The debate over Fed policy, especially about when to start cutting rates, seems to have become disconnected from the reality of rapid disinflation. Thinking about it reminded me of ... an experience I once had on a cycling trip 1/
In 2015, I think, I went on a week-long cycling tour in Vermont. I was in pretty good shape, but hadn't done a trip like that for a while, and was slightly worried about my stamina 2/
On the second day, I was getting close to what the notes from Discovery Tours said was a major climb. As I approached, there were a series of short, sharp uphills, and I thought "if this is the approach, the real thing must be really hard" 3/
Then the road leveled off — and I suddenly realized that I had already done the "major climb" I was worried about 4/
On inflation, there's still a lot of handwringing about what it will take to get inflation down to target, and whether the "last mile" will be the hardest. To which the question should be, "what last mile"? Like that major climb on my bike trip, we've already done it 5/
Core PCE has risen at <2% for the last 6 months; unless forecasts are way off, Friday's data won't change that. More sophisticated efforts to extract the signal from the noise also show us close to target 6/
Where does the idea that there's still a lot of work to do come from? Partly from looking at yoy changes, which are a lagging indicator when inflation is falling fast; partly from the CPI, also lagging bc of how it measures shelter 7/
And partly, I guess, people who were warning sternly about stubborn inflation in early 2023 are having trouble adjusting to the way the problem evaporated. But seriously, time to stop talking about inflation's last mile 8/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Debates about the causes of inflation and disinflation are getting strangely tangled, partly because some people don't seem to recognize that both aggregate demand and aggregate supply can shift. Here, using standard textbook pictures, is what I think happened 1/
During the pandemic and early aftermath, we had a lot of fiscal stimulus. This sustained growth and employment despite an adverse supply shock, but doing so involved a temporary surge in inflation. Then the supply shock reversed, and we got immaculate disinflation 2/
Doing it this way avoided one risk — long-term scarring from a persistently depressed economy — while running another — inflation getting entrenched. Given how things have actually turned out, it seems obvious that policymakers made the right call 3/
OK, since the debate is mostly happening here, a thread on why I don't buy the argument that Fed rate hikes explain disinflation, and unwinding of transitory shocks does; Mike Konczal says most of it, but here's my version 1/
First off, I like the idea of a nonlinear Phillips curve, and was very partial to it as late as spring 2023. And it's one way to explain how we got more or less back to target inflation without a massive Summers-type bulge in unemployment 2/
But if what was happening was that monetary tightening was causing us to slide down a steep Phillips curve, you'd expect to see the "signature" of that process in more than just falling inflation 3/
Assertions that Biden's 2021 policies were a disaster rested on the proposition that they would cause inflation that would be very costly to bring down. In fact, inflation has come down painlessly, probably as pandemic-era kinks are worked out 2/
This says, first of all, that there were basically no long-term costs due to excessively expansionary policy. And it also suggests that much of the 2021-22 inflation was the result of those temporary kinks 3/
This is an important point. Gonna do a newsletter on it, but I thought I should hit the high points — it helps explain consumer sentiment, and is also (believe it or not) good news for Biden 1/
Some people saying that consumers don't care about inflation, only the level of prices. Bad news if true, because deflating back to price levels from the past would be a nightmare. But surely overstates the case 2/
What is true is that 1 year is an arbitrary period. Easy to calculate because no need to worry about seasonal adjustment. But as everyone in this biz knows or should know, it's too long for macro analysis; it misses the big recent disinflation 3/
Some more notes on the disconnect between what people say about their own financial situation and what they say about the economy 1/ nytimes.com/2023/09/07/opi…
I'm seeing a fair amount of strawmanning, insisting that as long as people are feeling any stress there's no disconnect. But it's a question of proportionality. 2/
The Fed's SHED survey shows a decline in financial well-being as pandemic programs ended, but only enough to roughly get us back to prepandemic levels. Yet assessments of the economy have tanked — disproportionately, as SHED itself acknowledges 3/
A few thoughts about Trump's proposed "ring around the collar" tariff; I think a lot of the commentary misses the real reason it's such a bad idea 1/ washingtonpost.com/business/2023/…
Before I get there: it's a fixed belief among Rs that Biden is doddering and senile (he isn't, at all). Imagine what they would say if he promoted a big policy idea with a 55-year-old ad slogan mainly remembered bc it was so annoying — and ... 2/
got it completely backward. If you're old and unlucky enough to remember those ads, "ring around the collar" was a *bad* thing Wisk detergent was supposed to eliminate. 3/