Economics (Theory and Philosophy)

Latest story

138 Shares96 Views

Why Low Layoff Numbers Don’t Mean the Labor Market Is Strong

by

Past economic cycles show that unemployment starts to tick up ahead of a recession, with wide-scale layoffs coming only later.As job growth has slowed and unemployment has crept up, some economists have pointed to a sign of confidence among employers: They are, for the most part, holding on to their existing workers.Despite headline-grabbing job cuts at a few big companies, overall layoffs remain below their levels during the strong economy before the pandemic. Applications for unemployment benefits, which drifted up in the spring and summer, have recently been falling.But past recessions suggest that layoff data alone should not offer much comfort about the labor market. Historically, job cuts have come only once an economic downturn was well underway.

.dw-chart-subhed {
line-height: 1;
margin-bottom: 6px;
font-family: nyt-franklin;
color: #121212;
font-size: 15px;
font-weight: 700;
}

Layoffs per month
Data is seasonally adjusted.Source: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York TimesThe Great Recession, for example, officially began at the end of 2007, after the bursting of the housing bubble and the ensuing mortgage crisis. The unemployment rate began rising in early 2008. But it was not until late 2008 — after the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the onset of a global financial crisis — that employers began cutting jobs in earnest.The milder recession in 2001 offers an even clearer example. The unemployment rate rose steadily from 4.3 percent in May to 5.7 percent at the end of the year. But apart from a brief spike in the fall, layoffs hardly rose.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

More stories

  • 125 Shares91 Views

    in Economy

    Harris and Trump Have Differing Plans to Solve Housing Crisis

    by

    The two presidential nominees are talking about their approaches for solving America’s affordability crisis. But would their plans work?America’s gaping shortage of affordable housing has rocketed to the top of voter worry lists and to the forefront of campaign promises, as both the Democratic nominee, Kamala Harris, and the Republican candidate, Donald J. Trump, promise to fix the problem if they are elected.Their two visions of how to solve America’s affordable housing shortage have little in common, and Ms. Harris’s plan is far more detailed. But they do share one quality: Both have drawn skepticism from outside economists.Ms. Harris is promising a cocktail of tax cuts meant to spur home construction — which several economists said could help create supply. But she is also floating a $25,000 benefit to help first-time buyers break into the market, which many economists worry could boost demand too much, pushing home prices even higher. And both sets of policies would need to pass in Congress, which would influence their design and feasibility.Mr. Trump’s plan is garnering even more doubt. He pledges to deport undocumented immigrants, which could cut back temporarily on housing demand but would also most likely cut into the construction work force and eventually limit new housing supply. His other ideas include lowering interest rates, something that he has no direct control over and that is poised to happen anyway.Economist misgivings about the housing market policy plans underline a somber reality. Few quick fixes are available for an affordable housing shortfall that has been more than 15 years in the making, one that is being worsened by demographic and societal trends. While ambitious promises may sound good in debates and television ads, actual policy attempts to fix the national housing shortfall are likely to prove messy and slow — even if they are sorely needed.Here’s what the candidates are proposing, and what experts say about those plans.Harris: Expand Supply Using Tax Credits.Ms. Harris is promising to increase housing supply by expanding the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, providing incentives for state and local investment in housing and creating a $40 billion tax credit to make affordable projects economically feasible for builders.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 150 Shares139 Views

    in Economy

    Kamala Harris Blames ‘Price Gouging’ for Grocery Inflation. Here’s What Economists Say.

    by

    Price increases when demand exceeds supply are textbook economics. The question is whether, and how much, the pandemic yielded an excess take.In detailing her presidential campaign’s economic agenda, Vice President Kamala Harris will highlight an argument that blames corporate price gouging for high grocery prices.That message polls well with swing voters. It has been embraced by progressive groups, which regularly point to price gouging as a driver of rapid inflation, or at least something that contributes to rapid price increases. Those groups cheered the announcement late Wednesday that Ms. Harris will call for a federal ban on corporate price gouging on groceries in an economic policy speech on Friday.But the economic argument over the issue is complicated.Economists have cited a range of forces for pushing up prices in the recovery from the pandemic recession, including snarled supply chains, a sudden shift in consumer buying patterns, and the increased customer demand fueled by stimulus from the government and low rates from the Federal Reserve. Most economists say those forces are far more responsible than corporate behavior for the rise in prices in that period.Biden administration economists have found that corporate behavior has played a role in pushing up grocery costs in recent years — but that other factors have played a much larger one.The Harris campaign announcement cited meat industry consolidation as a driver of excessive grocery prices, but officials did not immediately respond on Thursday to questions about the evidence Ms. Harris would cite or how her proposal would work.There are examples of companies telling investors in recent years that they have been able to raise prices to increase profits. But even the term “price gouging” means different things to different people.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 113 Shares199 Views

    in Economy

    Stock Markets Signal Recession Fears. Here’s the Economic Outlook.

    by

    The economy has repeatedly defied predictions of a downturn since the pandemic recovery began. Now signs of strength contend with shakier readings.The U.S. economy has spent three years defying expectations. It emerged from the pandemic shock more quickly and more powerfully than many experts envisioned. It proved resilient in the face of both inflation and the higher interest rates the Federal Reserve used to combat it. The prospect many forecasters once considered imminent — a recession — looked increasingly like a false alarm.Until now.An unexpectedly weak jobs report on Friday — showing slower hiring in July, and a surprising jump in unemployment — triggered a sell-off in the stock market as investors worried that an economic downturn might be underway after all. By Monday, that decline had turned into a rout, with financial markets tumbling around the world.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    The number of jobs added in July was the second smallest monthly gain in years.
    Note: Data is seasonally adjustedSource: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York Times

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    The unemployment rate in July rose to the highest level since October 2021.
    Note: Data is seasonally adjustedSource: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York TimesSome economists said investors were overreacting to one weak but hardly disastrous report, since many indicators show the economy on fundamentally firm footing.But they said there were also reasons to worry. Historically, increases in joblessness like the one in July — the unemployment rate rose to 4.3 percent, the highest since 2021 — have been a reliable indicator of a recession. And even without that precedent, there has been evidence that the labor market is weakening.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    The Sahm Rule indicator suggests a recession might have already begun.
    Data is seasonally adjusted and shows the change in the U.S. unemployment rate compared with the low point in the previous 12 months. All calculations based on three-month moving average.Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. LouisBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares139 Views

    in Economy

    What Forecasters Say About Interest Rates (and Why They Disagree)

    by

    Hopes for a steep drop in borrowing costs for consumers and businesses have been dashed. But some experts predict modest reductions in coming months.How soon is soon? Or exactly how much later is later?As the year started, there was a widespread view among economists and on Wall Street that the Federal Reserve would lower interest rates in the first half of the year. Maybe in March, maybe in May, but sooner rather than later.That long-awaited moment, two years after the Fed began ratcheting up rates to their highest level in decades, held the prospect of brightening consumer sentiment, increasing company valuations and improving corporate financing opportunities. It was called “the pivot party,” and everyone was invited.But three months of hotter-than-expected inflation data followed. Financial markets then projected that the Fed would lower rates once, near the end of the year, or not at all — based on a view that the central bank will see little merit in such a move as long as inflation remains a bit elevated and employment is growing.Interest rates for home and car loans tilted up again. And it seems the pivot party has been canceled. But some experts argue that it has only been postponed, leaving forecasters divided about what the rest of the year will bring.Camp 1: Inflation Is Coming Under ControlSome market analysts and bank economists are making the case that rate cuts are still on the table. The April jobs report, which implied a cooling labor market and softer wage growth, gave them some fodder.These analysts generally contend that current measures of inflation are overstated because of lagging indicators, reflecting cost pressures from over a year ago, that will ebb in summer. And they believe that while the diffuse process of stabilizing prices, formally called disinflation, may face setbacks (especially any oil shock), it is on track.After a wild ride, inflation has dropped back to lower levels, according to the Fed’s preferred measure.The annual percent change in the Personal Consumption Expenditures price index

    Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis By The New York TimesA measure of U.S. inflation that excludes an estimate of homeownership costs suggests that price increases are less rapid.The annual percentage change in the Consumer Price Index compared with the change in the Harmonized Index of Consumer Prices. H.I.C.P. is an inflation measure commonly used in other countries that excludes “owners’ equivalent rent,” an estimate of how much it may cost homeowners to rent a similar home.

    Source: Eurostat and Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 75 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Is the Boom-and-Bust Business Cycle Dead?

    by

    There is a growing view that the U.S. business cycle has changed (for better) in a more diversified economy. To some, that sounds like tempting fate.For much of modern history, even the richest nations have been subject to big perennial upswings and crashes in commercial activity almost as fixed as the four seasons.Periods of economic growth get overstretched by increased risk-taking. Hiring and investment crest and fall into a contraction as consumer confidence wanes and spending craters. Sales fall, bankruptcies and unemployment rise. Then, in the depths of a recession, debts are settled, panic abates, green shoots appear, and banks begin lending more easily again — fueling a recovery that enables a new upswing.But a brigade of academic economists and prominent voices on Wall Street are asking if the unruly business cycle they learned in school, and witnessed in practice, has fundamentally morphed into a tamer beast.Rick Rieder, who manages about $3 trillion in assets at the investment firm BlackRock, is one of them.“There is a lot of ink spilled on what type of landing we will see for the U.S. economy,” he wrote in a note to clients last summer — employing the common metaphor for whether the U.S. economy will crash or achieve a “soft landing” of lower inflation, slower growth and mild unemployment.“But one point to keep in mind,” Mr. Rieder continued, “is that satellites don’t land and maybe that is a better analogy for a modern advanced economy” like the United States. In other words, dips in momentum will now happen within a steadier orbit.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    Consumers Hate ‘Price Discrimination,’ but They Sure Love a Discount

    by

    The Wendy’s debacle is a warning shot for brands: If you want to play with prices, make sure to communicate why and whom it could help.It’s been a strange and maddening couple of years for consumers, with prices of essential goods soaring and then sinking, turning household budgets upside down.Listen to this article with reporter commentaryOpen this article in the New York Times Audio app on iOS.Perhaps that’s why, in late February, the internet revolted over Wendy’s plan to test changing its menu prices across the day. If the Breakfast Baconator winds up costing $6.99 at 7 a.m. and $7.99 three hours later, what in life can you really count on anymore?The company later issued a statement saying it would not raise prices during busy parts of the day, but rather add discounts during slower hours. Nevertheless, the episode won’t stop the continued spread of so-called dynamic pricing, which describes an approach of setting prices in response to shifting patterns of demand and supply. It might not even stop the growth of “personalized pricing,” which targets individuals based on their personal willingness to pay.And in many circumstances, customers may come around — if they feel companies are being forthright about how they’re changing prices and what information they’re using to do it.“There’s a need for some transparency, and it has to make sense to consumers,” said Craig Zawada, a pricing expert with PROS, a consultancy that helped pioneer dynamic pricing by airlines in the 1980s and now works across dozens of other industries. “In general, from a buyer standpoint, there has to be this perception of fairness.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 100 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Three Lessons From a Surprisingly Resilient Job Market

    by

    The recovery from the pandemic lockdowns has prompted economists to consider whether their playbook is outdated or just missing a page.The pandemic created an economic crisis unlike any recession on record. So perhaps it shouldn’t be surprising that the aftermath, too, has played out in a way that almost no economists expected.When unemployment soared in the first weeks of the pandemic, many feared a repeat of the long, slow rebound from the Great Recession: years of joblessness that left many workers permanently scarred. Instead, the recovery in the labor market has been, by many measures, the strongest on record.In early 2021, some economists foresaw a surge in inflation. Others were skeptical: Similar predictions in recent years — in some cases from the same forecasters — had failed to come true. This time, however, they were right.And when the Federal Reserve began trying to tamp down inflation, there were warnings that the job market was sure to buckle, as it had threatened to do every time policymakers began raising interest rates too rapidly in the decade before the pandemic. Instead, the central bank has raised rates to their highest level in decades, and the job market is holding steady, or perhaps even gaining steam.The final chapter on the recovery has not been written. A “soft landing” is not a done deal. But it is clear that the economy, particularly the job market, has proved far more resilient than most people thought probable.Interviews with dozens of economists — some of whom got the recovery partly right, many of whom got it mostly wrong — provided insights into what they have learned from the past two years, and what they make of the job market right now. They didn’t agree on all the details, but three broad themes emerged.

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    Unemployment usually rises when job openings fall. Not this time.
    Notes: Job openings are shown as a share of employment. Unemployment is shown as a share of the labor force. All data is seasonally adjusted.Source: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York Times

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    The racial unemployment gap is narrowing
    Note: Data is seasonally adjusted.Source: Bureau of Labor StatisticsBy The New York Times

    .dw-chart-subhed {
    line-height: 1;
    margin-bottom: 6px;
    font-family: nyt-franklin;
    color: #121212;
    font-size: 15px;
    font-weight: 700;
    }

    Job growth has far surpassed prepandemic expectations
    Notes: Change since fourth quarter 2014. Projection based on 2015 Congressional Budget Office forecast.Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics; Congressional Budget OfficeBy The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 113 Shares129 Views

    in Economy

    Can America Turn a Productivity Boomlet Into a Boom?

    by

    After drooping in 2022, the output of U.S. businesses per worker has surged. Economists wonder if the trend can continue, and who will benefit most.Kevin Rezvani came of age in kitchens: spending summers at his grandfather’s bakery in Japan, doing work-study in his college cafeteria and working for years as a line cook at mid-tier restaurants, along with some stints in fast food.By his late 20s, the biggest takeaway Mr. Rezvani had from his experience “working in every kind of thing in food” was the industry’s widespread inability to reconcile the art of a kitchen, and the science of a restaurant, with the math of a business.Too many ventures, he says, are not profitable enough to justify all the work hours needed from managers and employees to stay afloat, much less grow. In other words, they fall short on productivity.“There’s a very fine line between doing OK, and doing well in this business,” said Mr. Rezvani, now 36. “And if you’re doing OK, it’s not worth your time.”He and two partners opened a casual sit-down restaurant near Rutgers University a few years after his graduation. But in early 2020, they split from him over personal and business disagreements, and he was on his own.To pay bills, he worked for a moving company and made deliveries for Amazon, which was booming during the lockdowns, as people idled at home spent their disposable income on buying goods.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More