Headline CPI was 0.5% for December, core was 0.6%. Cars were a big part of the number (again) but inflation continues to broaden--the "other" excluding cars and pandemic services is high for the third month in a row.
Inflation is still almost entirely driven by durable goods not services. Durable goods inflation should come down as supply chains unsnarl but what will happen to services is the big question--is drifting up a little bit lately.
One reason to expect services to rise more is that they include shelter--which includes rent and owner's equivalent rent. The CPI is showing a much smaller increase than other measures. They're not comparable but measures of new leases show the future for all leases.
The US-Euro area gap widened a bit in December as well. Looking over twenty-four months on a comparable basis US is 2pp higher. Slightly less comparable but comparing core Euro area to core US ex shelter shows an even larger gap.
Finally this looks at core CPI over different time periods. 24 months avoids base effects (which are relatively small now), 12 months is the headline number, and 3 months is what is happening lately.
In terms of where we're going, this report doesn't do much to clarify--the same exact debates from the last several months are still applicable (including is it temporary supply chain and durables or will it shift to services.
My views on what people got wrong last year and what could happen this year in this (long) thread.
Slowing inflation this year is the most likely scenario, most experts expect it to slow to around 2% in the second half, I would take the over on that.
I will be enthusiastically supporting faculty legislation to cap the number of A's at Harvard at 20% (plus a bit). The collective action problem that has driven grades higher & higher over time is increasingly problematic. I hope other institutions consider similar steps.
I've talked to numerous colleagues & students about grade inflation. Almost all of them see it as a a problem. I've also heard about as many different ideas for solutions as I've had conversations. I would tweak this proposal in various ways. But would support it over nothing.
One place the current system fails--and it's not the only place--is honors. I'm on the Committee to recommend honors in the economics department. It's increasingly hard to distinguish excellence with so many A's. I believe that now even two A-'s makes you ineligible for Summa.
Depending on how you look at it growth in Q3 was very very strong or very strong or just possibly merely strong. Annual rates:
GDP: 4.3%
Real final sales to domestic purchasers: 2.9%
Average of GDP & GDI: 3.4%
GDI: 2.4%
A big part of the story was consumer spending up at a 3.5% annual rate. Started the year looking weak but new data and revisions have made consumers very strong.
Business fixed investment a bit weaker but also very heterogenous. Equipment investment and IPP up but non-residential structures down for the seventh straight quarter.
Several thoughts on that piece by @nealemahoney & @BharatRamamurti in @nytopinion.
1. They claim price controls are good politically. I'm very open to this being true, I'm under no illusion that what I think is good policy is particularly well correlated with good politics. But I am genuinely interested in more evidence beyond the brief observations they make.
2. They claim that even if you think price controls are a bad idea they can help you pass supply-increasing legislation that is on balance good. Once again, I'm open to this. And in government I've often done 3rd, 7th or 12th best policies because of constraints.