I live in the USA and I am concerned about the future. I created this blog to share my thoughts on the economy and anything else that might catch my attention.
Friday, April 6, 2012
2012's Bondmageddon
Click to enlarge.
Your children may now be safely released back out onto the streets (presumably to find jobs). Thanks to amiserable employment report, the bond market crisis has been averted.
Pretty good effort, the 6th ad is still something we need, though I don't know how much productivity better machine translation will actually give us. . .
I can't quantify it, but I suspect much of our productivity gains of 1995-now have come from just offshoring our work and calling the cheaper imports we get instead production while ignoring the follow-on costs of trade deficit we've eventually got to pay.
Looking at the hard goods trade, I see that since 1996 we've given them $665B of stuff and they've given us $3.2T stuff in return, a $2.5T account deficit and a wealth multiplier of ~5X.
This trade may be only 2.7% of our economy, but it's the only sector we've seen productivity gains in.
Our dominant expenses -- food (1/12th of spending), housing (1/6th of spending per that article) and health care (1/5th) are becoming less productive in dollar terms.
Without a bigger wealth pie in the future we won't be able to give the skimmers their piece so easily.
That's an interesting way to look at the trade deficit by the way. I would say it was disturbing but nearly every way of looking at the trade deficit is disturbing. So what's new? Sigh.
The 30 years of 1982-2012 was a good ride on the productivity train.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MnQ8EkwXJ0 was AT&T's predictions from 1993-94.
Pretty good effort, the 6th ad is still something we need, though I don't know how much productivity better machine translation will actually give us. . .
I can't quantify it, but I suspect much of our productivity gains of 1995-now have come from just offshoring our work and calling the cheaper imports we get instead production while ignoring the follow-on costs of trade deficit we've eventually got to pay.
Looking at the hard goods trade, I see that since 1996 we've given them $665B of stuff and they've given us $3.2T stuff in return, a $2.5T account deficit and a wealth multiplier of ~5X.
This trade may be only 2.7% of our economy, but it's the only sector we've seen productivity gains in.
Our dominant expenses -- food (1/12th of spending), housing (1/6th of spending per that article) and health care (1/5th) are becoming less productive in dollar terms.
Without a bigger wealth pie in the future we won't be able to give the skimmers their piece so easily.
And they want a big piece!
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=6hP
explores the relationship between notoional systemic interest burden (blue, currently 20% of wages) vs the prime rate (red, ~3.3%).
The prime rate rising to 8% would push the interest burden to close to 50% of wages.
That way is either Greece or 1923, dunno which really. Maybe both, as we've said.
8%
ReplyDelete10%
11%
12%
16%
34%
26%
19%
23%
26%
34%
39%
-156%
3980%
41%
52%
YOY nominal GDP growth / trade deficit with China, 1996 - 2011
Hmmmm.
^ oops, trade deficit with China / YOY nominal GDP growth
ReplyDeleteTroy,
ReplyDeleteAT&T's predictions from 1993-94
Woah! I just saw that video a few days ago when I was looking for something to post! No joke. I settled on Time Life's Mystic Places.
We must share a Daisenryaku gene and/or were separated at birth, lol.
That's an interesting way to look at the trade deficit by the way. I would say it was disturbing but nearly every way of looking at the trade deficit is disturbing. So what's new? Sigh.
ReplyDeleteAnnualized Imports from China as a % of Wage and Salary Disbursements
ReplyDelete