I am beyond thrilled the President Biden is taking the long overdue step to adjust the Thrift Food Plan to be in line with the increased cost of healthy food. This is a large advance for poverty reduction, nutrition and opportunity for children.
In a 2015 CEA report we explained why the long-standing practice of updating the Thrifty Food Plan, the basis for the SNAP benefits, by inflation was an inadequate reflection of the increased cost of a nutritious meal. I'll list the reasons in this thread. obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/whitehou…
1. VARIETY & PALATABILITY. The TFP departs sharply from avg food consumption. The TFP assumes consumption of foods like beans, whole wheat pasta, etc. 20X the average American consumption, while assuming near-zero consumption of some healthful foods that Americans eat regularly.
2. PREP TIME. The TFP assumes greater meal prep time than families typically spend preparing meals, btwn 1-2 hours of prep time per day, excluding shopping, but studies of low-income women found that they do not spend as much time on food prep as the TFP assumes
3. VARIATIONS IN COST. The cost of the TFP is not regionally adjusted though food costs vary substantially by location. In addition, low-income households are less likely to have access to large grocery stores that offer lower prices.
4. LAG IN INFLATION ADJUSTMENT. Every year, the TFP is adjusted for inflation. But there is a lag in the inflation adjustment of as much as 16 months by the following September. If food prices are rising over that 16 month period, the value of SNAP benefits are eroding.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The problem recently has been in both goods and services. Core goods inflation has typically been about zero but in the run-up to this year had deflation. Now tariff-driven inflation.
And at the same time core services inflation has picked up.
A market slowdown in the pace of job gains, with 22K added in August, bringing the three month average to 29K.
On a percentage basis have not seen job growth this slow outside of recessionary periods in more than sixty years.
The unemployment rate rose from 4.2% to 4.3% (unrounded was a smaller increase).
Wage growth was strong and average hours steady.
All of these are consistent with a marked slowdown in labor supply (due to immigration policy) combined with a continued slight softness in labor demand (as evidenced by the unemployment rate which has been steadily rising at about 0.03 percentage point per month for 2-1/2 years.
But two reasons to be less worried than headline: (1) transitory tariffs & (2) some of this is imputed from rising stock market.
Here are the full set of numbers I'll talk about.
Particularly notable is how much lower market core has been than overall core at every horizon. Note regular core includes imputed items, notably portfolio management fees where the price goes up when the stock market goes up.
Market core is both better predicted by slack and a better predictor of future inflation. It has moved sideways this year. But given that tariffs are (hopefully temporarily) pushing inflation up that suggests that underlying inflation is going down.
The jobs slowdown is here with 73K jobs in July & large downward revisions to May & June bringing the average to 35K/month.
Not quite as bad as you might think because steady-state job growth is much lower in a low net immigration world but unemployment still gradually rising.
A small portion of the weaker jobs numbers in recent months are Federal cuts.
But the bigger issues is the slowdown in private job creation.
My latest @nytopinion attempts to answer the question, "The Tariffs Kicked In. The Sky Didn’t Fall. Were the Economists Wrong?"
Part of my argument is the economy actually has slowed & inflation has picked up, as you would expect.
Plus Trump called off some tariffs and lags.
But there are two broader lessons here:
1. U.S. economy is mostly domestic services. Trade matters but it doesn't matter as much as some of the hype might make you think. (And I confess, I do suffer from TDS, tariff derangement syndrome.)
2. Much of macro is small on a percentage basis. But small things really matter a lot.
0.5% off one year's growth rate and $1,000 per household per year forever are the same. But the former sounds small and the later makes it clear it is a large unforced error.