Jason Furman Profile picture
Feb 13 7 tweets 2 min read
Over the next yr the labor force participation rate could rise by an astounding ~0.9 percentage point if all of the people who have left the labor force return.

The last time we've seen anything like this was 1976, 1977 & 1978.

Maybe not so comforting for inflation.

A short 🧵
The labor force participation fell sharply when COVID hit & is still far from recovered. Now 1pp below where it would have been if all the age-sex participation rates had stayed the same. This is due to a combo of ages and genders. (Discontinuity is the population controls.)
It's plausible that many of these people will come back over something like the next year if COVID becomes more manageably endemic or more ignored.

If these workers come back that will be great for incomes, employment, GDP, and much more.

But will it be great for inflation?
The case for it reducing inflation is that it increases supply. But more people working will also increase demand. It's plausible that the supply effect is somewhat more than the demand effect (because nonemployed may have been smoothing consumption) but probably not by a lot.
Historically structural labor force participation changes don't seem to affect inflation one way or the other. It's not like the big influx of workers in the late 1970s lowered inflation. Or that declining participation post-2020 raised inflation.
At the same time, IF labor force participation does rise rapidly back to normal levels over the course of 2022 I would bet the unemployment rate will also have fallen and the labor market will be even tighter than it is now, or at least not much looser.
So I would put the return of workers as another factor that might possibly reduce inflation but likely not by a lot. And I would not be surprised if it, together with what came with it, generated a small increase in inflation.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jason Furman

Jason Furman Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jasonfurman

Feb 14
1. Gas prices not very high in historical context.

2. Federal gas tax last raised in 1993, has been cut in half by inflation since.

3. Gas tax lower than the climate/road damage/congestion costs imposed by gasoline.

4. A gas tax holiday would raise profits for oil companies. Image
Expanding on the last point, the "incidence" of any tax cut gets shared between the two sides of the market (whichever side is less responsive to price will get more of the tax cut). In the case of a gas tax holiday that would mean billions for oil companies.
It is depressing that the decades long link between highway financing and highway use was broken in the 1990s. If anything the gas tax should go up not down. I realize that is impossible to ask now. But at least hold on to what we have.
Read 6 tweets
Feb 13
I'm uncertain about the trajectory of inflation.

But even conditional on my inflation views, I'm even more uncertain about what exactly monetary policy should do. Nervous about overreacting but also nervous about being so far from a reasonable place now.

So just, well, nervous.
There are good reasons to think inflation will go down (shift to services, massive stimulus behind us, workers returning, global supply chains unsnarl, normalized endemic COVID). A number of these arguments are overstated, often in the same way, but collectively plausible.
There are also good reasons to think inflation will go up (tighter labor markets, higher inflation expectations, wage-price spiral, continued excess demand with accelerations Phillips curve, normalized endemic COVID). (Yes, normalized endemic COVID is on both lists.)
Read 11 tweets
Feb 12
If you think profit maximization (aka corporate greed) was responsible for the 7.5% inflation over the last twelve months, what would you say was responsible for the 6.3 million private sector jobs added over the last twelve months?
In some sense both of these are trivially the result of corporate greed in that most of what we see in our economy is an equilibrium that reflects profit maximizing decisions by firms.
The low inflation in the years up to the pandemic was also corporate greed (companies would have lost money if they charged more).
Read 6 tweets
Feb 12
One part I love about @ezraklein's podcast is his guests recommend three books at the end. I had a chance to recommend three on the Podcast I just did with him, will link to my Goodreads reviews of them in the next three tweets. nytimes.com/2022/02/08/pod…
Who We Are and How We Got Here by uses ancient genetic data to paint a complex picture of the history of humanity. He manages to charts the ups and downs of inequality hundreds of thousands of years ago. Amazing science. goodreads.com/review/show/23…
.@JoHenrich's The WEIRDest People in the World uses genetics, history, evolutionary biology, economics, and more to understand the causes and consequences of the culture he calls Western Educated Industrialized Rich Democratic. goodreads.com/review/show/34…
Read 6 tweets
Feb 12
A thread on the perils of interpreting moving averages that will be of interest to almost no one. Also has implications for annual averages which is a slightly more important topic. This fleshes out one aspect of my error with the Atlanta Fed wage data.
I'll use a made up hypothetical of the following wage data. What would you say happened to wages in the pandemic period (which for expositional simplicity I'm drawing as starting in 2020)?

I think you would say wages fell in the pandemic.
The right calculation for what happened in wages in the pandemic would be:

Wage growth in pandemic = (wage level Dec 2021 / wage level Dec 2019).

In the picture above this is -1% if you annualize (take the square root to get growth per year).
Read 15 tweets
Feb 11
My charts on the distribution of real wage growth were flat out wrong, as @IrvingSwisher correctly pointed out. I'm deleting all of the tweets (here's a screenshot of one so you know what I'm talking about). Feel terrible to have put this out.

This 🧵 explains more fully.
The question I was trying to ask was what has happened to wage growth adjusted for inflation by different income groups & how does it compare to pre-COVID.

The broad inference is likely still true but possibly less bad than I showed (it is unclear). The data was wrong.
I still believe the following are true for the period from the pandemic to today:

1. On average nominal wages have increased more slowly than inflation.

2. Faster wage gains for lower-wage workers

3. For most groups any inflation-adjusted gains are smaller than pre-pandemic.
Read 19 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

:(