A recent study, "Wage Woes" by Russ
Koesterich at BlackRock examines what is missing in the post-Great Recession
recovery and how this missing factor is going to impact growth rates in the
economy.
Let's open with a look at two key
aspects of the economy; real disposable personal income and real personal consumption
expenditures. Here is a graph showing how real (after
inflation) per capita disposable personal income has changed since the Great
Depression:
Notice how the curve flattens after
2007 - 2008? Let's look at that in a bit more detail.
Here is a graph showing the
year-over-year annual percentage change in real per capita disposable personal
income:
Over the 85 year period, real
personal disposable income grew at an average annual rate of 2.06 percent even
when all recessions are included. This growth rate dropped substantially
after 1998 as shown by the red arrow; between 2008 and 2013, growth dropped to an average of 0.4 percent per
year over the six year period, hitting a peak of 1.6 percent in 2011 and a low
of -1.3 percent in 2008. Even in 2013, four years after the
"recovery", real per capita disposable personal income did not grow
at all.
Here is a graph showing real personal
consumption expenditures:
After a spending slowdown during the
Great Recession, America's consumers are now spending with total real personal
consumption expenditures of $10.831 trillion in the fourth quarter of 2013.
Here is a graph showing the
year-over-year growth rate of real personal consumption expenditures:
Note how the red arrow on this graph tracks the red arrow on the second graph? The Great Recession saw the greatest
contraction in personal consumption expenditures all the way back to the 1940s
and since the end of the recession in mid-2009, annual growth in personal
expenditures has risen at an average of 2.2 percent compared to the annual
average of 3.3 percent back to the late 1940s when all recessions are included.
The graph also shows us that the latest "recovery" has been the
most modest when comparing the growth rate of real consumer spending between
recessions back to 1948.
Now, let's go to the study. The
author notes that real median family incomes have been on the decline since
long-before the Great Recession; in fact, the vast majority of American
households have had stagnant real incomes since around the year 1998 as shown
on this graph:
Obviously, when real household income drops, real disposable income drops. Between 1973 and 2011, a median male
working full-time experienced a 5 percent contraction in inflation-corrected
income, dropping from $50,000 to $48,200. This means that after adjusting
for inflation, an average American male worker has not had a raise in the past
4 decades.
What will change this situation?
The author notes that the number of jobless claims is directly related to
growth in real income. Historically, when initial jobless claims around
around 320,000, real income growth of between 3 percent and 3.5 percent is
likely. However, even though the economy is in that level now, there are
other factors at play. One key factor, thanks to Washington, is the
continuing high level of political and policy uncertainty as measured by the
Economic Policy Uncertainty Index (EPUI) as shown on this graph:
Higher levels of political and policy uncertainty leads
to lower consumer and business confidence which leads to lower capital spending
and lower levels of hiring. The lack of hiring results in much lower
upward pressure on wages. The author estimates that the current high level of political and policy uncertainty alone has subtracted half a percent from annual real wage growth. Thanks for
nothing Washington!
In closing, here is a graph that
shows how much of an impact consumer uncertainty has had on the percentage of
consumer spending in GDP:
Between 1970 and 2010, the personal
consumption component of GDP grew from 60 percent to 68 percent. Since
2010, there has basically been no change; the very modest growth level in
consumer spending simply is not contributing more to GDP which results in lower
GDP growth which leads to more uncertainty which leads to less capital spending
by businesses which leads to less hiring etcetera ad infinitum.
America's economy is caught in a
loop from which there appears to be no easy means of extrication. The Fed's
pumping and dumping has done relatively little to prod either consumers or
businesses to spend, invest and hire, resulting in a situation where there is absolutely no
motive for businesses to speed up the pace of wage growth. Without real wage growth, consumers will not spend, businesses will not invest and the economy will not grow. It's as simple as that.
You have a strong analysis here. I do not find it terribly surprising that wage growth has been flat over the time period you cite. Classical economic growth theory posits human/physical capital, and technology as primarily contributing to GDP growth (and subsequent wage growth as a result); however, economic literature also maintains that capital will inevitably flow to areas with lower input costs. Interestingly, looking at the wage growth/GDP data of emerging markets over the same time period indicates the notion of reallocation of capital and resources to further exploit market efficiencies. Let us not forget the primary objective of a corporation is in profit maximization. Therefore, the high regulatory standards in the west, coupled with significantly higher wage floor, incentivised companies to seek other foreign options. One cannot argue that the standard of living within many emerging markets have not increased over the past 40 years as a result of capital inflows from the west. America will need to find other avenues in which to compete globally as India and China are gaining the competitive advantage in all areas of R/D to market infrastructure. Furthermore, intellectual property and "idea generation" has been Americas forte and primary advantage over the world. However, the east is gaining in this regard. If this trend continues, one can expect further pressure on American wage's.
ReplyDeleteI contend that demand drives investment, it is not about confidence, it is about lack of demand. Call it want you want, CEOs are unenthusiastic and banks have little incentive to loan money on half backed ideas for which their is little demand. It is becoming apparent to many that the financial system has become totally dysfunctional. People are loaning money to governments and banks for five years with negative interest. This is at a time that there is little demand for loans even at zero interest rates. More on this in the article below.
ReplyDeletehttp://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2012/09/demand-drives-investment.html
Thanks for your great sharing,,
ReplyDeleteCrescita Personale