of-center government in North America. They are a significant problem for Europe. But they are an enormous problem for the Middle East, for Russia, and for China. Or perhaps they are not a problem for these last three but an opportunity? To the extent that the executive of the modern state is little but a committee for managing the affairs of the ruling class, international tax havens are not a bug but a feature.

And even in the United States it is the case that too often in the past generation policy details have been deliberately constructed to enable rather than to discourage tax avoidance via tax havens. In the words of one former Bush 43 senior staffer: “it is, ultimately, about freedom”. This is a big chunk of the 1/3 fall in the effective reach of the U.S. corporate income tax since the late 1990s.

A century ago, when the First Gilded Age was at its height, noted American Progressive Louis Brandeis famously said that “sunlight is the best disinfectant”. Thus the creation of transparency is the first task–Zucman favors a single global registry, a publicly-accessible database of the ownership of financial instruments. If that is the first step, the shifting of the corporate tax base from profits reported to have been earned in a country to sales made in a country is the second. The point would still be to tax corporate profits–it does nobody any good to tax corporations that are truly losing money. But opportunities for tax havens would be greatly reduced if profits were apportioned among countries by the share of wages and of sales made in a country. As Zucman stresses, a corporation can move its legal headquarters and transfer-price its internal transactions, but it has a much much harder task in moving its employees across national borders, and it cannot move its customers.

It is fashionable to say that nothing can be done–that national sovereignty is too strong a meme, and that today’s plutocrats have too much political power both over elected politicians and even more so over appointed civil servants who expect someday not too far distant to go through the revolving door. It is fashionable to recall that, more than a century ago, then-Governor Woodrow Wilson of New Jersey convinced his legislature to get New Jersey out of the corporate-haven business. And America’s corporations picked up their legal headquarters and moved next door to Delaware.

Those who say that international policy coordination is impossible are always right–until, someday, things change and they are wrong. Why, right now it looks as though international policy coordination is very possible when it comes to ISDS: investor-state dispute settlement. But if we do not get the transparency and prepare the ground for formula apportionment now, someday the opportunities to make the taxation of our Second Gilded Age’s global plutocracy genuinely progressive when those opportunities will be at hand, yet we will fail to grasp them.

829 words