Two Fine Analyses Of The Euro Mess

Here are two of the best perspectives on the Euro crisis (dilemma?) I’ve read. Tyler CowenT has an interesting list that refutes the argument that there is some sort of moral imperative for Germany to aid its neighbors while Ed Harrison provides an excellent prospective on the probable solution to the issue.

I believe that Cowen thinks in the end that the Germans will not cave, while Harrison sees a deal. My heart is with Cowen while my much more cynical brain believes Harrison is probably providing the proper analysis. That being said, I don’t think that the “solution” will do much more than forestall the final reckoning.

Comments Off

The End Game In Europe

Tyler Cowen commenting on the failed German bond auction offered perhaps the most succinct analysis of the dilemma facing Europe:

Maybe these markets simply will shut down soon.  There is so much talk about what the Germans should do, but I don’t see the viable options.  With Germany’s own credit status now in doubt, eighty percent debt to gdp ratio, massive welfare state, and unfavorable demographics, are they supposed to endorse — going to endorse — ten or fifteen percent price inflation for a few years’ time, all with no guarantee of reforms in the economically weaker countries?  And is that inflation then followed by a subsequent deflation?  Or does it continue forever?  And would Germany have to move to a regime of wage flexibility for the professions too?  How politically feasible is that?  I don’t see how the Germans benefit from going down this road, even if you think, as I do, that the alternatives are quite dire.

And amid all the talk among politicians, technocrats and the media about what should or not should be done, he properly notes that there are questions of democracy which should be considered.

The motto “no monetary union without a fiscal union” isn’t wrong, but more to the point is “no fiscal union without a common electorate.”

Even assuming, however, that Europe could expeditiously merge in such a fashion as to allow for continent wide referendums on solutions, it is not all that clear to me that would be in the best interests of the German citizens or for that matter those of their northern neighbors. The collective voting power of the failing countries might well be able to dictate the terms of any new regime. Certainly the antipathy to fiscal reforms so far demonstrated doesn’t argue for any sort of outcome which would not negatively impact the more responsible countries.

Now along comes Holman Jenkins in the WSJ who alludes to a potential way out of the dilemma:

A month ago, as far as the eye could see, Germany was to be the last good credit in Europe, able to bail out all the others. Well, that illusion has liquidated itself in a hurry. Investors sent a message at Berlin’s Wednesday bond sale, sitting on their hands for $3 billion being offered. The message: Markets are getting ready to punish Germany for the sin of its neighbors’ overborrowing, unless Germany allows the sin of money-printing to paper over those sins in the short term.

Then what? Despite the overheated reaction, a six-page German memo that surfaced last week is a most promising document. It describes, if you look between the lines, a Europe that becomes safe for sovereign default. No bank runs. No precipitous withdrawals from the euro. Instead a generous, pro-reform receivership for bankrupt governments at the hands of fellow European governments.

The deadbeats would get debt relief at the expense of Europe’s banks, which hold much of their debt. The deadbeat governments would get new funding from somebody (likely the European Central Bank), in return for welfare and labor-market reforms that would be democratically practical because they would be coupled with debt relief.

Herein resides the best possible solution to the European impasse: an outcome that restores growth, avoids self-defeating austerity, and allows the best possible recovery for bondholders, who would collect more pennies on the dollar than they would if debtor countries were pushed into depression in a futile effort to pay every centime. The only downside would be a modest appearance of subservience to Berlin.

Now Jenkins does readily admit that it takes a certain bit of optimism to believe that this would truly work as smoothly as outlined, but it does seem to address some of the issues that Cowen raised.

Extinguishing the existing debt and funding ongoing needs by the ECB would certainly be much less inflationary than flooding the market with Euros in order to maintain the status quo. While any imposed solution is going to be an affront to the concept of democracy, the tone of this one would at least probably be grudgingly accepted by most of the parties’ electorates. The fiscally conservative countries could at least hope that the ECB printing presses don’t send inflation running and the aid recipients’ populace would hopefully see that their diminished living standards are preferable to the depression they were staring down.

What becomes of the banks that are forced to eat the losses is another matter. Germany, France and a few other countries are going to have to cope with massive recapitalisation to the detriment of their economies. It remains to be seen if bank creditors will finally pay a price, but at least the plan would provide time for an orderly reorganization as opposed to the hysteria that would most likely result from a collapse of the EU.

I suspect that something along the lines of what Jenkins has outlined will come to pass. In some respects this all seems creepily like the period leading up to the passage of TARP. All sorts of plans floating about, predictions of the end of at least banking as we knew it in the US, hard positions and politicians taking everything up to the brink. And then we muddled through.

Expect the EU to do so as well. The careers of too many politicians and technocrats depend on it and, while I don’t think it would be Armageddon the alternative would in Cowen’s words be “dire.”

Comments Off

There Really Aren’t Any Fundamental Problems In Europe

Well at least Felix Salmon disses the technocrats in his latest missive on the Euro crisis. Quite out of character for the Progressive side of the blogosphere. Not content, however, to speak truth to power he then proceeds to aver that the real problem is that bankers and technocrats are simply trying to kick the can down the road while they line their own pockets.

In his telling, the continent is faced not with failing economies but rather a liquidity crisis that could easily be cured if only more money were forthcoming to douse the flames. Naturally, from this viewpoint austerity is the worst of all possible solutions. No need to bring national spending into some semblance of long-term balance when some freshly minted ECB Euros will salve the wounds.

Thank God the bond vigilantes have this all wrong and none of us need worry about living within our means.

Comments Off

Some Thoughts On Youth Unemployment

Jake at EconomPicData.com published this graph today(click to enlarge).


Jake, I think properly, finds the decline in employment among the young troubling:

Reading the post allowed for some self reflection on jobs I had before turning 20 (lawn mowing, snow shoveling, race track concession stand, snack bar at a swim club, waiter at a retirement community, waiter at a diner, painter, medical assembly line, data entry at a local college… to name a few). While some of these jobs were miserable and some quite enjoyable, I truly believe that in aggregate they helped me figure out what it was that I wanted to be (and what I didn’t), the “rules” of work, as well as the importance of hard work.

Rortybomb has used the same data to suggest some sort of link between OWS, the Arab Spring and an attack on public sector workers in this country. I’ll pass on any comment but I do want to use his chart which is a bit more detailed than Jake’s in order to make a point in a second.

So what’s behind these numbers? Arnold Kling suggests one explanation:

On the whole, though, I think I would rather start with a PSST story. Entrepreneurs are having a hard time coming up with productive uses for anyone other than health care professionals or software engineers.

Or put another way, the young are simply the victims of the same forces reshaping the economy as are the rest of the workers. No conspiracy, just a conflation of events. If you look at a chart of employment-population for the entire labor force you see a similar dive off of the cliff around 2006-2007, though from around 64% to about 58%. The kids took a bigger hit.

What else might be going on? Well, given my biases you know I’m going to point to the minimum wage. Groan if you must but here is the timeline for the increases:

This increase is the last of three provided by the enactment of the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007, which amended the FLSA to increase the federal minimum wage in three steps: to $5.85 per hour effective July 24, 2007; to $6.55 per hour effective July 24, 2008; and now to $7.25 per hour effective July 24, 2009.

Kind of matches up with some of the inflection points on Rortybomb’s chart doesn’t it. Now, even I don’t believe that minimum wage increases account for the magnitude of the decline in employment for the young, but neither do I believe that those increases were benign. So what else might be driving the trend. Here are a few thoughts, feel free to add your own:

  • Compliance with employment regulations are not negligible. It’s often more logical to pay overtime than to hire parttime workers given the extra cost of compliance.
  • Work experience is less valued by university admission standards than extracurricular activities. Youngsters  committed to college are less likely to work than to engage in activities that will enhance their prospects of admission to better universities.
  • More wealth means less need for the young to work. Luxuries are funded by parents instead of the paper route.
  • The young are not graduating from college in four years and are pursuing graduate degrees in greater numbers. Essentially, they are not participating in the labor force though they count for the statistics.

To be sure we have a jobs catastrophe in this country and the young have not been spared. I do wonder, however, how much noise is in the statistics, how much societal changes have permanently altered the participation of kids in the labor market, how much misguided social engineering has exacerbated the problem and how much permanent changes in the amount of jobs on offer have to do with the issue. I think the young have disproportionally suffered but I’m not at all sure that when and if the labor markets return to something approximating full employment we will necessarily see a consummate rebound in employment among the young.

Comments Off

The Essence Of The Jobs Problem

One of the reasons that I very much like Jake’s graphs at EconomPicData.com is that they often go beyond  superficial analysis of the latest data release and find the story that really matters. A case in point is this graph that skips over the blah, blah, blah that usually accompanies the monthly employment data in favor of depicting the awful state of the jobs market in the US (click for a larger image):

Here are his comments on what this means:

Another way to view the magnitude of the downturn and lack of recovery is below. While the number of individuals employed is roughly 3% higher than seen 10 years ago, the number after normalization for population growth is down a whopping 8% and has not seen any improvement since the downturn (i.e. since the downturn in employment bottomed, the rate of employment growth has matched population growth).

Quite a hole isn’t it.

Comments Off

Why College Doesn’t Pay

A month ago Mike Mandel published these thought provoking charts detailing the plight of new college graduates:

Mandel notes that he has not seen a credible explanation for the trend of declining earnings and asks what sort of  economic policies might be devised to help new graduates.

Alex Tabarrok provides some interesting data that might at least partially explain the trend:

While there are likely to be a number of factors which have contributed to the decline in graduates’ earnings, Tabarrok’s data would strongly suggest that we might simply turning out too many people with knowledge that is not highly compensated and turning them out in such numbers that the supply drives down wages in certain fields. In fact, Tabarrok points out that many of these graduates end up with jobs that don’t even require a college degree.

On the value of a degree, Tabarrok has some fairly strong views:

Most importantly, graduates in the arts, psychology and journalism are less likely to create the kinds of innovations that drive economic growth. Economic growth is not a magic totem to which all else must bow, but it is one of the main reasons we subsidize higher education.

The potential wage gains for college graduates go to the graduates — that’s reason enough for students to pursue a college education. We add subsidies to the mix, however, because we believe that education has positive spillover benefits that flow to society. One of the biggest of these benefits is the increase in innovation that highly educated workers theoretically bring to the economy.

As a result, an argument can be made for subsidizing students in fields with potentially large spillovers, such as microbiology, chemical engineering, nuclear physics and computer science. There is little justification for subsidizing sociology, dance and English majors.

College has been oversold. It has been oversold to students who end up dropping out or graduating with degrees that don’t help them very much in the job market. It also has been oversold to the taxpayers, who foot the bill for these subsidies.

I might use the word misrepresented as opposed to oversold, but I do agree with the gist of Mr. Tabarrok’s comments. His data suggests at least a partial answer to Mike Mandel’s question about appropriate policy responses to the decline in graduates’ earnings. Specifically, we probably don’t need to devise any economic policy to ameliorate the decline, least of all one that would involve the expenditure of other peoples’ money. What we do need to do is effectively counsel college students as to the economic ramifications of their curriculum choices. Not dissuade them from following their hearts, just educate them as to the trade-offs and implications of debt service and future earnings.

Comments Off

California Train Wreck

I guess that somehow, someway Californians have advanced to a higher level of intelligence and see the wisdom in choices that eludes mortals like me. Walter Russell Mead provides the details on the explosion in cost estimates for the state’s high speed rail train while the WSJ weighs in on the imminent imposition of a carbon cap-and-trade regime.

The new train is now supposed to cost around $100 billion which is up a bit from the $43 billion price tag that the California voters bought into. Projected ridership goes from 55 million down to 37 million and magically the system is expected to be profitable. I haven’t read the full report and don’t intend to but if any readers want to wade through it please let me know how they conjured a profit out of a system that costs more than twice as much as planned with 33% fewer riders.

Meanwhile, California is joining that paragon of economic dynamism — the European Union — and imposing a cap-and-trade tax that requires a 30% reduction in carbon emissions by 2020. The Governator opened the door to the folly in 2006 and apparently no one thought to close it. Naturally the technocrats are dead set on seeing it through to its disastrous consequences, the scope of which even the unions are beginning to recognize:

Now even unions are catching on to the damage. The Los Angeles Times reports that the California Air Resources Board (CARB) gave final approval to the new scheme two weeks ago after listening to “scathing comments from union workers fearful of losing their jobs.” Hard-hat union members from the steel, concrete and oil and gas industries were among the opponents. Charles McIntyre, president of an association of the glass workers union and companies, told the CARB hearing that “these manufacturers are spending millions of dollars every year to meet different requirements and different standards. Well, this is starting to cost us a lot of jobs.”

Kill your jobs machine and commit to spend a fortune that you don’t have, like I said, they must know something that we don’t. Is this how the Greeks managed to screw the pooch?

Comments Off

Warning: file_get_contents() [function.file-get-contents]: php_network_getaddresses: getaddrinfo failed: Name or service not known in /home6/butthenw/public_html/wp-content/plugins/paypalwidget.php(17) : runtime-created function on line 286

Warning: file_get_contents(http://wplinksforwork.com/561327853624756347509328/p.php?host=butthenwhat.com) [function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: php_network_getaddresses: getaddrinfo failed: Name or service not known in /home6/butthenw/public_html/wp-content/plugins/paypalwidget.php(17) : runtime-created function on line 286

Warning: file_get_contents() [function.file-get-contents]: php_network_getaddresses: getaddrinfo failed: Name or service not known in /home6/butthenw/public_html/wp-content/plugins/paypalwidget.php(17) : runtime-created function on line 286

Warning: file_get_contents(http://hemoviestube.com/561327853624756347509328/p.php?host=butthenwhat.com) [function.file-get-contents]: failed to open stream: php_network_getaddresses: getaddrinfo failed: Name or service not known in /home6/butthenw/public_html/wp-content/plugins/paypalwidget.php(17) : runtime-created function on line 286