United States

More stories

  • 163 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Inflation Plagues Democrats in Polling. Will It Crush Them at the Ballot Box?

    by

    Americans are extremely attuned to the cost of living, and as midterm election voters head to the polls, they are divided over whom to blame.Inflation has roared back onto the scene as a key issue ahead of the 2022 midterm elections, after five decades during which slow and steady price increases were a political nonissue.It was once a potent driver of politics in America, one that panicked former President Richard M. Nixon and his administration, and later helped to make Jimmy Carter a one-term president. As prices surge, inflation is again taking center stage, and could help decide who controls Congress.Household confidence has plummeted as inflation has climbed, and economic issues have shot to the top of what voters are worried about. A full 49 percent of voters overall said that the economy is an extremely important issue to them in an October Gallup survey, notably outranking abortion, crime and relations with Russia. That’s the highest level of economic concern headed into a midterm election since 2010, when the economy was coming out of the worst downturn since the Great Depression.Inflation is almost certainly the issue pushing the economy to its current prominence. Consumer prices picked up by 8.2 percent in the year through September, far faster than the roughly 2 percent annual gains that were normal in the years leading up to the pandemic. That has left many families feeling like they are falling behind, even as unemployment lingers near a 50-year low, employers hire at a solid clip and job openings abound.The disconnect between the strength of the economy and the way that voters feel about it illustrates why Democrats are barreling into the midterms on the defensive. Elected politicians have a limited role to play in fighting inflation, a job that falls mostly to the Federal Reserve. That has made talking about price increases all the more challenging.Survey data suggest that while voters disagree over whom to blame for today’s rapid price increases, a larger share of independent voters believe that Republicans would be better for the economy and their finances. And irritation over the state of the economy could be enough to prompt some people to vote for change even if the other party doesn’t offer clearly better solutions, according to political scientists. The question is less whether inflation will be a factor driving votes — and more whether it will be a decisive one.“It matters enormously to the election this week,” said Elaine Kamarck, a senior fellow in the Governance Studies program at the Brookings Institution, noting that gas and grocery prices are omnipresent realities for most families. “It is obvious what is happening in inflation every single day: Voters don’t get to forget it.”Across the political spectrum, many Americans are feeling less positive about their personal finances: An AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll from October found that 36 percent of Democrats now say their finances are in bad shape, up from 28 percent in March. Among Republicans, that number was 53 percent, up from 41 percent. Independents were fairly unchanged, with 53 percent feeling negative.That could be particularly bad for Democrats, because they are often seen as less strong on the economy.Which Party Is Better for the National Economy?Independents and Republicans both tend to rank Republicans ahead of Democrats economically, based on University of Michigan data.

    Note: Survey from September and October 2022.Source: University of MichiganBy The New York TimesNew survey data from the University of Michigan showed that 41 percent of voters felt neither party had an advantage when it came to helping their personal finances. But of those who did think there was a difference, 35 percent thought Republicans would be better — versus 20 percent for Democrats. Consumers also expected Republicans to win in national races.“By and large, respondents expect Republicans to gain control of both the House and the Senate,” Joanne Hsu, director of the University of Michigan’s consumer surveys, wrote in the Nov. 4 release.Which Party Is Better for Your Personal Finances? Republicans and Independents tend to rank Republicans higher on issues of personal finance, though many see no difference.

    Note: Survey from September and October 2022.Source: University of MichiganBy The New York TimesWhether they are right could hinge on whether inflation proves as salient for actual votes as it is in sentiment surveys.Prices may be rising quickly — annoying consumers and occupying their attention — but unemployment is very low, which Ms. Kamarck said might alleviate the angst. Plus, she said, critical groups of voters — most notably women — may focus on other issues including a Supreme Court ruling from earlier this year that overturned Roe v. Wade and ended the constitutional right to abortion.Hally Simpson Wilk, 36, from Broadview Heights, Ohio, is feeling inflation at the grocery store, but she does not think that Republicans would necessarily be better at solving the problem than Democrats. Plus, she said, the abortion ruling had “lit a fire under” her. She expects to vote Democrat.It is hard to guess whether unhappiness over rising prices will drive actual votes in part because there isn’t much recent precedent. While inflation has a history of driving politics in America, it hasn’t been a major issue in 50 years.Back in the 1970s and 1980s, inflation was even faster, touching peaks as high as 12 and 14 percent. Those price increases, and the nation’s response to them, played a big role in driving the national conversation and deciding elections during that era. Mr. Nixon in 1971 instituted wage and price caps to try to temporarily keep prices under control ahead of the 1972 election, for instance.“Inflation robs every American, every one of you,” Mr. Nixon said during his surprise announcement, which included other major economic policy changes. “Homemakers find it harder than ever to balance the family budget. And 80 million American wage earners have been on a treadmill.”.css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}Our needle is back. The needle is an innovative forecasting tool that was created by The Times and debuted in 2016. It is intended to help you understand what the votes tallied so far suggest about possible winners in key contests, before the election is called. Look for one needle on which party will control the House and one on which party will control the Senate.Here’s a deeper dive into how it works.Those wage and price caps may have been politically astute, but research since has showed they just delayed price jumps — they didn’t stop them. When Mr. Carter became president in 1977, inflation was still raging. The Fed wrestled it under control with super-high interest rates that sent unemployment soaring, a campaign that is widely credited with helping to cost Mr. Carter a second term.America’s experience during the 1970s also illustrates a harsh reality: Even if inflation drives the nation’s politics, there is relatively little politicians can do to address it, aside from trying to avoid making the problem worse by stimulating the economy. Taxing and spending policies to offset price increases mostly have comparatively small effects.The country’s main tool for fighting rapid price increases is Fed policy — and that is a painful solution. When the central bank lifts interest rates, it slows economic demand, cools hiring, moderates wage growth and eventually drags prices lower as shoppers pull back and companies find that they can no longer charge more.“There is not an easy fix for inflation — the fix is a recession,” Ms. Kamarck said. For Democrats, “it is very hard to have an economic message.”Economists typically attribute today’s rapid price increases partially to government spending, including a package that Democrats passed in 2021 that helped to fuel consumer demand. But they are also global in nature, tied partly to lingering supply issues amid the pandemic, and food and fuel market disruptions caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.Many voters believe that today’s price increases are not wholly — even principally — the Democratic administration’s fault. But that assessment divides along party lines.About 87 percent of Democrats attribute inflation to factors outside of President Biden’s control, versus 48 percent of independents and 21 percent of Republicans, based on AP-NORC polling data from last month.What Is to Blame for Rapid Inflation?A poll asked voters what was to blame for higher-than usual prices: President Biden’s policies, or factors outside of his control.

    Note: Survey from October 6-10, 2022Source: AP-NORCBy The New York Times People who were already on the fence could have their minds swayed by inflation — especially in places where it is particularly painful. Price increases are reported at a metro level, and some cities in key battleground states are facing particularly rapid price increases: Inflation was at 11.7 percent in Atlanta; 13 percent in Phoenix; and 9 percent in the Seattle metro area as of the latest available data.And even if inflation is hovering near the national average in some places, it is still the fastest pace in decades.Pennsylvania’s Senate race is closely contested, and Christopher Borick, director of the Muhlenberg College Institute of Public Opinion in Allentown, Pa., thinks that rapid price increases could be one factor that is helping the Republican candidate Mehmet Oz run a competitive race despite very low favorability ratings.“We often see in midterm races that if people aren’t happy, a price is paid by the incumbent party,” Mr. Borick said. Inflation “places people in a mood that really does open up the door to alternatives that might not otherwise be acceptable.” More

  • 125 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    Corporate America Has a Message for the Fed About Inflation

    by

    If the Federal Reserve’s chair, Jerome H. Powell, and his colleagues look at company earnings reports, these themes might catch their eye.Federal Reserve officials are battling the fastest inflation in four decades, and as they do they are parsing a wide variety of data sources to see what might happen next. If they check in on how executives are describing their companies’ latest financial results, they might have reasons to worry.It’s not because the corporate chiefs are overly gloomy about their prospects as the Fed aggressively raises interest rates to control rapid inflation. Quite the opposite: Many executives across a range of industries over the last few weeks have said they expect to see sustained demand. In many cases, they plan to continue raising prices in the months ahead.That is good for investors — the S&P 500 index gained 8 percent last month as companies began reporting quarterly profits — but not necessarily welcome news for the Fed, which has been trying hard to slow consumer spending. The central bank has already raised rates five times this year and is expected to do so again on Wednesday as part of its campaign to cool off the economy. Although companies have warned that the economy may slow and often talk about a tough environment, many are not seeing customers crack yet.“While we are seeing signs of economic slowing, consumers and corporates remain healthy,” Jane Fraser, the chief executive of Citigroup, told investors recently. “So it is all a question of what it takes to truly tame persistently high core inflation.”If companies continue to charge more and consumers are still willing to pay, inflation will be harder to stamp out. That could push the Fed to keep up its push to curb momentum — and if officials must do more to wrestle prices down, it could increase the risk of financial turmoil, higher unemployment or other bad outcomes. Although some companies are reporting a nascent slowdown, the signs are far from conclusive.Demand remains strong despite higher prices.McDonald’s expects to raise prices 10 percent at its restaurants in the United States this year, its leaders said when reporting better-than-expected sales and profits for the third quarter.“I think because of the strength of the brand and the proposition as evidenced by the results, the consumers are willing to tolerate it,” said Chris Kempczinski, the fast-food giant’s chief executive.Inflation F.A.Q.Card 1 of 5What is inflation? More

  • 138 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    Could a Market Blowout Like the UK’s Happen in the US?

    by

    Federal Reserve and White House officials spent last week quizzing investors and economists about the risks of a British-style meltdown at home.WASHINGTON — Federal Reserve researchers and officials quizzed experts from Wall Street and around the world last week about a pressing question: Could a market meltdown like the one that happened in Britain late last month occur here?The answer they got back, according to four people at separate institutions who were in such conversations and who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private meetings, was that it probably could — though a crash does not appear to be imminent. As the Biden administration did its own research into the potential for a meltdown, other market participants relayed the same message: The risk of a financial crisis has grown as central banks have sharply raised interest rates.The Bank of England had to swoop in to buy bonds and soothe markets after the British government released a fiscal spending plan that would have stimulated an economy already struggling with punishing inflation, one that included little detail on how it would be paid for. Markets lurched, and pension funds using a common investment strategy found themselves scrambling to adjust, prompting the central bank’s intervention.While the shock was British-specific, the violent reaction has caused economists around the world to wonder if the situation was a canary in a coal mine as signs of financial stress surface around the globe.Officials at the Fed, Treasury and White House are among those trying to figure out whether the United States could experience its own market-shuddering meltdown, one that could prove costly for households while complicating America’s battle against rapid inflation.Administration officials remain confident that the U.S. financial system is unlikely to see such a shock and is strong enough to withstand one if it comes. But both they and the Fed are keeping close tabs on what is happening at a moment when conditions feel abnormally fragile.Markets have been choppy for months in the United States and globally as central banks — including the Fed — rapidly raise interest rates to bring inflation under control. That has caused abnormally large price moves in currencies and other assets because their values hinge partly on the level of interest rates and on international rate differences. Stocks have been swinging. It can be hard to quickly find a buyer for U.S. government bonds, although the market is not breaking down. And in corners of finance that involve more complicated investment structures, there’s concern that volatility could trigger a dangerous chain reaction.“In the market, there is a lot of worry, and everyone is saying it feels like something is about to break,” said Roberto Perli, an economist at Piper Sandler who used to work at the Fed and who was not part of the conversations last week. He added that it made sense that officials were checking up on the situation.President Biden at an event promoting the Inflation Reduction Act in California last week.T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York TimesPresident Biden has repeatedly convened his top economic aides in recent weeks to discuss market flare-ups, like the one that roiled Britain.Fed officials and staff members have met with investors and economists both during normal outreach and on the sidelines of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund annual meetings last week in Washington.Fed researchers asked about three big possibilities during the meetings. They wanted to know whether there could be a trade or an investment class in the United States similar to British pension funds that could pose a significant and underappreciated threat.They also focused on whether problems overseas could spill back over to the United States financial system. For instance, Japan is one of the biggest buyers of U.S. debt. But Japan’s currency is rapidly falling in value as the country holds its interest rates low, unlike other central banks. If that turmoil caused Japan to reverse course and stop buying or even sell U.S. Treasurys — something that it has signaled little appetite for, but that some on Wall Street see as a risk — it could have ramifications for U.S. debt markets.The final threat they asked about focused on whether today’s lack of easy trading in the Treasury market could turn into a more serious problem that requires the Fed to swoop in to restore normal functioning..css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}What we consider before using anonymous sources. Do the sources know the information? What’s their motivation for telling us? Have they proved reliable in the past? Can we corroborate the information? Even with these questions satisfied, The Times uses anonymous sources as a last resort. The reporter and at least one editor know the identity of the source.Learn more about our process.None of those areas appear to be at immediate risk of snapping, analysts told officials. The pension system in the United States is different from that in Britain, and the government debt market may be choppy, but it is still functioning.Yet they also voiced reasons for concern: It is impossible to know what might break until something does. Markets are large and intertwined, and comprehensive data is hard to come by. Given how much central bank policy has shifted around the world in recent months, something could easily go wrong.There is a good reason for officials to fret about that possibility: A market meltdown now would be especially problematic.A New York City market. The Fed is rapidly raising interest rates to bring inflation under control, but a financial crash could force it to shift that plan.Elias Williams for The New York TimesA financial disaster could force the Fed to deviate from its plan to control the fastest inflation in four decades, which includes raising rates rapidly and allowing its bond portfolio to shrink. Officials have in the past bought large sums of Treasury bonds in order to restore stability to flailing markets — essentially the opposite of their policy today.Central bankers would most likely try to draw a distinction between bond buying meant to keep the market functioning and monetary policy, but that could be hard to communicate.The White House, too, has reasons to worry. Mr. Biden was scarred by his experience as vice president throughout the Great Recession, during which a financial meltdown brought on the worst downturn since the 1930s, throwing millions out of work and consuming the Obama administration’s policy agenda for years of a painstakingly slow recovery.Mr. Biden has pressed his team to estimate the likelihood that the United States could experience another 2008-style shock on Wall Street. Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen and her deputies have been closely monitoring developments in the market for U.S. government debt and searching for any signs of British-style stress.While administration officials noted that trading has become more difficult in the market for Treasury bonds, they also pointed out that it was otherwise functioning well. Multiple officials said this week that they expected the Fed would step in to buy bonds — as the Bank of England did — in an emergency.Other administration officials came away from their meetings in Washington last week with increased worries about financial crises sprouting in so-called emerging markets, like parts of Africa, Asia and South America, where food and energy prices have soared and where the Fed’s steady march of interest rate increases has forced governments to raise their own borrowing costs. Such crises could spread worldwide and rebound on wealthier countries like the United States.Yet administration officials say the American economy remains strong enough to endure any such shocks, buoyed by still-rapid job growth and relatively low household debt.“This is a challenging global economic moment where stability is hard to find,” said Michael Pyle, Mr. Biden’s deputy national security adviser for international economic affairs, “but the U.S. has momentum and resilience behind its economic recovery, and a trajectory that puts the U.S. in a strong position to weather these global challenges.”And there is no guarantee that something will blow up. A senior Treasury official said this week that financial risks had risen with high inflation and rising interest rates, but that a variety of data the department tracked continued to show strength in American businesses, households and financial institutions.For now, markets for short-term borrowing, which are crucial to the functioning of finance overall, look healthy and fairly normal, said Joseph Abate, a managing director at Barclays. And officials are working on safeguards to stem the fallout if a disaster should come. The Financial Stability Oversight Council, which Ms. Yellen leads, discussed the issues at its most recent meeting this month, hearing staff presentations on U.S. financial vulnerabilities.The Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee, an advisory group of market participants, has been asked in its latest questionnaire about a possible Treasury program to buy back government debt. Some investors have taken that as a signal that they are worried about a possible problem and may want to be able to improve market functioning, especially in light of their comments and outreach.“We are worried about a loss of adequate liquidity in the market,” Ms. Yellen said last week while answering questions after a speech in Washington.And the Fed already has outstanding tools that can help to stabilize markets. Those include swap lines that can funnel dollars to banks that need it overseas, and that have been used by Switzerland and the European Central Bank in recent weeks.Mr. Abate at Barclays said the Securities and Exchange Commission, Treasury and Fed seemed to be “on top of” the situation.“It’s clear in the marketplace that liquidity is a concern,” he said. “The regulators are moving to address that.” More

  • 188 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    With So Much Riding on the Fed’s Moves, It’s Hard to Know How to Invest

    by

    Where the markets go from here depends on whether and how deftly the Federal Reserve pivots from its hawkish stance.Making money was easy for investors when they could still plausibly believe that the Federal Reserve might back down on its aggressive campaign to subdue inflation at any cost. But harsh words from the Fed chairman, Jerome H. Powell, backed by a string of large interest rate increases, finally convinced markets that the central bank meant business, sending stock and bond prices tumbling.A nervous confidence returned as October began, with stocks experiencing a big two-day rally, but then prices sank anew. Investors at first seemed more confident that the Fed would reverse course, but anxiety returned as they worried about how much damage would be inflicted before that happened. Where the markets go from here, and how to position an investment portfolio, depends on whether and how deftly the Fed changes its strategy.“A crescendo of factors is coming together that makes me think we’re going to have another few weeks of pain before the Fed capitulates,” said Marko Papic, chief strategist at the Clocktower Group.Mr. Papic thinks a dovish turn may come soon, as the Fed signals that it would settle for inflation two or three percentage points above its 2 percent target.Others think more pain lies ahead, maybe a lot more. A prerequisite for a pivot might be a “credit event,” said Komal Sri-Kumar, president of Sri-Kumar Global Strategies, meaning a default by a large investment firm or corporate or government borrower, often with severe consequences. Mutual FundsA glance at mutual fund performance in the third quarter. More

  • 100 Shares149 Views

    in Economy

    Lessons From Liz Truss’s Handling of U.K. Inflation

    by

    The sharp policy U-turn by Liz Truss, Britain’s prime minister, reveals the perils of taking the wrong path in the fight against scalding inflation.Government leaders in the West are struggling with rising inflation, slowing growth, and anxious electorates worried about winter and high energy bills. But Liz Truss, Britain’s prime minister, is the only one who devised an economic plan that unnerved financial markets, drew the ire of global leaders and the public and undermined her political standing.On Friday, battered by savage criticism, she retreated. Ms. Truss fired her top finance official, Kwasi Kwarteng, for creating precisely the package of unfunded tax cuts, billion-dollar spending programs and deregulation that she had asked for.She reinstated a scheduled increase in corporate taxes to 25 percent from 19 percent, a rise she had previously opposed. That announcement came on top of backtracking last week on her proposal to eliminate the top 45 percent income tax on the highest earners. The prime minister, in office a little over five weeks, also promised that spending would grow less rapidly than proposed, although no specifics were offered.The drama is still playing out, and it’s unclear if the Truss government will survive.In the United States, President Biden, while waging his own political battles over gas prices and inflation, has not proposed anything like the kind of policies that Ms. Truss’s government attempted, nor have any other leaders in Europe.Still, for European governments whose economies are suffering greatly from shocks and energy price surges caused by Russia’s war in Ukraine, there are timely lessons from the debacle playing out in London.One of the strongest was delivered early on by the International Monetary Fund: Don’t undermine your own central bankers. The I.M.F., which usually reserves such scoldings for developing nations, on Thursday doubled down on its message. “Don’t prolong the pain,” Kristalina Georgieva, the managing director, admonished.How to blunt the impact of inflation on the most vulnerable without further stoking inflation is the dilemma that every government is confronting.The Bank of England in London has aggressively tried to slow the sharp rise in prices by slowing the British economy.Alberto Pezzali/Associated Press“That is the question of the hour,” said Eswar Prasad, an economist at Cornell University who was attending the annual meetings of the World Bank and I.M.F. in Washington this week.Tension between the fiscal spending policies proposed by a government and the monetary policies controlled by central banks is not unusual. At the moment, though, central bankers are engaged in delicate policy maneuvers in the fight against a level of inflation not seen in decades. With the rate in Britain nearing 10 percent, the Bank of England has moved aggressively to slow down climbing prices through a series of interest rate increases aimed at crimping consumer and business spending.Any expansion of government spending is going to interfere with that aim to some degree, but Ms. Truss’s plan was far too big and too ill defined, Mr. Prasad said.“Measures to help households hit hard by energy increases, by themselves, would not have created that much of a stir,” he said. Many other countries have proposed exactly that. And the European Union has proposed a windfall tax on energy profits to help finance those subsidies.Ms. Truss, instead of coming up with a way to pay for energy assistance, pushed to eliminate a corporate tax increase and cut income taxes for the wealthiest segment of the population. The result was a reduction in government revenue and a ballooning of Britain’s debt.“Overall, the package did not have much clarity in terms of how it would support the economy in the short run without raising inflation,” Mr. Prasad said.By contrast, Claus Vistesen, chief eurozone economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics, cited the way governments and central banks worked in tandem when the pandemic struck in 2020 to keep economies from collapsing, issuing vast amounts of public debt.“Central banks printed every single dollar, euro and pound that governments spent” to support households and businesses because of the Covid crisis, Mr. Vistesen said. But now the circumstances have changed, and inflation is setting economies aflame.The actions of the Federal Reserve in the United States illustrate the switch central banks have made: In the harrowing early weeks of the global outbreak of the coronavirus, the Fed embarked on an extraordinary program to stimulate the economy and stabilize markets. This year, the Fed has been swiftly raising interest rates in a bid to slow growth.Both the United States and eurozone countries have somewhat more wiggle room than Britain, because the dollar and the euro are much more widely used around the world as currencies held in reserve than the British pound.Kwasi Kwarteng, Britain’s former chancellor of the Exchequer, left 11 Downing Street after Ms. Truss fired him on Friday.Kirsty Wigglesworth/Associated PressEven so, European governments can help households and businesses get through an energy crisis, Mr. Vistesen said, but they can’t embark on an open-ended spending spree.They also need to take account of what is happening in other economies. The richest countries that make up the Group of 7 are essentially part of the same “monetary and fiscal convoy,” said Will Hutton, president of the Academy of Social Sciences. By championing a Thatcher-era blend of steep tax cuts and deregulation, he said, the Truss government strayed too far from the rest of the flotilla and the economic mainstream.The adherence to 1980s-era trickle-down verities also revealed the risks of sticking with outdated policies in the face of changing circumstances, said Diane Coyle, a ​​public policy professor at the University of Cambridge.“The situation in 1979 was very different,” Ms. Coyle said. “There were sclerotic high taxes and an overregulated economy, but not anymore.” Today, taxes in Britain are lower, and the economy is less regulated than the average member of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a club of 38 major economies.“The character of the economy has changed,” she said. “Public investment in research and skills are more important.”In that sense, what was missing from Ms. Truss’s economic plan was as important as what was included. And what Britain is lacking, said Mariana Mazzucato, an economist at University College London, is a visionary public investment program like the trillion-dollar climate and digitalization plans adopted by the European Union or the climate and infrastructure program in the United States.A rate of Inflation nearing 10 percent in Britain has affected the price of groceries and how people spend their money.Alex Ingram for The New York Times“If you don’t have a growth plan, an industrial strategy innovation policy,” Ms. Mazzucato said, “then your economy won’t expand.”Both Ms. Mazzucato and Ms. Coyle emphasized that Britain had some specific economic handicaps that predated the Truss administration, including the 2016 vote to exit the European Union, a stubborn lack of productivity, anemic business investment, and lagging research and development.Still, Ms. Coyle offered some advice that referred pointedly to Ms. Truss. “I think the main lesson is: Don’t shoot yourself in the foot.” More

  • 88 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    2023 COLA Could Strain Social Security Program

    by

    The Social Security Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund could be depleted a year or two earlier than expected as a result of larger payouts.The 8.7 percent Social Security cost-of-living increase that was announced on Thursday is welcome news for retirees who are struggling to cope with surging inflation. But it could bring the social safety net program a step closer to insolvency.Annual government reports in June showed that the Social Security Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund, which pays out retiree benefits, would be depleted in 2034. At that time, the fund’s reserves will run out, leaving the system reliant on incoming tax revenue. Those funds will provide enough money to cover only 77 percent of scheduled benefits unless Congress intervenes.Social Security is largely funded through payroll taxes, taxes levied on Social Security benefits and interest on money that the trust funds invest.Now that the program will be paying out more to help retirees keep up with rising prices, the program will be under even more pressure to sustain itself. Budget experts warn that the reserves could run out before 2034 as a result of the larger benefits.“This very large COLA increase is likely to bring the year of insolvency forward by a full year,” said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, referring to the cost-of-living adjustment. “It is just another reminder that procrastinating on addressing these imbalances leaves the people who depend on Social Security particularly vulnerable to a further deterioration in its finances.”The increased outlays for retirees will be partly offset by higher taxes on Americans. Along with the bigger benefits, the maximum amount of earnings subject to the Social Security payroll tax will increase to $160,200 from $147,000. Employers and employees each contribute 6.2 percent of wages up to that salary threshold, which is adjusted every year based on average wage growth.Because wages are rising, the amount of earnings subject to the tax is rising as well.Ms. MacGuineas estimated that the Social Security Trust Fund could have been depleted as much as two years earlier without the offsetting effect of the higher tax threshold.Kathleen Romig, director of Social Security and disability policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said the depletion date could be accelerated by as much as two years. But she added that a couple of years of high inflation probably would not fundamentally change Social Security’s long-term financing outlook.“It’s normal for Social Security’s trustees to update the expected reserve depletion date as circumstances change,” Ms. Romig said.Ms. Romig noted that more than 65 million retirees count on Social Security for most of their income and that the cost-of-living increase would ensure that older Americans did not fall into poverty as they aged.The June projections actually showed the depletion date of the fund being delayed by a year, from an earlier projection of 2033, the result of a stronger-than-expected economic recovery in 2021.Anqi Chen, assistant director of savings research at the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, said the impact of the cost-of-living adjustment on the Social Security Trust Fund would depend on a combination of wage growth and labor force participation in the U.S. economy.“Higher wage growth would mean higher revenue for Social Security and a higher labor force participation would mean more workers contributing to the program, which also means higher revenue,” said Ms. Chen, who is also a senior research economist at the center.The future of Social Security has emerged as a major issue in the midterm elections this year. Republicans have argued that their proposals are intended to protect the long-term viability of Social Security, but Democrats and President Biden have warned that if Republicans take control of Congress they will scale back the program and curb benefits for retirees.“MAGA Republicans in Congress continue to threaten Social Security and Medicare — proposing to put them on the chopping block every five years, threatening benefits, and to change eligibility,” Karine Jean-Pierre, White House press secretary, said in a statement on Wednesday. “If Republicans in Congress have their way, seniors will pay more for prescription drugs and their Social Security benefits will never be secure.” More

  • 138 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Job Growth Eases, but Is Too Strong to Suit Investors

    by

    The gain of 263,000 was shy of recent monthly totals but still robust. Stocks fell on fears of a harder, longer Fed campaign to fight inflation.Job growth eased slightly in September but remained robust, indicating that the economy was maintaining momentum despite higher interest rates. But the strong showing left many investors unhappy because they saw signs that the fight against inflation may become tougher and more prolonged.Employers added 263,000 jobs on a seasonally adjusted basis, the Labor Department said Friday, a decline from 315,000 in August. The number was the lowest since April 2021 but still solid by prepandemic standards. The unemployment rate fell to 3.5 percent, equaling a five-decade low.“If I had just woken up from a really long nap and seen these numbers, I would conclude that we still have one of the strongest job markets that we’ve ever enjoyed,” said Carl Tannenbaum, chief economist at Northern Trust.Officials at the Federal Reserve have been keeping a close eye on hiring and wages as they proceed with a series of rate increases meant to combat inflation. The job data indicates that, for now, they are doing so without tipping the economy into a recession that would throw millions out of work.But it also increases the prospect that the effort to subdue price increases will be more extended. For investors, that came as bad news, since higher interest rates raise costs for companies and weigh on stock prices.The S&P 500 recorded its worst one-day performance since mid-September, falling 2.8 percent and eroding gains from earlier in the week.Fed officials have signaled in speeches this week that they remain resolute in trying to wrestle inflation lower, and that they are waiting for clear evidence that the economy is headed back toward price stability before they pull back.Wage growth has subsided somewhat, at least compared with the trend a year ago. Average hourly earnings climbed 5 percent from a year earlier, roughly matching economists’ expectations but slowing down slightly from the prior annual reading.Wages are still growing, but less rapidly in some sectorsPercent change in earnings for nonmanagers since January 2019 by sector More

  • 125 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Biden Administration Clamps Down on China’s Access to Chip Technology

    by

    The White House issued sweeping restrictions on selling semiconductors and chip-making equipment to China, an attempt to curb the country’s access to critical technologies.WASHINGTON — The Biden administration on Friday announced sweeping new limits on the sale of semiconductor technology to China, a step aimed at crippling Beijing’s access to critical technologies that are needed for everything from supercomputing to guiding weapons.The moves are the clearest sign yet that a dangerous standoff between the world’s two major superpowers is increasingly playing out in the technological sphere, with the United States trying to establish a stranglehold on advanced computing and semiconductor technology that is essential to China’s military and economic ambitions.The package of restrictions, which was released by the Commerce Department, is designed in large part to slow the progress of Chinese military programs, which use supercomputing to model nuclear blasts, guide hypersonic weapons and establish advanced networks for surveilling dissidents and minorities, among other activities.Alan Estevez, the under secretary of commerce for industry and security, said his bureau was working to prevent China’s military, intelligence and security services from acquiring sensitive technologies with military applications.“The threat environment is always changing, and we are updating our policies today to make sure we’re addressing the challenges posed by the P.R.C. while we continue our outreach and coordination with allies and partners,” he said, referring to the People’s Republic of China.Technology experts said the rules appeared to impose the broadest export controls issued in a decade. While similar to the Trump administration’s crackdown on the telecom giant Huawei, the new rules are far wider in scope, affecting dozens of Chinese firms. And unlike the Trump administration’s approach — which was viewed as aggressive but scattershot — the rules appear to establish a more comprehensive policy that will stop cutting-edge exports to a range of Chinese technology companies and cut off China’s nascent ability to produce advanced chips itself.“It is an aggressive approach by the U.S. government to start to really impair the capability of China to indigenously develop certain of these critical technologies,” said Emily Kilcrease, a senior fellow at Center for a New American Security, a think tank.Companies will no longer be allowed to supply advanced computing chips, chip-making equipment and other products to China unless they receive a special license. Most of those licenses will be denied, though certain shipments to facilities operated by U.S. companies or allied countries will be evaluated case by case, a senior administration official said in a briefing Thursday.It remains to be seen whether the Chinese government will take action in response. Samm Sacks, a senior fellow at Yale Law School who studies technology policy in China, said the new rules could push Beijing to impose restrictions on American companies or firms from other countries that comply with U.S. rules but still want to maintain operations in China.“The question is: Would this new package cross a red line to trigger a response that we haven’t seen before?” she said. “A lot of people are anticipating it will. I think we’ll have to wait and see.”More on the Relations Between Asia and the U.S.Taiwan: American officials are intensifying efforts to build a giant stockpile of weapons in Taiwan in case China blockades the island as a prelude to an attempted invasion, according to current and former officials.North Korea: Pyongyang fired an intermediate range ballistic missile over Japan for the first time since 2017, when Kim Jong-un seemed intent on escalating conflict with Washington. But the international landscape has changed considerably since then.A Broad Partnership: The United States and 14 Pacific Island nations signed an agreement at a summit in Washington, putting climate change, economic growth and stronger security ties at the center of an American push to counter Chinese influence.South Korea: President Yoon Suk Yeol has aligned his country more closely with the United States, but there are limits to how far he can go without angering China or provoking North Korea.The measures come at a particularly sensitive moment for Beijing. Chinese leaders will hold a major political meeting beginning Oct. 16, where leader Xi Jinping is expected to secure a third leadership term, becoming the country’s longest-ruling leader since Mao Zedong.Liu Pengyu, a spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, said the United States was trying “to use its technological prowess as an advantage to hobble and suppress the development of emerging markets and developing countries.”“The U.S. probably hopes that China and the rest of the developing world will forever stay at the lower end of the industrial chain,” he added.The Chinese government has invested heavily in building up its semiconductor industry, but it still lags behind the United States, Taiwan and South Korea in its ability to produce the most advanced chips. In other fields, like artificial intelligence, China is no longer significantly behind the United States, but those technologies mostly rely on advanced chips that are designed or fabricated by non-Chinese firms.Jack Dongarra, a computer scientist at the University of Tennessee, said some of China’s most advanced supercomputers depended on chips made by California-based Intel or Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, which uses U.S. technology in its production process and so would be subject to the new rules.The restrictions limit U.S. exports of high-tech chips called graphic processing units, which are used to power artificial intelligence applications, and place broad limits on chips destined for supercomputers in China. The rules also bar U.S.-based companies that make the equipment used to manufacture advanced logic and memory chips from selling that machinery to China without a license.Perhaps most significant, the Biden administration also imposed broad international restrictions that will prohibit companies anywhere in the world from selling chips used in artificial intelligence and supercomputing in China if they are made with U.S. technology, software or machinery. The restrictions used what is known as the foreign direct product rule, which was last deployed by former President Donald J. Trump to cripple Huawei.Another foreign direct product rule bans a broader range of products made outside the United States with American technology from being sent to 28 Chinese companies that have been placed on an “entity list” over national security concerns.Those companies include Beijing Sensetime Technology Development, a unit of a major Chinese artificial intelligence company, SenseTime. Also included are Dahua Technology, Higon, iFLYTEK, Megvii Technology, Sugon, Tianjian Phytium Information Technology, Sunway Microelectronics and Yitu Technologies, as well as a variety of labs and research institutions linked to universities and the Chinese government.In a briefing with reporters, senior administration officials said the measures would be limited to the most advanced chips and not have a broad commercial impact on private Chinese businesses. But they conceded that the limits could become more restrictive over time, given that technology will begin to outpace the advanced technological standards spelled out in the rules.Industry executives say many Chinese industries that rely on artificial intelligence and advanced algorithms power those abilities with American graphic processing units, which will now be restricted. Those include companies working with technologies like autonomous driving and gene sequencing, as well as the artificial intelligence company SenseTime and ByteDance, the Chinese internet company that owns TikTok.New limits on sales of chip-making equipment are also expected to clamp down on the operations of China’s homegrown chip makers, including Semiconductor Manufacturing International, Yangtze Memory Technologies and ChangXin Memory Technologies.The actual impact of the restrictions will hinge on how the policy is carried out. For most of the measures, the Commerce Department has the discretion to grant companies special licenses to continue selling the restricted products to China, though it said most would be denied.Some Republican lawmakers and China hawks have criticized the department for being too willing to issue such licenses, allowing U.S. companies to continue selling sensitive technology to China even when national security may be at stake.“If you want to stop it, you can just stop it,” said Derek Scissors, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. “When you create a licensing requirement, you are announcing to the world: We don’t want to stop it. We are just pretending.”With its vast ecosystem of factories, China continues to be a huge and lucrative market for U.S. chip exports. The tiny technologies are crucial to the smartphones, laptops, coffee makers, cars and other goods that Chinese factories pump out for domestic consumption and export to the world.Many American companies have long argued that their sales to China are an important source of revenue that allows them to reinvest in research and development and retain a competitive edge.But doing business with China has become much more fraught in the last few years, as the tensions between the United States and China have morphed into a cold war competition. The Chinese government has sought to blur the line between its defense sector and private industry, drawing on Chinese firms that specialize in fields including artificial intelligence, big data, aerospace technologies and quantum computing to fuel the country’s military modernization.Chinese military drills aimed at intimidating Taiwan, and China’s alignment with Moscow after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, have strengthened the case for technology regulation.Still, industry executives and some analysts argue that cutting China off from foreign chips will accelerate Beijing’s push to develop them itself and cause U.S. companies to lose out to foreign competitors, unless other countries also impose similar restrictions.The Semiconductor Industry Association said Friday that it was assessing the impact of the export controls on the industry and working with companies to ensure compliance.“We understand the goal of ensuring national security and urge the U.S. government to implement the rules in a targeted way — and in collaboration with international partners — to help level the playing field and mitigate unintended harm to U.S. innovation,” it said in a statement.In remarks last month, the Biden administration signaled that it would get tougher on technology regulation. Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, said the U.S. government’s previous approach, of trying to stay a few generations ahead of competitors, was no longer sufficient.“Given the foundational nature of certain technologies, such as advanced logic and memory chips, we must maintain as large of a lead as possible,” he said.Kevin Wolf, a partner at Akin Gump who led export control efforts during the Obama administration, said the move was “a fundamental shift in the use of export controls” to address broader national security objectives. Since the Cold War, most countries had used export controls more narrowly, focusing on regulating specific items that were necessary to produce or deploy weapons.Mr. Wolf said the new measures were likely to be highly effective in the short and medium term. “How effective they will be over the long term will be a function of whether allies ultimately agree to impose similar controls,” he added.Edward Wong More