There is a fair bit of news today, which I will deal with in other posts, but I wanted to start with this one because I think it encapsulates a lot of the arguments that are being made at a national level.
October 26, 2012
There is a fair bit of news today, which I will deal with in other posts, but I wanted to start with this one because I think it encapsulates a lot of the arguments that are being made at a national level.
October 25, 2012
As we move into the last days before the election, both sides have a lot to say on any and every issue that could vaguely be considered relevant. Ever smaller groups of voters are being targeted and pandered to. Today, it’s the “waitress moms,” per the front-page article in the New York Times (NYT), “Crucial Subset: Female Voters Still Deciding.” Obama continues to be the favorite, but at slowly eroding odds. And people are starting to realize that regardless of who wins the election, we are still going to have to deal with the same problems.
The headlines now are focusing more on what we will do, rather than who is going to be doing it. Even as the political uncertainty escalates—the presidential race is getting tighter, and “Number of Competitive Senate Races Rises” on page A6 of the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) points out that control of the Senate may be up for grabs as well—the economic focus is narrowing. Whoever wins, there is a set of problems that will have to be addressed, and those problems are becoming the focus.
Two major banks, J.P. Morgan and Wells Fargo, reported substantially stronger profits over the weekend, largely due to mortgage lending. The weekend Wall Street Journal (WSJ) had “JP Morgan and Wells Fargo: Housing on Mend” on page B1, and the weekend Financial Times had “Dimon bullish on US housing market” on the front page. The weekend New York Times (NYT) had two housing stories on B1: “Mortgage Lending Helps JPMorgan Profit Rise 34%” and “Which House Is Worth More?”
The first point I want to make is that as housing recovers, it helps across the board. Rising home values generate more transactions, which generate multiple business spin-off benefits: realtor fees, mortgage fees, furniture sales, and everything that goes with the transaction and the new property. For existing owners, rising prices make them wealthier. For underwater owners, the power of leverage that made them broke on the downside is now making them whole just as fast. Fewer underwater owners means fewer foreclosures going forward. The fact that the improving housing market is showing up in the financials of the largest banks is a sign of how large and widespread the recovery is becoming. The publicity around it can help build confidence even further.
October 12, 2012
I have been doing some detailed review work on the economy, both historically and going forward, for my presentation at Commonwealth’s upcoming National Conference. As part of that, I put together a chart that I thought was worth sharing as we move closer to the election. The blue line is business uncertainty, and the red line is the U-6 unemployment series. Note how changes in the blue line lead changes in the red line.
October 9, 2012
The slowing global economy was the big story this morning. It was front-page news in the Financial Times (FT) and the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), with “IMF cuts global growth forecasts” and “Global Recession Risk Rises,” respectively. Although it didn’t make the New York Times (NYT) front page, it did make the front of the business section, with “IMF Lowers Its Forecast for Global Growth.”
The short version is that Europe continues to tank, China continues to slow, and the U.S. is at risk because of political uncertainty. The IMF is projecting continued though slower global growth, but that depends on a few criteria: Europe implementing the sovereign bond purchase program successfully and navigating its multiple other problems, China achieving a soft landing, and the U.S. not going over the fiscal cliff. A hefty set of assumptions.
October 8, 2012
The big story over the weekend was the surprising drop in the unemployment rate to 7.8 percent, which is the lowest it has been during the Obama presidency. Employment growth remained slow, at 114,000 jobs, but the big story there was that the previous two months were revised upward to much better levels than had been initially estimated. The papers had different focuses, as expected. The Financial Times (FT) cut to the chase with “Obama boosted by US jobs figures” and “Jobs report better than expected but labour growth still slow.” The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) led with “Hiring Notches Modest Gains,” followed by “Jobless See Little Improvement in Outlook” (p. A2). The New York Times (NYT) took the opposite tack, with “Jobless Rate Sinks to 7.8%, Its Lowest for Obama’s Term.” Nice to see when the papers wear their hearts on their sleeves.
Surprisingly, the drop in the unemployment rate led to charges, most visibly by Jack Welch, that the government had cooked the numbers. The NYT addressed that directly with “Jobs Report: Cooked or Correct” (p. A17) and “Taming Volatile Data for Jobs Reports” (p. B1); the articles concluded that the numbers were legitimately volatile, not cooked, and explained how the numbers are derived. Apparently, the last time charges like this were widely aired was during the Nixon presidency—an indicator of how wide the political divide is now.
October 2, 2012
We certainly are not free of the fiscal cliff, but it is at least comforting to know that our representatives are taking up the matter when they have a free minute. The New York Times (NYT) reports today on the front page, with “Senate Leaders See Path to Avert Mandatory Cuts,” that the Senate, the less irresponsible body, is “closing in on a path” to deal with the problem.
As well they should be. In addition to the 160 million people to be affected by the fiscal cliff mentioned in an article yesterday (“Payroll Tax Rise for 160 million is Likely in 2013,” NYT, p. A1), today the Financial Times (FT) has “Washington’s fiscal cliff to hit 90% of families, claims think tank” on page 3. That’s a lot of voters.
Oh, yes—spending cuts! The papers this morning are all about both. The key article, and the one most people (160 million of them) will be talking about shortly is on the front page of the New York Times (NYT), “Payroll Tax Rise for 160 million Is Likely in 2013.” The expiration of the 2-percent payroll tax on earnings will hit everyone immediately in the new year, and it’s not likely to be reinstated.
This is just a part of the fiscal cliff, which is becoming clearer and clearer as the election approaches. Taxes will be going up, and spending will be cut—the question is how. “Way round the fiscal cliff still unclear” on page 2 of the Financial Times (FT) is pretty self-explanatory and leads with the conclusion that Congress is unlikely to resolve the issues in 2012, leaving another potential pending crisis in 2013. Patriotic citizens are glad to contribute more, led, of course, by private equity managers. According to “Private equity managers fear tax hit” in the FT (p. 17), they are attempting to rewrite existing agreements to specify that they will make more money to compensate if their taxes go up. Clients, unsurprisingly, do not seem to be in favor. No doubt, the managers want to make sure they can continue to spend and stimulate the economy, which will then trickle down.
September 28, 2012
The U.S. economy continues to actively stay in one place. The papers reflect this, with headlines like “Numbers Augur Trouble Ahead” and “Obama Trumpets Revised Job Data,” both from page A6 of the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) and both painting very different pictures of where we are. Although the job figures have been revised up—meaning we actually have more than 400,000 more jobs than we thought—slowing growth and a drop in durable goods orders suggest that the future will be worse than expected. Likewise, “Chinese Slowdown Idles US Coal Mines” from the front page of the WSJ talks about how reduced exports and mining employment are hitting the U.S., while “GE’s Immelt Is Upbeat on Industrial Outlook” (p. B3) suggests that the recent industrial and manufacturing slowdown is in fact overdone. But there is cognitive dissonance within the GE article itself, with an acknowledgment that FedEx and Caterpillar are much less sanguine about the future.
The New York Times (NYT) is just as visibly conflicted. “Fearing Fiscal Cliff, Investors Cash In and Seek Safety” (p. B1) is right next to “Economy Still Weak, But More Feel Secure.” A follow-up article, “Good News and Bad in New Data on Economy” (p. B6), makes the uncertainty even more explicit. How’s that for hard-hitting analysis?
