Janet Yellen's recent admission at a
meeting of the National Association for Business Economics is a bit of an
eye-opener for a central banker. Rarely do central bankers admit that
they are wrong on anything, particularly one of the two aspects of the economy
that they are responsible. Here's what she had to say:
"Today I will discuss uncertainty
and monetary policy, particularly as it relates to recent inflation developments.
Because changes in interest rates influence economic activity and inflation
with a substantial lag, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) sets monetary
policy with an eye to its effects on the outlook for the economy. But the
outlook is subject to considerable uncertainty from multiple sources, and
dealing with these uncertainties is an important feature of policymaking. Key
among current uncertainties are the forces driving inflation, which has
remained low in recent years despite substantial improvement in labor market
conditions. As I will discuss, this low inflation likely reflects factors whose
influence should fade over time. But as I will also discuss, many uncertainties
attend this assessment, and downward pressures on inflation could prove to be
unexpectedly persistent. My colleagues and I may have misjudged the
strength of the labor market, the degree to which longer-run inflation
expectations are consistent with our inflation objective, or even the
fundamental forces driving inflation. In interpreting incoming data, we
will need to stay alert to these possibilities and, in light of incoming
information, adjust our views about inflation, the overall economy, and the
stance of monetary policy best suited to promoting maximum employment and price
stability." (my bold)
From her presentation, here is a
graphic showing how both core inflation (inflation which strips out volatile
food and energy prices) and inflation as measured using the personal
consumption expenditures (PCE) are falling well below the Fed's rather randomly
selected 2 percent level:
Here is a graphic showing which
components of PCE inflation have been running lower than the 2 percent level:
As I have posted previously, central
bankers hate low inflation and particularly deflation as much as they hate
unemployment. As we all know, the Bank of Japan has had a decades-long
economic nightmare largely because of deflation as shown here:
While the Federal Reserve is not
meeting its inflation target according to the definition used by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics, the keeper of American price data, a
measure of inflation used by the New York Federal Reserve Bank may actually be
showing a building up of inflationary pressures.
Let's start by looking at how the BLS
calculates the Consumer Price Index, the headline inflation rate that is
reported by the mainstream media. Here is how the CPI is calculated:
"The CPI market basket is
developed from detailed expenditure information provided by families and
individuals on what they actually bought. For the current CPI, this information
was collected from the Consumer Expenditure Surveys for 2013 and 2014. In each
of those years, about 7,000 families from around the country provided
information each quarter on their spending habits in the interview survey. To
collect information on frequently purchased items, such as food and personal
care products, another 7,000 families in each of these years kept diaries
listing everything they bought during a 2-week period.
Over the 2 year period, then,
expenditure information came from approximately 28,000 weekly diaries and
60,000 quarterly interviews used to determine the importance, or weight, of the
more than 200 item categories in the CPI index structure.
The CPI represents all goods and
services purchased for consumption by the reference population (U or W) BLS has
classified all expenditure items into more than 200 categories, arranged into
eight major groups. Major groups and examples of categories in each are as
follows:
FOOD AND BEVERAGES (breakfast cereal,
milk, coffee, chicken, wine, full service meals, snacks)
HOUSING (rent of primary residence,
owners' equivalent rent, fuel oil, bedroom furniture)
APPAREL (men's shirts and sweaters,
women's dresses, jewelry)
TRANSPORTATION (new vehicles, airline
fares, gasoline, motor vehicle insurance)
MEDICAL CARE (prescription drugs and
medical supplies, physicians' services, eyeglasses and eye care, hospital
services)
RECREATION (televisions, toys, pets and
pet products, sports equipment, admissions);
EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION (college
tuition, postage, telephone services, computer software and accessories);
OTHER GOODS AND SERVICES (tobacco and
smoking products, haircuts and other personal services, funeral expenses).
Also included within these major groups
are various government-charged user fees, such as water and sewerage charges,
auto registration fees, and vehicle tolls. In addition, the CPI includes taxes
(such as sales and excise taxes) that are directly associated with the prices
of specific goods and services. However, the CPI excludes taxes (such as income
and Social Security taxes) not directly associated with the purchase of
consumer goods and services.
The CPI does not include investment
items, such as stocks, bonds, real estate, and life insurance. (These items
relate to savings and not to day-to-day consumption expenses.)
For each of the more than 200 item
categories, using scientific statistical procedures, the Bureau has chosen
samples of several hundred specific items within selected business
establishments frequented by consumers to represent the thousands of varieties
available in the marketplace. For example, in a given supermarket, the Bureau
may choose a plastic bag of golden delicious apples, U.S. extra fancy grade,
weighing 4.4 pounds to represent the Apples category."
As you can imagine, with a wide range
of goods in the BLS market basket, some goods are seeing their prices rise
while others are seeing their prices fall. Currently, more than 25
percent of the components that make up the CPI are experiencing deflation as
shown on this graphic:
A graphic like this must give the
braintrust at the Federal Reserve a massive headache!
In contrast to the CPI, the New York
Federal Reserve Bank uses another measure that they call the Underlying Inflation Gauge (UIG).
There are two UIG measures used:
1.) the prices-only measure which is
derived from the large number of disaggregated price series in the Consumer
Price Index
2.) the full data set measure which
uses the above data along with additional macroeconomic and financial
variables" including the Producer Price Index, data from the Institute for
Supply Management, various labour statistics including unemployment, the
employment-to-population ratio and various financial measures as shown on this
list:
Here's what both UIG measures look like
compared to CPI inflation going back to 1995:
As you can see, the full data set UIG
shows significant inflationary pressure, hitting 2.74 percent in August 2017
while the prices-only measure was 2.17 percent. These measures suggest
that trend CPI inflation is in the 2.2 percent to 2.7 percent range, above the
Federal Reserve's 2 percent comfort zone.
While the New York Fed's Underlying
Inflation Gauge may suggest that the economy looks set to reflate, the yield on
10-year inflation-indexed Treasuries would suggest that investors feel that
there is little risk of growing inflation as shown here:
When all things are considered, it is becoming
increasingly apparent that the Federal Reserve has no idea why the economy is
not showing signs of inflationary pressures, particularly given that
unemployment is at or around the levels normally experienced when the economy
is “hot”. From Japan’s experience, we
can see that their deflationary pressures rose thanks to the nation’s aging
demographic. Perhaps the aging
population in the United States is key to the Federal Reserve’s inflation dilemma,
an issue that they can do very little about.
The Fed and other central banks often claim the fear of deflation drives or allows their QE policy to remain and is central to their ability to stimulate. The moment inflation begins to take root or becomes apparent much of their flexibility in policy is lost. The 2% inflation target central banks have deemed optimum is not valid.
ReplyDeleteIn the past, I have put forth the idea that inflation could rule the day even if central banks are unable to keep the wheels on the bus and the economy collapses. This powerful force also known as stagflation can devastate those improperly invested. The article below explores the basis of this theory.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2016/03/inflation-or-deflation-debate-continues.html