|
Jon Stewart is a Genius
Jon Stewart asks Alan Greenspan an excellent question:
Why do we have a Fed? Why do we have someone adjusting the rates if we’re a free-market society? Alan’s answer is not satisfying, but I don’t blame him: The economics profession does not have a good answer. We economists have rigorous and fundamental theory to explain why we have environmental regulation (externalities) and to explain why we have antitrust laws (market power), but there is no consensus about what market failure calls for the existence of a central bank. The answer has something to do with the benefits of a system of fiat money. And it has something to do with the possibility of short-run monetary nonneutrality… |
Nice post from the recent Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to President Bush and current Harvard professor. If I remember right he was in consideration to serve on the Fed. I also don’t think he is questioning the regulatory role of the Fed but the interest rate and monetary policy.
Related: Bernanke Calls for Stronger Regulation of Mortgages – Investor Protection Needed – What is the Fed Funds Rate?
Well the credit crisis triggered by the fallout from lax mortgage lending is really making waves. It seems we are likely to have some real issues to deal with. The reduction of easy money can have serious consequences to an economy especially one so based on spending beyond what it is producing. I’m still not sure what the overall impact will be but the risks certainly seem to be worth watching.
The world savings glut has overwhelmed the excessive borrowing done by the federal government and private sector and kept interest rates lower than seemed reasonable. That may finally change – or may not, isn’t economics great :-/
Economic statistics, like all data, needs to be defined. The way to collect data (economic data or any other type) is to operationally define the terms. Statistics don’t lie. Statistics can be faulty, when those collecting the data fail to use good operational definitions and the data quality is poor (without a definition people make guess…). People can also just make up false number. And people can try to mislead by stating statistics in a way that seem to indicate something that is not the most accurate way to view the whole situation.
The way to cope with such problems is to understand statistics and data. The data can be wrong. So you have to access that possibility. And the data can mean something different than you assume (and often the data is not presented with the operation definitions). When that is the case be careful about your assumptions (with financial and economic data and other data too). But don’t decide to just ignore data because then you condemn yourself to ignorance of the many things which data shed light onto.
In, What ‘Unemployment’ Really Means These Days, the unemployment data is explored. The post does a good job of showing how you can get different measures of the “unemployment rate” depending on how you define what you will measure. I happen to believe the existing measure is best but you need to understand that it doesn’t factor in underemployment and people giving up completely… I believe the best way to deal with those weaknesses is to have supplementary measures that enhance your understanding of the unemployment rate. And too view it as only one measure of economic health. Look also at median wages, health care coverage, hours worked, vacation time…
Read more
re: Myths of Manufacturing Productivity
Output counted should only measure the value added – it should not count the entire value (not the same thing exactly but similar – when a HDTV is sold by the plant to a wholesaler and then the wholesaler sells it to a retailer and then the retailer sells it to a customer the economic data does not add those 3 purchases together to get the total value of HDTV sales). The measures are suppose to be the amount added at the point of measure. So the output of the local plant does not count the total value of say the car but the value added at the plant. Obviously, like with most economic measures, this data has plenty of room for error.
While they intend to measure the added value as far, this is not easy and there can be reasons to distort the data (taxes, bonuses…). The VAT, used in Europe, is helpful illustration (both of the concepts and some of the measurement difficulties).
I keep looking for better data (I am actually surprised how sparse the data is given the importance). I would not want to make economic policy with the very incomplete data I have been able to find. Still, my belief is real global manufacturing output is up. And global manufacturing jobs are down. If those statements are right, productivity increase is the only reason – by definition.
When trying to look at country specific measures it does get more difficult – to find data that is obviously clear. Still, based on the data I have been able to find it seems that the USA continues to increase manufacturing output and decrease jobs. This seems right to me though I do agree the data I have seen still leaves questions. Previous posts I have made on the topic include: Manufacturing Value Added Economic Data – Manufacturing Jobs Data USA, China and globally, even manufacturing jobs data can include data quality issues but it is probably cleaner than most of the rest of this data. The data from this Clemson study shows the USA has lost a lower percentage of jobs than most every other country – Global Manufacturing Data by Country
Global data sources certainly still has data quality issues but you can be reasonably certain huge double counting is not going on. If so you would see the global totals increasing hugely. If a GM car was manufactured with 50% Mexican parts and the GM counted 100% of the value and Mexico counted there value then you would have 150% of the total value counted. Which would then mean the global figures would be counted not just increased output but also going up as the countries “over-counted” their output. And remember, in this example Mexican output could include (40% of their 50%) from Brazil…