Jason Furman Profile picture
Feb 18 8 tweets 2 min read
Arguments about how how people *should* feel about the economy can sometimes be based on inconsistencies in the standards for assessing different factors like job growth and wage growth.

In some respects people may be more consistent/coherent than the experts.
Caricaturing the argument you hear: "jobs are growing rapidly & real wages are up relative to prepandemic, so everyone should be happy."

But note the job claim is about what is happening in recent months (the change) while the wages claim is over the entire period (the level).
Real wages have been falling lately. If you point that out many (reasonably) argue that real wages rose a lot in 2020 & you should include that too.

I mostly agree and most of my wage analysis/discussion focuses on the full period. piie.com/blogs/realtime…
But some will also point to the 6.6m jobs created over the last year as evidence that the economy is doing really well. There is a lot of merit to this view but the analogous argument applies: this is a partial bounceback from 2020 job losses and we're still down 2.9m total jobs.
A reasonable statement of the facts is:

1. If you judge by the whole pandemic period, the economy is in worse shape than it was in Feb 2020. That is not at all a controversial or surprising given the massive pandemic that is still here & the sharp 2020 recession.
2. If you judge just by the recent trajectory, the jobs and GDP have been growing very rapidly but real wages have been falling as inflation has outstripped wage gains.
3. If you judge compared to historical benchmarks, the recovery has been much more rapid than any previous recession.

If you judge compared to other countries, the GDP recovery has also been much faster but the employment recovery has been worse and inflation has been higher.
I can see the argument for expecting households to assess the economy using the entire pandemic period or using recent changes.

But don't bemoan household attitudes just because you unconsciously shift the yardstick to whatever works best for each variable and they don't.

FIN

• • •

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 18
Nominal wage growth definitely leads to price growth. And price growth definitely leads to nominal wage growth.

The open questions are:
1. How rapid is the transmission in each direction

2. Is the transmission more or less than one-for-one

3. Which goes up more

A 🧵.
On the *definitely* point if nominal wages and prices each followed their own totally unrelated dynamics you would see some very strange changes over time.

We don't and countries with 5% inflation have faster nominal wage growth than countries with 1% inflation. Etc.
In the short run the same forces are at work for both. Higher demand gives businesses more purchasing power so higher prices. And it gives workers more bargaining power so higher nominal wages.
Read 17 tweets
Feb 18
The Dallas Fed has an analysis that argues that real wages are up over the pandemic period. Not sure they're right (will look more closely). Regardless, they confirm the more relevant issues: real wages falling & below trend--so not a pretty picture.
dallasfed.org/research/econo…
1. The Dallas Fed researchers show that real wages have been falling over the last six months. That is relevant for how households evaluate the economy, even if they got (as indeed they did) real wage gains earlier in the expansion.
2. The Dallas Fed appears to be consistent with the strong evidence that any pandemic-era real wage growth is below previous trends: "real AHE growth that controls for composition effects has remained slightly positive over the past two years."
Read 11 tweets
Feb 16
Wowsers, nominal retail and food services sales up 3.8% in January even as prices were rising. Some charts that tell the story--presented mostly without commentary.

These are retail sales, mostly goods, people don't seem to be tiring of buying goods.
The largest category of durable goods: motor vehicles and parts.
The most fun category of retail sales (especially the bookstores part).
Read 5 tweets
Feb 15
New Keynesian macroeconomics is built on a foundation that assumes imperfect competition (i.e., businesses that can set prices). This imperfect competition results in quantities that are inefficiently low. This foundation has three policy implications (one for each tweet):
1. Micro policies like competition policy have the potential to improve welfare by raising quantities (or lowering prices in specific markets).

Personally I'm concerned about the reduction in competition and overly lax anti-trust. And glad to see President Biden addressing it.
2. Recessions are even worse than we thought and should be vigorously combatted with macroeconomic tools.

The intuition is that if your baseline is below where it should be then going even further below that is a particularly large loss (technically a first order loss).
Read 4 tweets
Feb 15
Great question. One view is that wage-price spirals were possible because unions had the power to negotiate contracts with cost-of-living adjustments. Under this view, the decline of unions and escalator contracts will mean a different dynamic.

I personally doubt it. Here's why:
Take an ice cream shop. They don't want to pay their workers more. Their workers don't have COLAs. But their workers are threatening to leave for jobs at Chipotle. Chipotle can afford to pay more because it raised prices. The ice cream shop has not choice but to pay more too.
And the ice cream shop will raise prices to be able to afford to pay more. Customers will still buy stuff there because prices are higher elsewhere too so the ice cream shop's relative prices haven't increased.

Etc. Etc. Etc.
Read 10 tweets
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.
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

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!

:(