Must-reads: May 4, 2016


Should-reads:

Must-read: Nick Rowe et al.: The Leijonhufvud Tradition

Must-Read: Nick Rowe et al.: The Leijonhufvud Tradition:

Must-read: Tamim Bayoumi and Joseph E. Gagnon: “Time to Be Bold, Mr. Kuroda”

Must-Read: Tamim Bayoumi and Joseph E. Gagnon: Time to Be Bold, Mr. Kuroda: “The surprise decision by the Bank of Japan (BOJ) last Thursday to leave policies essentially unchanged…

…while downgrading the growth and inflation forecasts has unnerved markets…. Markets needed a surprise, but this one was in the wrong direction. What is required is a bold initiative rather than renewed paralysis…. Strong, decisive policy action is needed—and soon—to convince markets the BOJ is still determined to achieve 2 percent inflation. With 10-year government bond yields now below zero, the most effective option is to ramp up purchases of other assets. Currently, the BOJ is buying about 0.5 percent of outstanding equities per year. Raising the rate of purchase to 10 percent would herald a major break with the past, pushing up equity prices and encouraging consumption and investment through higher household wealth and lower cost of capital.

Must-read: Wolfgang Munchau: “The Revenge of Globalisation’s Losers”

Must-Read: Wolfgang Munchau: The Revenge of Globalisation’s Losers: “A process once hailed for delivering universal benefit now faces a political backlash…

…The establishment view, in Europe at least, is that states have neglected to forge the economic reforms necessary to make us more competitive globally. I would like to offer an alternative view. The failure of globalisation in the west is in fact down to democracies failure to cope with the economic shocks that inevitably result from globalisation, such as the stagnation of real average incomes for two decades. Another shock has been the global financial crisis–a consequence of globalisation–and its permanent impact on long-term economic growth….

Voters’ insurrection is neither shocking nor irrational. Why should French voters cheer labour market reforms if it could result in the loss of their jobs, with no hope of a new one?… Germany’s acclaimed labour market reforms in 2003 succeeded in the short term because they raised the country’s cost competitiveness through lower wages relative to other advanced countries. The reforms produced a state of near full employment only because no other country did the same. If others had followed, there would have been no net gain. The reforms had a big downside. They reduced relative prices in Germany and pushed up net exports in turn generating massive savings outflows, the deep cause of the imbalances that led to the eurozone crisis. Reforms such as these can hardly be the recipe for how advanced nations should address the problem of globalisation….

Globalisation has overwhelmed western societies politically and technically. There is no way we can, or should, hide from it. But we have to manage the change. This means accepting that the optimal moment for the next trade agreement, or market liberalisation, may not be right now.

Must-read: Martin Ford: “How Unprepared We Are for the Robot Revolution”

Martin Ford: How Unprepared We Are for the Robot Revolution: “Machines are rapidly taking on ever more challenging cognitive tasks…

…encroaching on the fundamental capability that sets humans apart as a species: our ability to make complex decisions, to solve problems — and, most importantly, to learn…. In the coming decades, machine learning is likely to be the primary driving force behind a Cambrian explosion of applications…. The near-term future is likely to be transformed not by general purpose robots or AI systems but rather a nearly limitless number of specialised applications… ultimately consuming nearly any kind of work that is on some level routine and predictable….

Low-wage service sector jobs in areas such as fast food and retail… are certain to be heavily affected. Even more important will be all the white-collar occupations that involve relatively routine information analysis and manipulation. As these ‘good’ jobs, often held by university graduates, begin to evaporate, faith in evermore education and training as the common solution to technological disruption of the job market seems likely to also erode. All of this portends a social, economic and political disruption for which we are completely unprepared…. If we fail to have a meaningful public conversation about what robotics and artificial intelligence mean for the future, and develop workable ways in which to adapt our economy and society, then far greater, and more frightening, volatility is sure to soon arrive.

Must-read: Gary Gorton: “The History and Economics of Safe Assets”

Must-Read: Gary B. Gorton: The History and Economics of Safe Assets: “Safe assets play a critical role in an(y) economy…

…A ‘safe asset’ is an asset that is (almost always) valued at face value without expensive and prolonged analysis. That is, by design there is no benefit to producing (private) information about its value. And this is common knowledge. Consequently, agents need not fear adverse selection when buying or selling safe assets. Safe assets can easily be used to exchange for goods or services or to exchange for another asset. These short-term safe assets are money or money-like. A long-term safe asset can store value over time or be used as collateral. Human history can be written in terms of the search for and production of safe assets. But, the most prevalent, privately-produced short-term safe assets—bank debt, are subject to runs and this has important implications for macroeconomics and for monetary policy.

Income mobility over a lifetime might be on the decline

Ask five people about economic mobility and you might end up with six definitions of the term. It’s a knotty subject because the term really does have a number of definitions. Lots of discussions about mobility center on the intergenerational kind—about how much of a parent’s economic situation gets passed onto their children. But there’s also intragenerational mobility—a lesser-discussed kind of mobility that looks at how much a person changes their position on the income ladder within their own lifetime.

Research over the past couple of years indicates that intergenerational mobility in the United States has stayed relatively constant since the early 1980s. In contrast, a new paper shows that intragenerational mobility has been on the decline amid rising income inequality.

The new paper, released today as part of Equitable Growth’s working paper series, is by Michael D. Carr and Emily E. Wiemers, both of the University of Massachusetts-Boston. It looks at how mobility over a career has changed since the early 1980s. Previous research on intragenerational mobility using data from the Social Security Administration found the overall level hasn’t changed that much. Carr and Wiemers also use data from the Social Security Administration, but they include administrative data from the Internal Revenue Service as well. Both of these datasets are linked to data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation, or SIPP, which follows households over time and has information on demographics and education levels.

The two economists find that a person’s initial place in the income distribution mattered more in the early 1990s than it did in the early 1980s. Specifically, they look at the mobility of workers over 15-year periods, the first spanning 1981 to 1996 and the second from 1993 to 2008. In the more recent cohort they find a stronger correlation between a person’s rank when they start a career and that person’s position later in life. A stronger correlation means that a person’s position earlier in life is more predictive of their later position, and therefore there are lower levels of movement up and down the distribution.

What’s particularly interesting is that the inclusion of the SIPP data lets the authors look at how trends in mobility have differed by educational levels. For workers with less than a high school diploma, intragenerational mobility hasn’t changed that much. The difference isn’t statistically significant in Carr and Wiemers’s analysis. But mobility has declined (as shown by a stronger correlation) for workers with a college degree. In fact, for the 1993-2008 cohort, college-educated workers didn’t experience more mobility than workers with less education. The results indicate that this may be because college-educated workers now have a higher starting point than in the past.

These results all come with the usual caveats of new working papers. But if the results stand, they require some careful thought from both researchers and policymakers.

(featured photo credit: Flickr/GurtyGurt)

Must-reads: May 3, 2016


Should-reads:

Must-read: Duncan Weldon: “Fear of the robots is founded in the messy reality of labour”

Must-Read: Duncan Weldon: Fear of the robots is founded in the messy reality of labour: “Dystopian visions of a future in which machines sweep millions of people out of work…

…are as old as technological change itself. What is missing from today’s debate about the march of the robots is an appreciation of the crucial role of labour bargaining power. When labour bargaining is weak, the Luddite fear of mechanisation is worth taking more seriously…. The best argument for being relaxed about this process is the long sweep of economic history itself…. But looking at the big picture risks missing important details….

To understand how the labour market reacts to labour-saving technology, economists tend to look at two related effects: the displacement effect and the compensation effect. The interaction of these processes determines how long a painful short run will last…. Labour market interactions are rarely the bloodless interplay of supply and demand lines on a graph. They are instead conditioned by the social and political context…. If labour’s bargaining position is weak, as it is currently, then the danger is that the higher productivity from new technologies will not sufficiently be captured in swift wage growth. Instead, it could flow to the owners of the technology…. Avoiding that unhappy outcome means recognising now that wage growth plays a crucial role in helping an economy through technological transitions and that labour bargaining power is a big part of it…

Must-read: Michael Heise: “The Case Against Helicopter Money”

Must-Read: Michael Heise does not seem to understand that central banks’ comprehensive assets include the ability to tax banks by raising reserve requirements:

Michael Heise: The Case Against Helicopter Money: “Helicopter drops would arrive in the form of lump-sum payments to households or consumption vouchers for everybody, funded exclusively by central banks…

…This… would reduce the central bank’s equity capital…. Proponents defend this approach by claiming that central banks are subject to special accounting rules that could be adjusted as needed…. Proponents… today include… Ben Bernanke and Adair Turner….

Distributing largesse… would have dangerous systemic consequences…. Policymakers would be tempted to… [avoid] difficult structural reforms… [and] would raise expectations… that central banks and governments would always step in to smooth out credit bubbles and mitigate their consequences…. Add to that the impact of the depletion of valuation reserves and the risk of negative equity–developments that could undermine the credibility of central banks and thus of currencies–and it seems clear that helicopter drops should, at least for now, remain firmly in the realm of academic debate.