Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage

    Two FIRE economy economists duke it out.


    2 Top Economists Differ Sharply on Risk of Deflation

    Michael Falco for The New York Times
    Left, Jan Hatzius of Goldman Sachs; right, Richard Berner of Morgan Stanley.

    By NELSON D. SCHWARTZ

    Published: August 5, 2010

    When the latest unemployment figures are announced on Friday, all of Wall Street will be watching. But for Richard Berner of Morgan Stanley and Jan Hatzius of Goldman Sachs, the results will be more than just another marker in an avalanche of data.





    Contrasting Forecasts

    Instead, the numbers will be a clue as to which of the two economists is right about where the American economy is headed. Their sharp disagreement over that question adds yet another twist to the fierce rivalry between the two firms, Wall Street’s version of the New York Yankees and the Boston Red Sox.

    Mr. Hatzius is arguably Wall Street’s most prominent pessimist. He warns that the American economy is poised for a sharp slowdown in the second half of the year. That would send unemployment higher again and raise the risk of deflation. A rare occurrence, deflation can have a devastating effect on a struggling economy as prices and wages fall. He says he may be compelled to downgrade his already anemic growth predictions for the economy.

    For months, Mr. Berner has been sticking to a more optimistic forecast, despite growing evidence in favor of Mr. Hatzius’s view. Last week, Mr. Berner was caught by surprise when the federal government reported that the economy grew at a 2.4 percent pace in the second quarter, well below the 3.8 percent he had forecast a month before. Mr. Hatzius came closer to hitting the mark, having projected a 2 percent growth rate.
    Mr. Berner and his deputy, David Greenlaw, still expect a pickup in the second half of the year, which would help gradually bring down unemployment. They play down the danger posed by deflation, the malady of falling prices and wages that deepened the Great Depression and contributed to Japan’s lost decade of the 1990s.

    “I’d say at this point the data and the sentiment in the marketplace have certainly gone more Jan’s way than mine,” Mr. Berner said. Some people, he added, “think I’m out of my mind. But I have a conviction in my beliefs that’s based on my analysis.”

    Mr. Hatzius, a 41-year-old native of Germany who was 3 when Mr. Berner started out as an economist, is more restrained. He can afford to be, having snagged the top spot in a recent ranking of Wall Street economists as well as an award from Arizona State University honoring his “uncanny economic forecasting that anticipated the global financial crisis.”

    On Wall Street, both men were among a very small group that accurately predicted the recent recession. Mr. Berner’s long résumé includes stints at the Federal Reserve in Washington and Mellon Bank in Pittsburgh. “I’ve seen plenty of ups and downs,” said Mr. Berner, 64, sitting in a corner office overlooking the Manhattan skyline at Morgan Stanley’s Midtown headquarters.

    Showing not even a hint of doubt, Mr. Hatzius said, “The prospect of substantial inflation seems very remote, but the prospect for deflation is far from remote. A double dip is certainly possible but not likely.”

    Mr. Berner does not expect substantial inflation, but he is predicting inflation will run 1 to 2 percent annually rather than the near-zero level Mr. Hatzius sees by the end of next year.

    “There is still a one in 10 chance of deflation,” Mr. Berner calculates. “But we already have been much more aggressive and proactive in dealing with the problem than Japan was,” he said, referring to the Federal Reserve’s decision to quickly cut rates and aggressively buy government securities.

    The split between the two chief economists, whose work helps inform trading strategies recommended to investors by their firms, echoes a broader and sometimes fiercer debate among academic economists and commentators about the threat posed by deflation and what the government’s response should be.

    According to the deflationistas, as they are nicknamed, a new round of stimulus spending by Washington is urgently required to stave off a Depression-like cycle of falling prices and wages that is difficult to reverse once it is set in motion.

    Inflationistas, by contrast, worry more about the effect that additional government borrowing could have on the recovery. With the budget deficit expected to hover around $1 trillion a year for the next decade, they say, interest rates could eventually surge, making borrowing — and goods — more expensive. A double dip, they say, is highly unlikely.

    Mr. Hatzius’s gloomy outlook is owed centrally to Americans’ slowdown in spending. Recent data suggests that consumers are using any extra cash they have to pay down debt or put into savings. That places a strain on an American economy that has become hugely dependent on consumer spending.

    On Tuesday, the Commerce Department reported that Americans saved 6.4 percent of their after-tax income in June, in contrast to the years before the recession, when savings rates stood at 1 to 2 percent.

    Last month, the Federal Reserve reported that consumer debt dropped by 4.5 percent in May, a $9 billion decline. It was the 20th consecutive month that figure has dropped. In 2007, consumer debt jumped by 5.7 percent or nearly $40 billion.

    “We had a housing and credit boom that was unsustainable, and now this boom has turned into a bust,” Mr. Hatzius said. “There was too much debt, and the deleveraging process has still got a ways to go. It’s going to keep private demand weak.”

    Another big factor is the amount of slack in the economy. According to a recent report by Nomura, “The U.S. economy continues to operate with a staggering amount of spare capacity — unemployed workers, idle trucks and factories, etc.”

    Mr. Hatzius agrees, adding that all this extra capacity will restrict the ability of companies to raise prices, thus raising the risk of deflation. “It’s plain to see there’s a ton of slack in the economy,” he said. “We’re not managing to generate enough demand to absorb all these productive resources in the economy.”

    Mr. Berner is also studying the role that slack and deleveraging are playing, but he draws very different conclusions from Mr. Hatzius. Excess capacity is being reduced more quickly than Mr. Hatzius believes, Mr. Berner said. That will help businesses raise prices and improve profits, thus heading off the threat of deflation.

    What is more, Mr. Berner argues that the deleveraging process is much further along than Mr. Hatzius believes, which will encourage consumers to start spending again. He expects economic growth in the second half of 2010 to run at more than 3 percent, roughly twice the 1.5 percent rate Mr. Hatzius projects.

    If Mr. Hatzius is right, unemployment will still stand at 9.7 percent at the end of next year, slightly higher than it is now. Mr. Berner says he believes unemployment should sink to 8.7 percent by then. As for Friday’s numbers, Mr. Berner is calling for a private sector gain of 145,000 jobs versus Mr. Hatzius’s prediction of 75,000 new jobs.

    Either way, both believe unemployment will remain at uncomfortably high levels for several years.

    One answer, Mr. Hatzius says, is another round of stimulus spending by Washington to fend off the deflation risk he worries about.

    Mr. Berner was skeptical of the stimulus bill passed in 2009, and he still “doubts that traditional fiscal stimulus is the right tool for the job.” Instead, he and his colleague Mr. Greenlaw argue for new mortgage rules that would reduce foreclosures and steady the housing market, payroll tax credits to encourage hiring and a new job training corps for unemployed workers.

    “Friday’s number is just one tile in a mosaic,” Mr. Berner said. “From time to time, it’ll be like I’m winning, from time to time Jan will be winning.”
    “The truth is that it’s just a crummy moderate recovery,” Mr. Berner added, hedging his bets. “We’ll both testify to that.”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/06/bu...lation.html?hp

  • #2
    Re: Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...cks/index.html

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage

      Originally posted by Chomsky View Post
      Two FIRE economy economists duke it out.


      Mr. Berner was skeptical of the stimulus bill passed in 2009, and he still “doubts that traditional fiscal stimulus is the right tool for the job.” Instead, he and his colleague Mr. Greenlaw argue for new mortgage rules that would reduce foreclosures and steady the housing market, payroll tax credits to encourage hiring and a new job training corps for unemployed workers.
      http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/06/bu...lation.html?hp
      Well, well! Now what do we have here. Is it at all possible that what he means is they change the rules to those for a true free market along the lines that I have been advocating for some years now. By that I mean fixed term mortgages with no changes of interest rate beyond the point of sale, or signing of the legal paperwork.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage

        “There is still a one in 10 chance of deflation,” Mr. Berner calculates.
        NYT style guide is indeed liberal with its verbs. This sentence should make de- and inflationistas chuckle together.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage

          Only 1 day later and already Hatzius has capitulated. More people will have read the NYT article already though and believe 'Goldman sees deflation and no double dip so it must be true'.

          Will NYT post a follow up article? I don't see one yet.

          http://www.zerohedge.com/article/gol...minent-qe-lite

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage

            Nice find!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage

              Inflation, unemployment, under-employment, economic stagnation, recession, double-dip recovery, starvation, bankruptcy, bail-outs, stimulus, deficits, joke-retirement programmes, zero interest rates, competitive de-valuations, corruption, gangs, bloated government, fuzzy-thinking, solar energy, windmills that don't turn, bubbles, babble, and Greenspanese---- all are part of the Great Recession. Each mality is the result of the others. They all work together; they are all cooked into the same soup.... This is why Bernanke should resign and the incumbents in the U.S. should be voted-out.... A stinking failure is a failure.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage

                Don't know the best deflation thread to post this on, but since this one came up, it will do.

                Here is a comment I recently crossed: http://www.creditbubblestocks.com/20...-is-right.html

                Friday, August 6, 2010

                Deflation Watch: Deflation is Right

                Good big-picture perspective from Sovereign Speculator:
                Also remember that the public sector has gotten itself into huge trouble, which is just starting to take effect with austerity measures in Europe and pending bankruptcies in US municipalities. US states are also broke and will have to finally deal with their union problems. Shrinking government worker salaries, if not payrolls, will put further pressure on demand for goods and leave banks with more bad loans. None of this is inflationary. Remember, in the ’70s private debt was low and growing, and companies were increasing their revenues and profits so that by ‘82 Dow 1000 was a bargain. Now we’re in a generational de-leveraging, frugality-restoring mode, Kondratieff winter for lack of a better term.

                The last couple of years should give deflationists confidence that we’re able to correctly assess the situation. Where is that dollar crash? What about $200 oil? What, in 2010 China still owns trillions in treasuries? Bernanke has tripled the US base money supply but a dozen eggs is still $1.50 and the long bond yields 4%? Obama spent how much, and unemployment is 17% ?
                One of the biggest stories of the year is deflationists and Treasury bulls being proven right.
                Now to that comment above, some everyday ole commenter like most of us here at itulip responded below: bold emphasis JN

                Leonard said...
                It be a bit early for you deflationistas to be declaring victory; you may well be correct in the short term, but perhaps not in the long term, it remains to be seen. Here's something to consider that seems to be surprisingly absent from almost all commentary on the subject: In deflation, as prices decline due to the deflation, wages necessarily fall (to zero for those workers unwilling to face reality), government revenues fall as well, yet the nominal denominations of the government debt remains the same, even as the value of each currency unit increases, making already mathematically unsupportable debt levels absolutely unpayable and the subject government goes poof! So, do you really think Chopper Ben will let the US government go under due collapse by debt, or would he rather dump unlimited money into the economy even though that will destroy the citizens wealth a la Weimar? I think I know where his priorities lie and I'll keep my inflation hedges, thank you.
                Then consider the above comment by Leonard to the idea of deflation being good at least temporarily as described in the post below: http://www.creditbubblestocks.com/20...rediction.html

                Tuesday, July 20, 2010 Amusing Prediction

                Right now, everyone thinks that Ben Bernanke is trying his damnedest to create inflation, and is failing.

                (In reality, a
                deflationary crash will be a great opportunity for the Treasury to sell longer maturity debt at attractive rates.)

                Once the Treasury has refinanced its $1.8 trillion in outstanding bills with 10 year Notes at, say, 1% yields, it will make sense to start "inflating it away."


                It occurs to me that, by that point, the current crop of Treasury bears will despair of the prospect that Bernanke will ever fire up the money helicopters and start inflating.

                Perhaps they will give up and buy Treasuries, creating one final surge in price. That's when I'll want to be short.

                Posted by CP at 6:12 PM
                I am not nearly wise or smart enough to know if what is suggested above would provide some sort of answer to the US's governmental debt problems, but regardless of whatever factors are responsible for driving down interest rates, then at some point low interest rates are a boon to those parties who need to borrow.

                IBM borrowed $1.5B this week with an interest rate of 1% http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/...ney-isnt-free/
                Jim 69 y/o

                "...Texans...the lowest form of white man there is." Robert Duvall, as Al Sieber, in "Geronimo." (see "Location" for examples.)

                Dedicated to the idea that all people deserve a chance for a healthy productive life. B&M Gates Fdn.

                Good judgement comes from experience; experience comes from bad judgement. Unknown.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage

                  Deleted double post.
                  Jim 69 y/o

                  "...Texans...the lowest form of white man there is." Robert Duvall, as Al Sieber, in "Geronimo." (see "Location" for examples.)

                  Dedicated to the idea that all people deserve a chance for a healthy productive life. B&M Gates Fdn.

                  Good judgement comes from experience; experience comes from bad judgement. Unknown.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage

                    do you think that in the 1930's people debated whether they were experiencing deflation?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage

                      Originally posted by jk View Post
                      do you think that in the 1930's people debated whether they were experiencing deflation?
                      When I look at articles relating to deflation in the Great Depression, I do not find that there was a general decline in prices. For example if I look at the Wiki - Causes of the Great Depression, this is what it says

                      The specific economic events that took place during the Great Depression have been studied thoroughly: a deflation in asset and commodity prices, dramatic drops in demand and credit, and disruption of trade, ultimately resulting in widespread unemployment and hence poverty.
                      I would argue, that the deflation in commodity prices took place primarily because of distress sales of inventory, as farmers looked to stave off foreclosure and bankruptcy. If my hypothesis is correct, this would have been a temporary fall, followed by a snap back as production declined, and then a stabilzation of the prices as farms consolidated, and became bigger and more corporate, and production came back up, but at a much higher price. Is that what actually happened?

                      From - Commodity Futures

                      In the case of inflation, it is easier to understand; however in the case of deflation, it may appear to not make sense. But in the Great Depression, commodity prices doubled from a low in 1932 to a high in 1934.
                      Given that the main assets being held by indviduals and families today is not farm land, but rather homes, that is where the major asset deflation lies.

                      Commodity prices are not going to fall unless there are major ag business bankruptcies. That is unlikely to happen unless unemployment leads to mass starvation -- an extremely unlikely situation in the US.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage

                        Originally posted by Rajiv View Post
                        When I look at articles relating to deflation in the Great Depression, I do not find that there was a general decline in prices.
                        But there was, if I understand correctly, a general and substantial decline in the supply and velocity of money, up until FDR devalued the Dollar against gold in 1933 (this being perhaps causing the rising commodity prices you evidence.)

                        So ... jk ... by "deflation" did you mean a decline in (1) commodity prices, (2) asset prices, (3) both of these, or (4) money supply/velocity?
                        Most folks are good; a few aren't.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage
                          Buffett Shortens Bond-Holding Duration After Inflation Warning

                          Aug 9, 2010 10:01 PM MT

                          Warren Buffett shortened the duration of bonds held by his Berkshire Hathaway Inc. after warning that deficit spending could force inflation higher.

                          Twenty-one percent of holdings including Treasuries, municipal debt, foreign-government securities and corporate bonds were due in one year or less as of June 30, Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire said in a filing Aug. 6. That compares with 18 percent on March 31, and 16 percent at the end of last year’s second quarter...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage

                            Originally posted by Rajiv View Post
                            I would argue, that the deflation in commodity prices took place primarily because of distress sales of inventory, as farmers looked to stave off foreclosure and bankruptcy..
                            I would add that the US was also producing goods for the world at that time. When world demand decreased, there were few markets for those goods. As a result, supply outstripped demand. Today we are a service economy. When demand decreases, there is no inventory build in services. Supply and demand fall together.

                            For instance, if I were to stop cutting my hair to save money, those haircuts that I didn't consume are not sitting in inventory. There is no pent-up demand that will resurface in the future. If I do start cutting my hair again, I will only need one haircut to get back to where I started. If I stopped washing my car for a year, how many car washes will be sitting in inventory? How many car washes will I need in the future? Even if I reestablished my old habits of washing my car once a week, I would only need one car wash to get back to normal. Meanwhile, there was lost productivity of 52 car-washes.

                            None of this will put pressure on prices, because there is no inventory. The market will not be forced to dump large quantities of services (i.e., haircuts and car-washes); they don't exist . Prices for services will not be forced down by excess inventory.
                            Last edited by dummass; August 10, 2010, 07:24 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Deflation v. Inflation argument makes NYTimes.com homepage

                              Originally posted by pythoniccow
                              So ... jk ... by "deflation" did you mean a decline in (1) commodity prices, (2) asset prices, (3) both of these, or (4) money supply/velocity?
                              yes
                              Originally posted by dummass
                              Prices for services will not be forced down by excess inventory.
                              tell that to the laid-off teachers whom i see as patients, and who are willing to take jobs paying much less than the prior one they lost.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X