![](http://library.vu.edu.pk/cgi-bin/nph-proxy.cgi/000100A/https/blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjoeSQeUokhBZrQwZ3NWROyjfSOSMFDBNTpSMpQdXLM4Tq8vSCku9Nm6o103nb0mByDDpFRSWlIPJv3onVyVi1C_Rj3tefHQNtW1CT3BYVwzBdX_XFO66wJVGBSx7AL5VjvTOD_jvchFpIc/s400/Copy+of+Picture1+647.jpg)
![](http://library.vu.edu.pk/cgi-bin/nph-proxy.cgi/000100A/https/blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgeInLPy8jEb096oe7608ibCDijhOTokvTN4_LxeFQsWuIPxFrRa_ow-aH2r-BhessxI1JJCbu9EBy4PhuVUMj4chYr1WWp657FExYTKkUe7LE3FuChmQRogA2mdhRb4VQ8A4j2TXYGlbOV/s400/Copy+of+Picture1+660.jpg)
Today CBO released the Long-Term Budget Outlook. Under current law, the federal budget is on an unsustainable path—meaning that federal debt will continue to grow much faster than the economy over the long run. Although great uncertainty surrounds long-term fiscal projections, rising costs for health care and the aging of the U.S. population will cause federal spending to increase rapidly under any plausible scenario. Unless tax revenues increase just as rapidly, the rise in spending will produce growing budget deficits and accumulating debt. Large budget deficits would reduce national saving, leading to more borrowing from abroad and less domestic investment, which in turn would depress income growth in the United States.
Keeping deficits and debt from reaching levels that could cause substantial harm to the economy would require increasing revenues significantly as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), decreasing projected spending sharply, or some combination of the two. Making such changes sooner rather than later would lessen the risks that current fiscal policy poses to the economy. Although the policy choices that will be necessary are difficult, CBO’s long-term budget projections make clear that doing nothing is not an option: Legislation must ultimately be adopted that raises revenue or reduces spending or both. Moreover, delaying action simply exacerbates the challenge, as is discussed in the report.
I ran some of the current numbers from the CBO's historical data series. Here are the relevant charts (click for a larger image):
Real gross domestic product -- the output of goods and services produced by labor and property located in the United States -- decreased at an annual rate of 5.5 percent in the first quarter of 2009, (that is, from the fourth quarter to the first quarter), according to final estimates released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the fourth quarter, real GDP decreased 6.3 percent.
Real nonresidential fixed investment decreased 37.3 percent, compared with a decrease of 21.7 percent. Nonresidential structures decreased 42.9 percent, compared with a decrease of 9.4 percent. Equipment and software decreased 33.7 percent, compared with a decrease of 28.1 percent. Real residential fixed investment decreased 38.8 percent, compared with a decrease of 22.8 percent.
Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in April suggests that the pace of economic contraction is slowing. Conditions in financial markets have generally improved in recent months. Household spending has shown further signs of stabilizing but remains constrained by ongoing job losses, lower housing wealth, and tight credit. Businesses are cutting back on fixed investment and staffing but appear to be making progress in bringing inventory stocks into better alignment with sales. Although economic activity is likely to remain weak for a time, the Committee continues to anticipate that policy actions to stabilize financial markets and institutions, fiscal and monetary stimulus, and market forces will contribute to a gradual resumption of sustainable economic growth in a context of price stability.
The prices of energy and other commodities have risen of late. However, substantial resource slack is likely to dampen cost pressures, and the Committee expects that inflation will remain subdued for some time.
In these circumstances, the Federal Reserve will employ all available tools to promote economic recovery and to preserve price stability. The Committee will maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and continues to anticipate that economic conditions are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for an extended period. As previously announced, to provide support to mortgage lending and housing markets and to improve overall conditions in private credit markets, the Federal Reserve will purchase a total of up to $1.25 trillion of agency mortgage-backed securities and up to $200 billion of agency debt by the end of the year. In addition, the Federal Reserve will buy up to $300 billion of Treasury securities by autumn. The Committee will continue to evaluate the timing and overall amounts of its purchases of securities in light of the evolving economic outlook and conditions in financial markets. The Federal Reserve is monitoring the size and composition of its balance sheet and will make adjustments to its credit and liquidity programs as warranted.
New orders for manufactured durable goods in May increased $2.8 billion or 1.8 percent to $163.9 billion, the U.S. Census Bureau announced today. This was the third increase in the last four months and followed a 1.8 percent April increase. Excluding transportation, new orders increased 1.1 percent. Excluding defense, new orders also increased 1.4 percent.
The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development said Wednesday that developed economies will shrink less sharply this year than it previously expected, and will grow next year.
The projection was the first upward revision to the OECD's growth forecasts since June 2007, before the financial crisis began. The International Monetary Fund is likely to follow suit when it releases new forecasts July 7.
First things first. It’s important to realize that there’s no hint of inflationary pressures in the economy right now. Consumer prices are lower now than they were a year ago, and wage increases have stalled in the face of high unemployment. Deflation, not inflation, is the clear and present danger.
So if prices aren’t rising, why the inflation worries? Some claim that the Federal Reserve is printing lots of money, which must be inflationary, while others claim that budget deficits will eventually force the U.S. government to inflate away its debt.
The first story is just wrong. The second could be right, but isn’t.
Now, it’s true that the Fed has taken unprecedented actions lately. More specifically, it has been buying lots of debt both from the government and from the private sector, and paying for these purchases by crediting banks with extra reserves. And in ordinary times, this would be highly inflationary: banks, flush with reserves, would increase loans, which would drive up demand, which would push up prices.
But these aren’t ordinary times. Banks aren’t lending out their extra reserves. They’re just sitting on them — in effect, they’re sending the money right back to the Fed. So the Fed isn’t really printing money after all.
Still, don’t such actions have to be inflationary sooner or later? No. The Bank of Japan, faced with economic difficulties not too different from those we face today, purchased debt on a huge scale between 1997 and 2003. What happened to consumer prices? They fell.
Rather, it’s more like a grand version of what the Fed does every Christmas season. The Fed always puts more currency into circulation during this prime shopping period because people demand it, and then withdraws the “excess” currency in January.
True inflation hawks worry about that last step. (Did someone say, “Bah, humbug”?) Will the Fed really withdraw all those reserves fast enough as the financial storm abates? If not, we could indeed experience inflation. Although the Fed is not infallible, I’d make three important points:
•
The possibilities for error are two-sided. Yes, the Fed might err by withdrawing bank reserves too slowly, thereby leading to higher inflation. But it also might err by withdrawing reserves too quickly, thereby stunting the recovery and leading to deflation. I fail to see why advocates of price stability should worry about one sort of error but not the other.
•
The Fed is well aware of the exit problem. It is planning for it, is competent enough to carry out its responsibilities and has committed itself to an inflation target of just under 2 percent. Of course, none of that assures us that the Fed will hit the bull’s-eye. It might miss and produce, say, inflation of 3 percent or 4 percent at the end of the crisis — but not 8 or 10 percent.
•
The Fed will start the exit process when the economy is still below full employment and inflation is below target. So some modest rise in inflation will be welcome. The Fed won’t have to clamp down hard.
As capital became increasingly hard to come by, and uncertainty soared about future demand, there was a sharp decline in production of manufactured goods, and in global trade in these goods. The level of industrial production in rich countries has dropped by 15 percent since August 2008, and that in developing countries, excluding China, by 10 percent.
GDP growth in developing countries is expected to slow sharply, from 5.9 percent in 2008 to 1.2 percent in 2009. However, their performance surpasses rich countries, whose collective GDP is expected to fall 4.5 percent in 2009. Notably, when India and China are removed from the total, developing countries as a group will experience a contraction in GDP of 1.6 percent, a real setback for poverty reduction.
Global GDP growth is expected to rebound to 2% in 2010 and 3.2% by 2011. In developing countries growth is expected to be higher, at 4.4 % in 2010 and 5.7 % in 2011, albeit subdued relative to the robust performance before the current crisis.
.....
Developing countries are likely to face a dismal external financing climate in 2009, according to the GDF. With private capital flows declining dramatically, many countries will find it difficult to meet their external financing needs, estimated at $1 trillion.
Private debt and equity flows will likely fall short of meeting the external financing needs of developing countries by a wide margin, amounting to a gap estimated to range between $350 billion and $635 billion. Capital flows from official sources, plus tapping foreign reserves, will help fill the gap in some countries, but in others, there will—of necessity—be sharp and abrupt macro adjustments.
Executives in charge of the largest US companies sent a signal of their concerns by selling far more shares than they bought this month, according to data based on Securities and Exchange Commission filings.
Share sales by so-called company insiders are outstripping purchases so far this month by more than 22 times. TrimTabs, the investment research company, said insiders of S&P 500 listed companies have unloaded $2.6bn in shares in June, compared with $120m in purchases.
“The smartest players in the US stock market – the top insiders who run public companies – are not betting their own money on an economic recovery,” said Charles Biderman, chief executive of TrimTabs.
No indicator is fool-proof, and no indicator is 100% accurate. But this is a really important sign that the market has probably topped out for now. The people who have access to confidential sales and financial informaiton are dumping shares. That's not good.