.@porszag cites superforecasters who think there is only a 42 percent chance of inflation exceeding 3 percent for the year. The Administration budget projections (perhaps reflecting lags in the process) call for inflation closer to 2 percent this year.
Given that inflation has totaled 2.7 percent in first 5 months of this year I think odds are better than 42 percent of higher 3 percent inflation in first half of the year!
Happy to make a friendly even wager, at any scale Peter wishes, that inflation (CPI or pce) will exceed 3 percent in 2021. @porszag are you prepared to stand by your superforecasters?
The confidence with which inflation serene economists hold to their views, even after being repeatedly surprised, is a mystery to me.
I am far from certain that inflation will, on a calendar year basis, exceed 4 percent this year but I do not see given the first 5 months how anyone could fail to see this as a major risk. CPI inflation above 5 in 2021 is more likely than below 3.
If 6 months from now we have had a yr of 4 plus % inflation, 8% growth rate, record labor shortages, bottlenecks in many supply chains, housing mkt on fire & Fed w/accelerator pushed to floor-all of which are likely-I think inflation expectations are unlikely to remain anchored.
This is especially the case if the Fed continues to reject preempting future inflation or even responding to current inflation in favor of its current "no tightening till we have excess inflation beyond a reasonable doubt"
Reasonable people can disagree on econ outlook & certainly mkts reflect considerably less alarm @ inflation than I feel is warranted. But I do not see how any responsible policy maker can fail to recognize that overheating is now the largest risk in the near term US macro outlook
If overheating takes place in the US and there is an eventual spike in interest rates driven either by the Fed or the markets, there will be enormous risks to an already fragile and over leveraged global economy.
It is not only Americans but people all over the world, especially in poor countries, who have a great stake in the prudence of US policy.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Watch here my @CFR_org talk with @gilliantett yesterday where I talked about inflation, saying:
The @federalreserve has traditionally acted and spoken in ways designed to preempt inflation fears.
Today, the @federalreserve speaks in a way designed to preempt the idea the Fed MIGHT have inflation fears. That’s a very different thing and likely to contribute to development of an inflation psychology.
The famous doctrine of @federalreserve has always been William McChesney Martin’s remark: Fed’s job is to “take away the punch bowl” before the party gets out of hand. What we are now saying is we are not going to do anything until we see a bunch of drunk people staggering around
It represents an overdue recognition that the relative return on public and private investment has changed dramatically over the last generation. That makes borrowing and investing at large scale the right strategy for the Federal government.
I continue to be very worried that the current fiscal - monetary mix will overheat the economy. But these measures will not exacerbate the problem.
.@POTUS Biden's $1.9 trillion covid-19 relief plan, added to the stimulus measure Congress passed in December with the incoming administration’s strong support, would represent the boldest act of macroeconomic stabilization policy in U.S. history.
Its ambition, its rejection of austerity orthodoxy and its commitment to reducing economic inequality are all admirable.
1. New NBER WP out today, “Rethinking How We Score Capital Gains Tax Reform” with @NatashaRSarin, @omzidar, and Eric Zwick.
We point out that there is likely much more revenue potential from raising capital gains rates than official scorekeepers believe. nber.org/papers/w28362?…
2. Elasticity of capital gains tax base to rate changes is assumed to be .7.
This is unchanged since the 80s, and means that raising cap gains rates to ordinary income levels puts you on the wrong side of the Laffer curve.
We believe this conclusion is mistaken.
3. Why? Estimates appear to miss that realizations deferred when rates rise unlikely to be deferred indefinitely
And when they are realized, taxed at new higher rates
Suppose doubling cap gains rates cuts realizations in half, e.g. occur once every 2 years rather than annually
I spoke via Zoom last night at the Beijing Forum 2020: COVID-19 Shock to Global Health and Development.
I retold the story of Reagan and Gorbachev and their private walk around Lake Geneva in 1985. As the story is told, Reagan asks Gorbachev if he would come to the defense of the USA upon the invasion of aliens from outer space and Gorbachev says, “Yes, of course.”
Gorbachev asks the same of Reagan and gets the same response. The two leaders then agree to collaborate in defense of all of humanity.
The big fiscal news is that the nation will not make the colossal error of letting stimulus lapse. That would have been hugely risky and ill advised.
But the set of compromises reached and not reached are-- in important respects--bizarre and unfortunate. This does not bode well
The lack of support for state and local government will mean hundreds of thousands more without work, more crime, more fires, and more kids falling behind. The business liability issue is in comparison a triviality that should have been compromised.
The business meals deduction that has been put back in may be the dumbest tax provision enacted in the last decade which, given the 2017 Act, is a strong statement. It make even the break for carried interest look good.