Ian Welsh

The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Category: Employment and Unemployment Page 1 of 4

The Credit Cycle: Phase Two Accelerating

By

On March 19, 2026

18 Comments

~by Sean Paul Kelley

Here are today’s Phase Two developments. Many are ominous. Things not looky so goody.

The smartest guys in the room, i.e., Goldman Sachs had this to say about AI: “Massive investment in AI contributed basically zero to US economic growth last year.” What will they predict next? An oil price spike if we go to war with Iran? Oh wait. 

Dario notes that the liquidity crisis is going global: “Middle East liquidity crisis in the financial system is surfacing.”

He cites Rashid ben Saeed who elaborates: “Citi and Standard Chartered literally evacuated their offices this week. Told staff go home, work remote. HSBC closed their Qatar branches. Hedge funds are in “contingency mode.” That’s a polite way of saying they’re bricking it. Analysts are saying customers could pull out $307 BILLION if this goes on another month.” 

First Squawk writes that both JP Morgan and Goldman are offering Hedge Funds ways to short private credit. That’s just weird.

Ripplebrain conveys just how devastating the attack on QatarEnergy’s LNG production is: “17% of QatarEnergy’s production is 3.4% of the world’s LNG production.” Ending ominously saying, that it’s “gone in the blink of an eye, perhaps for years.”

The irrepressible Matt Stoller highlights a video that highlights “straightforward market manipulation.” He also points our attention to the #2 story at the Wall Street Journal: “U.S. Regulators Propose More Lenient Capital Rules for Big Banks.” This kind of proposal is in direct contravention to the ‘stress test’ rules put in place after the 2008 Financial Crisis. It also clearly foreshadows liquidity and/or solvency issues that the commericial banks will soon face. 

In another clear phase two clusterfuck is this story from the WSJ, cited by Unicus Research. The upshot: “Stone Ridge’s LENDX fund just told investors it would honor only 11% of redemption requests.” The post on X also includes what kind of garbage is in the fund. Go take a look. It’ll engender a ton of schadenfruede. Enjoy! 

As pending crises morph into full blown disasters investment banks often prepare by enacting the following policies. First, they raise production quotas for their employees while simultaneously cutting their commission payouts. It’s a cut-throat business. Payout cuts are painful. I’ve lived it. And they always cut payouts right before or during bear markets. I endured this twice at Morgan Stanley. Guess what: Goldman has begun that process, as First Squawk reports: “Goldman plans performance-based job cuts in late April.” This we can infer two important factoids from this: Goldman is worried about cash-flow. You don’t plan to run employees off if you’re flush with cash. Two: timing, Goldman clearly sees this credit cycle accelerating rapidly with an April inflection point.

Shashank Joshi catches an excellent highlight from the Economist: “Average prices of petrol and diesel have reached $3.88 and $5.09 a gallon, compared with $3.11 and $3.72 at Mr Trump’s inauguration. Republican support for the war is strong, but softening.”

More Perfect Union informs us “the cost of vegetables jumped 49% last month as inflation hit hard and companies raised prices.” Its source is BLS data. Now I know, some will dispute how the CPI is computed. I thinks it full of balderdash and male bovine excrement. So does Ian. So I post and you decide. 

Sohrab Ahmari notes, unconfirmed but entirely plausible, that “force majeur [has been declared] on Qatari LNG contracts for up to five years.” Five years? That’s going to pile Pelion atop the already messa Ossa of the energy markets globaly. 

CORRECTION: according to EarlyGray the video below does not say anything about Japan buying Russian oil. Mea culpa. I regret the error. SPK

Richard posts a video and apparently translates it. If true, it’s a bombshell: “Japan is now openly buying Russian oil with the yuan.” Why not with JPY? I would imagine that China has already set up a Yuan based transaction system for buying and selling oil to steadily chip, chip, chip away at dollar hegemony. Yeah, Japan has said it publically and officialy. That’s pretty much like pissing on the petrodollar. Our closest North East Asian Ally. That’s fuckery on an hitherto unseen level. 

Meanwhile, to Japan’s northwest, South Korea is considering resuming imports of Russian oil.

And I make the observation, in utterly obscene Russian fashion that “with these high oil prices the Russian Treasury has certainly Как бога за яйца поймал.” Translated idiomatically: Russia is in the catbird seat. Translated directly:they got God by the balls.

Rory Johnston notes just how high Dubai crude prices have risen: “Cash Dubai crude (balance of the month) just broke above $170 per barrel.”

Here’s what I’ve previously written on this credit cycle. I stand by it all. The only comment I’ll add at present is this: if the exogenous shocks to the US economy continue and the energy shock intensifies, all bets are off on the proximate cause of the end of dollar hegemony.

 

Saturday Morning Grab Bag Of Baddies and Goodies

By

On March 7, 2026

24 Comments

~by Sean Paul Kelley

I’ll begin, as usual, with the economy. JP Morgan lays odds for a global recession at 60% now. Causes? According to JPMorgan it’s threefold: the conflict in Iran, the tariffs and AI. But JP Morgan is forgetting another huge variable, the private credit/shadow credit unwind happening in real time. Blackrock halted redemptions from its flagship debt fund to the tune of $1.2bn. Blackrock to investors: fuck off. Blackrock’s fuckery marks the third private credit shop in the last three months to shut investor redemptions down: first Blue Owl, then Blackstone and now Blackrock. 

As Dario intones ruefully, “Mark my words, the damage to the financial system the private credit space will cause will be greater by many orders of magnitude than the one subprime caused in 2008.” I’m pretty well convinced he’s right. That said, the political will to backstop another financial crisis has not eroded totally, so the emerging credit crunch will be the last one backstopped by the Fed and/or Congress. 

Another variable JP Morgan doesn’t address is the most recent (un)employment numbers. If the first reported, non-revised numbers of a -92,000 jobs is any indication, once the numbers are revised, February’s numbers are likely to resemble a catastrophe. 

On the ugly, catastrophe side of things, Dubai has only ten days of fresh food remaining if the Straits remain closed. I suppose they can eat dates, no? 

Also of note, The Reptile, aka Peter Thiel (yes, it’s a real anagram, google it if you donnae believe me!), dumped 2 million shares of Palantir. It’s a bright flashing red light, a semaphore both unmistakable and of serious consequence, when top execs dump shares of the corps they run. They are cashing out, leaving the equity collapse in the hands of suckers, ermm, retail investors, widows and orphans-like. 

If you want a fuller understanding of the logic logic behind Iran’s attacks on the region’s infrastructure, read here. Speaking of oil, one can’t fix stupid. Shorting oil in this kind of risk environment is nucking futs.

Maintaining our focus on petroleum for a bit longer, I have to note, if oil breaks bad to the north, past say $120, the resulting global recession will have deleterious effects on commodities, especially gold and silver. But more gold than silver, as the silver supply-demand equation has been so structurally out of whack for so long, the recession would have to be almost depression-like to impose enough demand destruction for the price to sink below the mid $70s.

Sticking with petrol it appears the Euros might come a begging to Czar Pootie-poot for gas and oil the longer the Straits remain inaccesible. Apparently Czar Vladimir has already hinted the Euros can, in Russian, “пошел нахуй.” I’m sure you can suss the meaning out of that one. If true, this volte face by the Euros is staggering in its hyprocrisy and implications. But it is far from surprising. Anyone with a halfway decent brain on their head could have seen this ugly denouement coming a mile away. Wait, a kilometer and some change. Yeah, ‘Muricans can do metric!

In genuinely good news, Indonesia has enacted a total and complete ban on the riding of elephants. When I traveled in South East Asia I refused to ride any elephants, they are too sensitive emotionally and very much deserving of my respect. As I note on X: 

This is supremely welcome humane news. The limbic system in elephants is so extensive and well developed it creates “profound emotional intelligence, long-term memory, and social bonds [in elephants.] [Their] brain structure allows for intense empathy, mourning, [and] social cohesion,” making them closer to humans in social development than any other class of animals than primates and ceteceans.

Check out the photo of an elephant getting frisky with me. Suprised me to no end, you can see it in my face. This news makes me smile and happy. Somewhere somebody is doing something right. Faith in humanity remains unrestored, but a credit has been added to the depleted account of faith, nonetheless. One of my finest memories is seeing a herd of wild elephants emerging out of the bush about sixty miles south of Mysore, India in 2009. Wild effing elephants. How cool is that? Portions of my life have been truly charmed and I’m grateful.

Speaking of memories, I was only five years old when Nadia Comaneci stuck 7 perfecf tens at the 1976 Summer Olympics in Montreal, but even then I knew I was witnessing something very special. My view hasn’t changed in 50 years. And her performance is as elegant and perfect as it was then.

How about some music on this fine March Saturday morning? I’ll note in brief the quiet but powerful resurgence of political and human vitality to American music. As I post regarding Tyler Childers:

Tyler Childers’ song, “White House Road”, written in 2017, paints a generalized portrait of American misfortune and hardship, but uses the patois of the Appalachian South in particular to stoke the emotions of the listener. And it’s why Childer’s imagery works no matter where you live in the US-hell, it’s almost Dickensian and could be anywhere. The tune’s poignance is just that brutally authentic and powerfully magnetic.

Don’t, for a second, confuse this with C&W. It ain’t that. This is threadbare roots Americana. If this doesn’t stir your heart, you don’t have one. 

The raw explosive emotion of Childer’s lyricism propels a simple 3-chord song (E-D-A) across the ragged, tragic and increasingly impoverished tableau of a decomposing America. Childers tells an old rural story, but ‘makes it new’ as Ezra Pound frequently exhorted young writers and poets. Indeed, there is a touch of Chris Whitley’s muse to this song.
 
Childers voice is a beacon of distress, masquerading as joy, “a damn good feeling to run these roads.” He sings.”Get me drinkin’ that moonshine/Get me higher than the grocery bill/Take my troubles to the highwall/Throw’em in the river and get your fill.”

His distress is amplified by his vocal register; and his range acts like the kinetic tension in an unsprung faucet, Schrodinger-like: at once blowing in a soft mountain drawl, only to tornado-up into a raspy hard emotional sucker punch landing on your solar-plexus and leaving you breathless. 
 
Tyler is proof that there are only two types of music: good music and bad music.
 
I dare you to listen and not stomp your feet.

More to the point, Jack White has single-handedly reinvented and fused Delta blues, Chicago blues and rock music right back into political and cultural relevance. One example is the global adoption of his anthemic Seven Nation Army.

His appearance on SNL in 2020 is another solid proof of concept.

Honorable mention goes to the Stone Foxes and their fantastic and criminally underrated retelling of the death of Delta Blues legend Robert Johnson, “I killed Robert Johnson.” The song is 15 years old. So what, it’s aged well.

While you’re at it, this lovely morning, check out this music here and rock out to this and this. The last two are representitive of a new breed of American rock bands. You won’t hear ’em on the radio, but rock is alive. And that’s a good thing, like this cover of Dancing in the Street, by the Struts.

Who ever talks about modern dance, or takes an interest in it ought give this video a solid once over: the choreogrpahy on display is a stuning blend of traditonal renaissance era galliard or volta, early Appalachian line dancing and urban American break dance, yeah, break dancing, for a tune straight out of my Scotch-Irish heritage

While you’re at it, check out this Ryan Adams cover of the Iron Maiden classic, Wasted Years.

Last one, I promise, this Band of Heathens song, “Hanging Tree,” eeriely echoes old-timey Protestant hymns sung by a choir, except it’s about infideltiy and damn near a murder ballad. It’s about 15 years old, as well, but it has aged like a fine Irish whiskey. Lastly, I have rarely in life coveted anything. And I use the word ‘covet’ purposefully. But that Dobro he’s playing in the video: me want one something fierce. But I’m left handed and those cost upwards of $1500. Ouch!

More if it happens. Maybe.

Nota bene: Apparently Kuwait Oil has declared force majeure on oil sales. That’s not confirmed, but plausible and bad news if true. As one commenter in the X thread linked wryly noted, “You know shit has hit the fan when you have to start using French terms.”

LMFAO.

If You Really Hate DEI & Actually Want Merit, There Is A Way

By

On January 23, 2025

20 Comments

There’s a lot of pushback on DEI these days, with some major companies ending their DEI programs. This has been tied into the competence crisis, which is bullshit.

Let’s put the idea that there isn’t massive discrimination to rest. There have been many studies. One found that identical resumes from people with black names vs. people with white names had half the interview requests. A meta-study found the effect less overall: 24%.

Now I don’t know if DEI overcomes that, but modern studies don’t find any less of a gap, so I’m guessing “no”, though the effect on promotion may be more significant.

The obvious solution is to do something similar to the how orchestras evaluate musicians: they place them behind a screen, and they play their music. The evaluators don’t know who’s playing, or anything about them.

Modern technology makes this viable: wipe the resume of any identifying remarks and do the same with any testing. Have the interview with an avatar with a computer masked voice. If you really want to evaluate entirely on merit: their record and their abilities, that would be the way to do it.

The counter-argument is “cultural fit” and I’m not going to say that there’s nothing to it. The evidence is that diverse teams improve quality at the cost of speed and increased conflict but the benefits don’t accrue for teams which don’t work together much. If you’re doing something you already know how to do, where quality isn’t much of a factor, speed is and team members don’t interact much anyway, then there’s a case for “cultural fit” teams. But if you’re dealing with uncertainty, or quality is more important than speed, then a diverse team is probably better.

(Amusingly the evidence is that startup funds perform less well without diversity, but silicon valley hates diversity and prioritizes fit, which is one reason for their under-performance the last couple decades since the tech-bros took charge.)

I’m not a huge fan of DEI. It introduces a variable that shouldn’t matter. Problem is that variable already matters, and DEI is an effort to counter people hiring less competent people because of prejudice.

But there is another solution: one that prioritizes merit, at least for hiring (and it could be extended to some types of promotion decisions). Decisions based on blinding out gender and race.

If the real issue is merit and not something else, this is the obvious way to go. Strange how rarely it is suggested.

This blog runs on donations and subscriptions from readers. It’s free, but not free to produce. If you value it, please give.

Why the Economy Is Bad for Most People and How to Make It Better

By

On June 10, 2019

51 Comments

This is the second collation of articles on why our world is what it is, and how we can change it. Some of these articles are old, as I don’t write as much as I used to about economics, mostly because the decision points for avoiding a completely lousy economy are now in the past. The last decision points were passed by when Barack Obama announced his economics team and refused to try and get rid of, or bypass, Bernanke to enforce decent policy on the Federal Reserve.

However, this economy was decades in the making, and if we do not understand how it happened we will only wind up in a good economy through accident, and, having obtained a good economy, will not be able to keep it. These articles aren’t exhaustive; a better list would include almost five centuries of economic history, at least in summary, and certainly deal with the 19th century and early 20th centuries.

I was heartened that hundreds of people read the articles linked in my compendium on ideology and character so I dare hope that you will, again, read these pieces. If you do, you will walk away vastly better informed than almost anyone you know, including most formal economists, about why the economy is as it is.

The Decline and Fall of Post-war Liberalism

Pundits today natter on and on about income inequality, but the fundamental cause of income inequality is almost always determined by how society distributes power. As power goes, so goes income–and wealth. The last period of broad-based equality was the “Liberal Period,” which started with the Great Depression. You can locate the end of that era at various points from 1968 to 1980, but 1980 was the point at which turning back became vastly difficult. This was the moment when a new political order was born; an order conceived to crush those who were willing and able to fight effectively for their share of income and money.

(I am fundraising to determine how much I’ll write this year. If you value my writing and want more of it, please consider donating.)

Why Elites Have Pushed “Free Trade”

Those who are middle-aged or beyond remember the relentless march of free trade agreements, the creation of the WTO, and the endless drumbeat of propaganda about how FREE trade was wonderful, inevitable, and going to make us all rich. It didn’t, and it was never intended to. Fully understanding why “free trade” has only enriched a few requires understanding the circumstances required for free trade to work, the incentives for free trade, and the power dynamics which make free trade perfect for elites who want to become rich (often by destroying the prosperity of their own countries). Free trade is about power, and power is about who gets how much.

The Isolation of Elites and the Madness of the Crowd

All societies change and face new challenges. What matters is how they deal with new circumstances. The US, in specific, and most of the developed world, in general, is in decline because of simple broken feedback loops. Put simply, ordinary people live in a world of propaganda and lies, while the rich and the powerful live in a bubble, isolated from the consequences their decisions have on the majority of the population, or on the future.

The Bailouts Caused the Lousy “Recovery”

This may be the hardest thing to explain to anyone with a connection to power or money: The bailouts are WHY the world has a lousy economy, not why it isn’t even worse. If people cannot understand why this is so, if they cannot understand that other options were, and are, available, other than making the people who destroyed the world economy even richer and more powerful, we will never see a good economy, ever again.

(I am fundraising to determine how much I’ll write this year. If you value my writing and want more of it, please consider donating.)

The Rapid Destruction of Countries

You may have noticed, you probably have noticed, that most countries are becoming basketcases faster and faster. Some are destroyed by war and revolution, others by forced austerity. However it happens, the end of anything resembling a good economy through austerity in places like Greece, the Ukraine, Italy, or Ireland, or through war, in places like Lybia and Syria, is sure. Understand this: What is done to those countries, is being done to yours if you live in the developed world, just at a slower pace–and one day, you, too, will be more valuable dead than alive.

Why Countries Can’t Resist Austerity

Many of you will realize that much of the answer to this is related to the article on free trade. Weakness, national weakness, is built into the world economic system, and done so deliberately. The austerity of the past six years is simply the deliberate impoverishment of ordinary people, for the profit of elites, on steroids. But it is worth examining, in detail, why countries can’t or won’t stop it, and what is required for a country to be able to do so.

Why Public Opinion Doesn’t Matter

We live in the remnants of a mass society, but we aren’t in one any more (though we think we are). In a mass-mobilization society with relatively evenly distributed wealth and income, and something approaching competitive markets, public opinion mattered. If it was not a King, well, it was at least a Duke. Today it matters only at the margins, on decisions where the elites do not have consensus. Understand this, and understand why, or all your efforts to resist will be for nothing.

The Golden Rule

Money, my friends, is Permission, as Stirling Newberry once explained to me. It is how we determine who gets to do what. He who can create money, rules. This is more subtle than it seems, so read and weep.

It’s Not How Much Money, It’s Who We Give It to and Why

We have almost no significant problems in the world today which we could either not have fixed had we acted soon enough, or that we could not fix or mitigate today, were we to act. We don’t act because we misallocate, on a scale which would put Pyramid-building Pharoahs to shame, our social efforts.

Higher Profits Produce a Worse Society

No one ever told you that, I’m sure. Read and learn.

The Fall of the USSR

The USSR fell in large part because of constant and radical misallocation of resources. This misallocation occurred because those running the economy did not receive accurate feedback. Despite the triumphal cries of the West and the managerial class who pretend to be capitalists, a version of this exact problem is at the root of our current decline, and it would serve us well to understand how and why the USSR fell.

What Privatization Does

Of all the ideological bugaboos of our current age, one of the strongest is the idea that private enterprise is always more efficient and better. It’s not, but that belief is a very profitable to our elites, and understanding how the engine of privatization works is essential to understanding both our current economic collapse and how the fakely-bright economies of the neoliberal era–especially the early neoliberal period of Thatcher and Reagan–were generated.

What Prosperity Is and Isn’t

It is, perhaps, odd to put this article so far down the list, but it’s wonky and important and not very dramatic. Simply enough, what we define as prosperity is not prosperity, which is why we are sick, fat, and unhappy with rates of depression and mental illness and chronic disease which dwarf those of our forbears despite having so much more stuff. Fix everything else, but if we insist on continuing to produce that which makes us sick and unhappy, what we have will not be what we need or want, nor will it be, truly, prosperity worth having.

The Four Principles of Prosperity

Prosperity, at its heart, is an ethical phenomenon, as much as it is anything else. Without the right ethics, the right spirit, it will not last, nor be widespread. If we want a lasting prosperity, which is actually good for us, we will start by reforming our public ethics.

How to Create a Good Internet Economy

The internet is wonderful, but despite all the cries of “Progress, progress!” it has mostly made a few people rich, created a prosperous class of software engineers who often lose their jobs in their 50s, and has simultaneously overseen the decline of the prosperity for most people in the developed world. It has not produced the prosperity we hoped it would. Here’s why and how to fix it.

Concluding Remarks

The above is so far from comprehensive as to make me cry, but it’s a start. I do hope that you will read it and come away with a far better idea of why the economy sucks for most people, and a clearer understanding of the fact that it is intended to suck, why it is intended to suck, and how the old, better economy was lost.

(Author’s Note: This was originally published October 6, 2014. I’m putting it back up top, as I have gained many new readers since then.)

The Unemployment Rate Isn’t Used to Keep Unemployment Low (with Graph)

By

On April 13, 2018

14 Comments

Years ago, I complained to my friend Stirling Newberry that the unemployment rate didn’t seem to track how good the economy felt, or how many people were in desperate need of employment.

The unemployment rate was, then, and is now, taken as a proxy for the health of the economy for ordinary people. However, I could see and feel that the economy was getting worse for ordinary people, and that fact was showing up in other statistics. Plus, unemployment rates that were considered a crisis when I was young in the 70s, were now considered acceptable.

(See: The Economy Has Not Recovered, With Graphs)

Stirling said, “You need to know who an economic statistic is designed for, and what they use it for.”

A little history is necessary here, about inflation. In the 70s, due to the oil crisis and other mishandled economic problems, inflation got out of control in the West. Very high interest rates were used to bring it down, by Chairman Volcker at the Fed. Western policy makers became obsessed with inflation. It was considered Enemy Number One. They decided that the worst cause of inflation was wage increases and called this “wage push inflation.”

To track this, they turned to a statistic called the non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment (NAIRU). NAIRU was the rate below which the unemployment rate was assumed to cause inflation.

The unemployment figure measures the number of people actively looking for jobs, compared to those who have jobs, remember. Thus it measures the active demand, in the market, for a job. Therefore, theoretically, if there are too few people looking for jobs, employers are expected to have to raise wages to attract workers.

(This is, to be clear, when wages rise the most, which is something non-economists and non-oligarchs want to happen.)

If you are old enough, you will remember that during the 80s and 90s, and even into the 00s, when the unemployment rate would drop, the stock market would take losses. This is because stock investors expected the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates, which is bad for the economy and bad for stocks.

So, the unemployment rate from late 70s and on, has been used to determine if wages should cause inflation, and to then raise interest rates to make sure they don’t.

Not incidentally, the result is also to crush wages, because, essentially, wages that improve are nothing more than wages that increase faster than non-wage inflation.

The unemployment rate not only doesn’t measure how good the economy feels for ordinary people, it was actually used, with purposeful action, to crush wages.

You’ve all been waiting patiently for your pretty graph, so here it is.

NAIRU vs Unemployment vs Fed Funds

NAIRU (Civilian Unemployment Rate) vs Unemployment (Natural Rate of Unemployment) vs Effective Federal Funds Rate

You’ll notice that while effective federal funds rates (the green line) increase during low unemployment periods (the red line) before Volcker, it is after Volcker that they correlate strongly to whether the unemployment rate is approaching or below NAIRU. Before Volcker, the unemployment rate is often below NAIRU and people get a lot of raises.

Note, in particular, and with amusement, that the flat, blue line rate (the natural rate of unemployment) in recent years shows a period where unemployment has stayed above NAIRU. Note that Yellen started talking about increasing rates as the unemployment rate came closer to NAIRU.

Your wages were crushed, deliberately, supposedly to crush wage inflation.

And this is why unemployment doesn’t have very much to do with how the economy feels for ordinary people, especially not now (it effects how the economy feels some, but not much). Unemployment has to get below NAIRU and stay there for you to get real wages.

I will point out, for completeness, that the idea that wages are the most important source of inflation is questionable, but I’ll deal with that at a later date.

(Read: A More Detailed Look at the End of the Post-war Liberal Era)

Originally published Feb 17, 2006. Back to the top because it is an actually important post. We just recently had another case of the stock market declining due to low unemployment rate figures. This is why.

The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Yellen’s Legacy Is Doing Nothing that Mattered

By

On November 3, 2017

24 Comments

So, Janet Yellen has been replaced as Fed chair.

Her reign was meaningless, she just kept the trends moving as they were, and was essentially no help to ordinary Americans. Yes, she kept interest rates low, but that meant little; all that money flooded into corporate bank accounts.

I don’t want to slam Yellen particularly hard. The person who was in place at the time when a real change could have easily been made was Bernanke, and he decided to bail out rich people and let ordinary people sink. He is responsible, with Bush, Obama, and Geithner, for the continued decline and stagnation of the US economy, and for the damage to much of the world’s economy.

If Bernanke had done nothing but allow banks to go bankrupt and the government to take them over, with appropriate support, we would be in far better shape now, though the couple years after the financial crisis would have been worse.

Yellen? Yellen is a drone. She had no idea what to do, so she froze for years in the headlights.

The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

How Much the US Economy Has Recovered for Most Workers

By

On September 10, 2017

29 Comments

Basically, not at all.

Labor Force Participation Rate

So, around 1980, wages go off a cliff. Americans respond by increasing the number of two earner households, because from 1980 onwards, the Federal Reserve deliberately limits wage increases for most workers so they always come in under the inflation rate.

Then the 2008 financial crisis happened, and those jobs went away. Wages haven’t improved, for most people they are even or down.

In 2009, I predicted a collapse in incomes. I got it partially wrong. I held the labor force participation rate steady and expected reductions to come out of wages. Instead, the reduction came mostly from jobs just going away. (In retrospect this was a clumsy mistake.)

So, lately you’ve been hearing about how wonderful the economy is. It isn’t. It’s still shitty for most people and has been shitty since 2008.

Obama’s didn’t fix the economy. He froze it at approximately where it was after the financial collapse, minus a dead cat bounce, which is to be expected since he and the Federal Reserve and Treasury did everything they could to not allow price discovery to happen and to not allow capitalism to do one of the things it does well, when left alone: make bankrupt companies go bankrupt and wipe out bad loans.

Instead they made sure that companies and people who had caused the financial collapse, in most cases deliberately, were made whole and prevented from losing everything, while pushing the losses down onto homeowners who were minor participants compared to Wall Street and large banks.

This has played out as stagnation. It is exacerbated by a host of other issues, like monopolization, corruption and the declining era of oil, but at heart it is a simple refusal to let large, politically powerful actors take their losses and lose the economic power they misused.

Having done everything wrong from 2000 to 2008 except buy Congress, financial interests afterwards kept doing everything wrong except buying politicians, because they won big-time, and the most important rule of capitalism is: “If you’re making lots of money, keep doing what you’re doing.”

When making money is, in effect, guaranteed, capitalism stops working in anything close to a beneficial fashion.

This was, again, Obama’s decision. When TARP was first proposed it failed to pass and only did so because Obama bent arms, viciously, to make it happen. He was 100 percent on side with everything Bernanke did, and not only did nothing to stop him, but aided and abetted him in what were crimes by any reasonable definition of the word.

The economy is bad. It is has never recovered from the financial collapse, and it will not do so until both austerity and crony capitalism are dealt with.

The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Federal Reserve Seal

Trump’s Coming Confrontation with Yellen and the Federal Reserve

By

On December 15, 2016

50 Comments

Okay, so the Federal Reserve, coincidentally, now that Trump has been elected, has decided that the economy is at full employment and they’ve raised rates.

The funny thing is, it’s true. Sort of. The unemployment rate (u-1) is low enough to be considered “full employment.” What that means is that the labor market is tight enough that, for the first time in Obama’s reign, workers actually got raises in 2015.

According to the economic policy regime which has run the Federal Reserve, and the US, since Greenspan, that can’t be allowed. The moment employment starts causing “wage push inflation” (wage increases faster than the general rate of inflation) it must be stopped.

Of course, out of Obama’s era, there has been only one good year so far (though 2016 will probably come in as decent), and the only reason the unemployment rate has improved is because millions of Americans gave up on finding a job. As a percentage of the population, there are about as many jobs as there were at the bottom of the last recession.

There was quite a bit of growth, but it didn’t make it into wages. The only way it will do so is if the labor market stays tight for years, because there are years (decades, really) to make up for almost all the gains going to the top few percent.

So, Yellen probably “should” have raised rates six months or so ago. She didn’t, probably because she’s Obama’s appointee–the same way that Bernanke didn’t when he “should” have because he was Bush’s appointee, and wanted a Republican to replace Bush.

Under Barack Obama, the deficit (how much the US pays on its debt) dropped, but the debt increased by $7.917 trillion (not including the first year, which he didn’t control). The deficit dropped because the Federal Reserve kept interests rates extremely low for years and years and bought up a pile of debt as well.

But the debt is higher than it has been, in relative terms, since the WWII debt splurge. And if Yellen raises rates, debt service charges will start to increase (not immediately, much of it is in longer term instruments).

More to the point, higher interest rates are meant to make sure that wages increases stop, the unemployment rate increases, and that (in effect) the economy never actually recovers from the financial crisis.

So Trump has a problem. He needs cheap money if he’s to have a good economy, and Yellen is ending the cheap money era–just as he’s been elected.

It’s not completely a coincidence, but it’s not entirely not a coincidence, and if I were Trump or his team, I’d be livid, and it looks like they are.

Worse, Trump has a big stimulus plan. It’s a bad plan, but it’ll still create some jobs, and Yellen has said:

“I would say at this point that fiscal policy is not obviously needed to provide stimulus to help us get back to full employment,” Yellen said.

That’s Fed speak for “spend the money if you want, but we’ll neutralize every dollar you spend.” Which, by the way, has been orthodox Fed policy since Greenspan and arguably Volcker–almost 40 years.

So, Trump (and Bannon) if they want a good economy and their stimulus to work, have a problem: Yellen and the Federal Reserve Board. And Yellen has stated she won’t step down till her term ends, in 2024.

They can do two things. The first is to wait, not for Yellen, but for the terms of other Federal Reserve members, to expire. Two slots of the six (seven with Yellen) are currently empty, he can fill those. That gives him two. One, Powell, is a Republican and may be amenable; and Fischer’s term expires June 2018. So by late 2018, Trump might have a Fed willing to cooperate with him–or at least not sandbag him.

BUT that’s quite a while, and assumes that Powell is amenable. It gives Trump only two years to make the economy work how he needs it to work, and means his first two years will be sandbagged by the Fed. Trump’s followers are not going to care what the reason is, they expect results.

The other option is hardball. Governors can be removed for cause. Trump can say they have performed badly (it’s not a hard case, and people who voted Trump and many others will agree) and remove them. This can then go to the Supreme Court, which, if Trump is smart, will then be firmly in Republican hands.

I will be frank: I would absolutely do this. I would have done it as Obama to Bernanke (if Obama had actually wanted a good economy, or to have banks go under) and I would do it as Trump. For four decades, the Federal Reserve has sandbagged wages and made sure the rich got richer. This is not even in question, and the financial crisis was only the largest proof of it, not nearly the only one.

I think this is coming. The Federal Reserve bows (and Yellen has been very clear she won’t) or the resisting Governors get booted.

There will be screams from Democrats and “liberals” and I will ignore most of them. As with ending the Trans-Pacific Partnership, this is the right thing to do, and it’s something that should have been done decades ago. Appointed technocrats sandbagging Congress’s fiscal policy and deliberately crushing wages was always evil.

Get out your popcorn, folks.

Oh, and these sort of stakes are why there is such a huge effort, abetted by the CIA (and opposed by the FBI) to make sure that Trump doesn’t take office.

Like it or hate it, he’s going to have to destroy much of how DC has done business for the last 40 years, and many people in power really, really don’t want this.

Don’t defend the Federal Reserve if you claim to care about workers, the middle class, or anyone under the top 10 percent or so. They have acted unutterably evil for decades, and if it takes another evil person to destroy their power, I’m fine with it. Frankly, the Federal Reserve should be placed under direct control of Congress with four year terms at most, and every central bank in the world should lose its “independence.” They have misused that independence to do little more than make the rich richer for decades and they are profoundly anti-democratic.

It’s a pity so much that has to be done will likely be done by someone like Trump, and that he’ll do much of it the wrong way to support terrible policies like tax cuts, but that’s what happens when the Left allows the Right to be the populist party, and chooses to be the party of bailouts and technocrats.

The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Page 1 of 4

Next

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén