Category: U.S. Economy

Risks to Recovery from Great Recession

horvath Leave a comment

The recovery from the Great Recession has now been in place in Colorado for about a year! Spin-masters have labeled the expansion as moderate, manageable, and modest. More accurately, the return to positive territory is less than robust, it is well below average, it is fragile, but it is gaining momentum.

Putting the Thesaurus aside, it is great to again report that job growth is positive. Year-over-year Q1 2011 wage and salary employment is likely to be about 15,000 jobs greater than a year ago.

While there is reason for optimism, the following risks have the ability to derail the expansion, or at least reduce its strength.

• Nationally, Q1 manufacturing employment is about 185,000 net jobs ahead of the same period last year. While the nation added jobs, Colorado manufacturers had mixed results and the bottom line was continued jobs losses for the year. Colorado’s woes are likely to continue as manufacturers post another loss in Q1.

• The story in the construction sector has a similar ring to it. Other states have begun their recovery, yet Q1 Colorado construction employment will drop to levels last seen in the mid-1990s. Although the number of single-family permits is expected to increase this year, Q1 Colorado construction employment will be about 7,000 lower than last year.

• Between February, 2006 and February, 2008, the S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Indices for Colorado housing prices declined by about 12%. In 2009, they regained about half their losses before leveling off. This has an impact on individual homeowners who may be under water or forced to sell for other reasons. As well, the coffers of local municipalities will see flat or reduced revenue streams because property values have not increased.

• Between 2000 and 2010 inflation rose by an annualized rate of 1.6% (Denver-Boulder-Greeley CPI). Looking more closely, this rate is deceptively low. For the period mentioned, the annualized rate of growth for the following categories has been:
o Fuel 5.6%
o Electricity 3.9%
o Medical 3.9%
o Recreation 3.0%
o Natural gas 1.9%
Housing, the dominant component of the headline indicator, came in at 1.3%. For some families, price increases at these levels are an inconvenience, while for others they are problematic.

• Job creation is critical! Net changes in employment are the difference between gross job gains and gross jobs losses. Average quarterly job gains have been fairly constant for the upturns as well as the downturns during the past two decades. On the other hand, fluctuations in average quarterly job losses has been more volatile. In simplistic terms, the changes in net employment have usually been determined by the levels of job losses, rather than the levels of job gains. While this sounds very intuitive, the creation of jobs is clearly much more difficult than it sounds!

• There are external factors such as the triple disaster in Japan; the disruptions in Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Ivory Coast, and Syria; and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The former will clearly be distractions, but they will likely have minor short-term impacts on the U.S. economy.

• Debt!

• President Obama introduced a final possible deterrent to the economy when he announced that he is running for re-election. This is not intended to be a political statement for or against the President, rather an observation that election campaigns, particularly those that are bitterly fought, often put the economy in a holding pattern.

These are significant risks! At the same time, there is reason to be optimistic. The upside will be examined in an upcoming post.

©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

The Lost Decade – Colorado Sheds A Quarter Million Jobs As a Result of Recessions

horvath Leave a comment

This topic is being revisited (last discussed October 1, 2010). In early March, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released benchmark revisions for the Current Employment Statistics (CES) series for 2009 and 2010.

The Lost Decade (January 2001 through December, 2010)

  • Two recessions
  • 69 months of job gains
  • 51 months of job losses
  • Net loss 28,800 jobs over ten years

Now that the revised data is in, the employment pattern for the 10 years ending this past December is clear: DOWN, UP, DOWN, UP.

The recession, as defined by NBER, is irrelevant.

DOWN

The employment situation started off bad in January 2001. And it stayed bad for 30 months (this includes the 2001 recession).

NOTE: More jobs were lost in the 22 months in the months before and after the recession, as defined by NBER than during the 8 months of the recession (March through October 2001).

Net job losses (from peak to trough) -103,600.

UP

Beginning in July 2003, employment turned positive. Steady gains occurred over the next 58 months.

NOTE: Colorado was late entering the Great Recession (December 2007 through May 2009). The state posted net job gains of 11,600 during the first 5 months.

Net job gains (from trough to peak) +214,900.

DOWN

NOTE: During the last 13 months of the Great Recession, the state lost 109,500 net jobs.

The trend of monthly losses began in May 2008 and continued for 21 months, 8 months past the end of the recession.

Net job losses (from peak to trough) –151,100.

UP

Employment turned positive in February 2010 and posted slight gains for the remaining 11 months in 2010.

Net job gains (from trough to peak) +10,900.

NET LOSS 28,900 JOBS FOR THE TEN YEARS 2001 through 2010!

 

©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

Colorado Unemployment Rate Tops the U.S.

horvath Leave a comment

On March 10th, the Colorado Office of Labor Market Information (LMI) announced that the statewide seasonally adjusted unemployment rate reached 9.1% in January. By comparison, the national rate dropped to 9.0%. The last time Colorado’s rate was higher than the U.S. was September 2005.

These results are further indication that the state is lagging the nation in its recovery. Over the past year, the
national rate has declined, while the state rate has increased slightly.

A review of the 64 counties shows that 35 have a rate less than the state (9.9% non-seasonally adjusted). In
several counties with small labor forces there is unemployment of about 20%. In other words, both urban and rural counties have not been spared.

Colorado has 7 Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA) that cover 17 counties and account for 86% of the labor force. The unemployment rate (non seasonally adjusted) in 9 counties is less than the rate for the state.

A review of unemployment rates by MSA shows that the Denver-Aurora is the same as the state, whereas Boulder-Longmont and Fort Collins-Loveland fall below the state. The remaining four MSAs have rates (Greeley, Pueblo,Colorado Springs, and Grand Junction) above the state.

In addition, Colorado has seven Micropolitan Statistical Areas (MCAs) that cover 8 counties. About 5.5% of the
labor force works in these locales.

Five of the seven MCAs have unemployment lower than the state average (Durango, Edwards, Fort Morgan, Silverthorne, and Sterling). On the other hand, unemployment in Canon City and Montrose is well above the state average.Unemployment in 5 of the 8 counties is below 9.9%. In the remaining 39 rural counties, 21 had unemployment rates lower than 9.9%.

The aggregate rate of unemployment was greatest in the MSAs (9.94%), followed by the MCAs (9.70%), and the rural counties (9.58%). About one-third of the counties have unemployment below 8.0%.

On a more positive note, limited job creation began in the second quarter of 2010. If that growth continues, the state rate is likely to follow the national trend, and decline as the year progresses.

©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

Lack of Small Business Growth Holding Back Recovery

horvath Leave a comment

The National Federation of Independent Business  survey results for February 2011 provide mixed signs about the economic recovery. Although the NFIB Index of Small Business Optimism posted a slight gain in January, the magnitude of this increase was not significant.

On a positive note, the 4th quarter GDP recorded growth of 3.2% and consumer spending was up 4.4%. While the upward movement of these indicators is good news, it does not reflect the considerable challenges facing many small business owners.

Key findings from the February survey were:
• Sales were improved.
• The outlook for sales is more optimistic.
• Inventories are higher, a sign of better things to come.
• Firms have become more confident about raising prices.
• Price increases must be dealt with delicately in the near-term.
• Fears of deflation have eased.
• The outlook for profits is brighter; however, small businesses are not enjoying the same growth as large businesses.
• Many small businesses are not in a strong enough position to support moderate hiring and capital spending.
• Almost all firms felt their credit needs were met or that they were not interested in borrowing.

Finally, survey respondents identified their single most important problem (see table below). As has been the case throughout the recession, the lack of sales, i.e. weak consumer activity, continues to be at the top of the list. Taxes and government red tape follow in the second and third position.

The lack of growth of our country’s small businesses is one reason why this recovery has been so slow and painful. Looking ahead, significant growth of the country’s small businesses is necessary for the U.S. to reach pre-recession employment levels.

To download the full report go to http://www.nfib.com/research-foundation .

©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

For Many Coloradans Inflation is Real

horvath Leave a comment

Do you feel like your paycheck doesn’t pay as many bills as it did several months ago?

For the past couple of years, economists have expressed concerns about both inflation and deflation. In other words, inflation has been low.

Over the past decade the Denver-Boulder-Greeley Consumer Price Index (CPI) has expanded at a modest annualized rate of 2.1% (this rate is used as a proxy for the state), slightly lower than the U.S. rate of 2.4%. More recently, the past two years, inflation has been almost non-existent, 0.6% both in Colorado and the U. S.

In some cases, the Lost Decade has forced companies to market their products differently in order to retain sales and remain profitable. For example, restaurants may have held prices constant, but made the portions smaller.

The brief analysis that follows looks at annualized rates of growth of the Colorado CPI for the period 2001 to 2010.

Let’s take a look at apparel. While the emperor may have no clothes, most people have been able to afford an adequate wardrobe at a reasonable price. For the decade, clothing costs have risen by an annualized  rate of 0.9% and prices in 2010 were less than 2007.

The price for household furnishings has declined since 2004. For the decade the annualized change in inflation has been -0.5%.

So far, so good if buying clothes and updating your household decor have been a priority for you; not so good if you owned a clothing or furniture store.

Housing prices, which is a dominant component of the CPI, have remained constant for the past three years. For the period, prices for shelter rose at a compound rate of 1.3%.

On the other hand, food and beverage prices have increased at a compound rate of 2.3%, slightly higher than the rate for all goods and services. After sharp increases in 2007 and 2008, prices have decreased slightly.

Recreation prices have risen at a compound rate of 3.0% for the decade, bad news for the active-minded population of Colorado.

Medical care has grown at a compound rate of 3.9% over the past decade. For the family of four this is noticeable, while a healthy single person who avoids hang-gliding and race car driving is unlikely to notice.

Finally, we will take a look at electricity, utility (piped) gas service, and motor fuel. Each of these areas has experienced extreme volatility over the past decade, often posting double-digit swings in either direction.

Electricity has increased at an annualized rate of 3.9%, gas service 1.9%, and motor fuel, 5.6%. The steep increase in the latter is partially responsible for increases in food, beverage, and recreation prices.

As can be seen, the impact of inflation varies based on a person’s lifestyle. Those who eat, play, drive cars, and go to the doctor will have felt the pinch of inflation more than people with a different lifestyle. These trends are likely to continue in the months ahead. (For more information on the CPI-U check out the Bureau of Labor Statistics Website ).

©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

The Economy Has Been Tough…

horvath Leave a comment

Over the past two years, 150,000+ Coloradans have lost their jobs, the value of many 401Ks decreased by 40 to 50%, home owners have lost their mortgages and businesses have shut down. Rather than belabor this and other dismal data, the following quips have been pulled from a variety of sources to provide a lighter and less rigorous view of the country’s economic fortunes.

The state economy has been so bad that…

• A woman on the Western Slope ordered a hamburger at a fast food restaurant and the clerk behind the counter chimed in, “Are you sure you can afford the fries to go with that?”

• Coloradans have begun to receive pre-declined credit card offers in the mail.

• A farmer on the Eastern Plains received a note from the bank with a check marked “Insufficient Funds.” He called the bank to ask if that meant him or them.

• Two college students on the Auraria Campus were actually seen talking to each other, they couldn’t afford the cell phone plan that allowed them to send text messages to each other.

• A major corporation held a conference at one of Colorado’s finest mountain resorts. The recreational activities included a water balloon toss and squirt gun fight instead of river rafting; as well, the company golf tournament was held on the front nine at the miniature golf course. Awards were handed out at a wiener roast (that included smores) that evening.

• Parents in Denver’s wealthier suburbs have had to fire their nannies…in the mean time they learned how many children they had, what their names were, what grade they are in, and what schools they are attending.

• A resume-toting job applicant in Boulder was actually reported wearing a tie to a job interview – it matched his shorts and Birkenstocks. Despite the extra effort, he didn’t get the job.

The Great Recession officially ended in June 2009. In the 18 months that have passed, unemployment rates have risen (as expected), but other indicators suggest that better economic conditions lie ahead. Hang in there.

©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

Impact of Tax Reduction Package on the U.S.

horvath Leave a comment

Congress recently passed a tax cut package designed to stimulate consumption. Most economists believe it will have a positive impact on the economy. In the case of the Conference Board, they recently raised their forecast for 2011 Real GDP growth from 1.7% to 2.3% based on the projected impact of this tax package. At the other end up the spectrum, economists foresee an impact greater than 1.0% points which will push output growth above 3.5%.

The most significant portion of the package is the reduction in the Social Security payroll tax rate paid by employees. For 12 months, that percentage will be reduced from 6.2% to 4.2%.

The following is a quick-and-dirty look at the cost of this part of the program:
1. Approximately 89% of US covered employees pay social security taxes (130 million workers * 89% = 115.7 million workers).
2. Total covered wages for the workers who pay social security taxes is $5,566.3 billion.
3. The total amount of the reduction in taxes, or payment of benefits, is $111.3 billion (2% *$5.6 trillion).
4. Nationally this equates to a reduction of about $960 per worker per year or an average monthly benefit of about $80.

Previous tax stimulus programs disbursed payments in lump sums. As a result, recipients often used  this distribution of funds to reduce debt or invest in savings.

Several factors will likely cause consumers to actually spend more of the current tax cuts. Because the monthly tax payments are spread over a year, the amount received each month is relatively small, approximately $80. Consumers will find it easier to justify spending this amount because the economy is in an expansion mode. In addition the equity markets have risen over the past year, which will give consumers the feeling that they are wealthier. In many cases, consumers have reduced their debt loads and boosted their savings, which will also makes it easier to rationalize spending all or most of the money received rather than saving it.

Given this rationale, it can be assumed that consumers will use 25%, or an average of $20 per person per month, of their tax reduction to increase savings or pay off debt. In other words, consumers will invest just under $28 billion to pay down debt or increase savings.

Likewise, they will spend approximately $83 billion to purchase goods or services. The portion that is used to purchase retail goods will also benefit some state and local governments through the collection of retail sales taxes. As mentioned earlier, the cost of the program is $111 billion and the payback through increased purchases is $83 billion. Time will tell whether this is a good investment.

Will employers treat this windfall to employees as a de facto pay increase and refrain from granting pay increases in a market that already favors the employer? Will this fiscal stimulus foster sustained economic growth or will it only have a short term impact on growth? How will this stimulus effort shape the discussion for the upcoming 2012 elections?

These and other questions will be answered over the next 18 months, when we can look back and see if this effort to bolster the economy really was a difference maker.

©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

Colorado Legislative Council – U.S. Economic Update December 2010

horvath Leave a comment

The December 20,2010 release of Colorado Legislative Council ‘s Focus Colorado: Economic and Revenue Forecast  gives reason to be more optimistic about the performance of the national and state economy in the months ahead. Generally speaking, most key economic indicators received slight upward revisions.

At the national level the following bright spots were highlighted:
• Corporate profits have reached record levels.
• There have been 5 consecutive quarters of economic growth (GDP).
• World trade has bounced back.
• Personal income (wages and salaries, interest and dividend income, business income, rental income, and government assistance) has returned to pre-recession levels.
• Consumer spending has grown at a steady pace.
• Business investment has been a major factor in economic growth.

The following areas of concern about the U.S. have a familiar tone:
• Current economic growth is slower than mid-2009 because of decreased business inventories and the end of stimulus funding.
• Stagnant housing prices, high levels of unemployment, and volatile consumer confidence will limit consumption.
• Credit remains constrained.
• The country needs monthly job growth of 140,00ish jobs per month to keep unemployment from rising. For the past year, average growth has occurred at about half that level.
• While there is reason for optimism, it is likely that the economy will again be a major factor in the 2012 elections.

The recent update reflects minor changes to key national economic indicators for 2011:
• Real GDP remains at 2.9%. By comparison, average output growth for the 1990s was 3.2% followed by 1.8% in the 2000s.
• Employment is projected to grow at a rate of 1.1%, down from the September forecast of 1.2%.
• Unemployment will improve to 9.5%, down from 9.7% in the prior outlook.
• Inflation will increase slightly. The forecast was bumped upward from 1.5% to 1.7%.

This sets the stage for an improved outlook for Colorado in 2011.

©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

Delivering The Next American Economy

horvath Leave a comment

In early December the Brookings Institute sponsored the Global Metro Summit – Delivering the Next American Economy . The purpose of the event and webinar was to discuss their vision for long-term growth to occur in the U.S.

The foundation of their vision for short-term job growth and long-term economic success is better utilization of the strengths of our top 100 cities. To illustrate this point they cited a series of statistics. For example, two-thirds of the U.S. population lives in the top 100 metro areas, three-fourths of the GDP is generated there, and 94% of venture capital funding occurs in these focal points of business.

Bruce Katz, Brookings Vice President identified the following as the means for better utilizing the U.S. centers of commerce:
• Innovation is essential in delivering the “next economy”. The development and implementation of new ideas is essential for positioning the U.S. as a global leader, both in economic and social reform. On the economic side of the equation, this will allow American companies to develop distinct competencies. From a social perspective, innovation also has the potential to raise the standards of individuals with lower incomes. American innovation is most likely to occur in our top metro areas.
• Increased global demand and the growth of third world countries will result in increased exports. Today, the top U.S. cities will have a chance to develop strategies with other cities (rural and metro), states, and regions to take advantage of this opportunity.
• The energy revolution will bring about change through the use of alternate energy sources. It is essential for the world to develop cleaner and more diverse sources of energy, particularly for use in the top 100 cities.

While Katz’s notions are well conceived and thought out, time will tell if they will become the driving force of the next economy or if they are great ideas that will be celebrated by urban leaders, scorned by rural communities, and ignored by political leaders because they are perceived as too self serving.

©Copyright 2011 by CBER.

Colorado Forecasts In – Tax Legislation will be Game Changer

horvath Leave a comment

A review of the various Colorado economic forecasts for 2011 is encouraging. On a comparative basis, they are generally upbeat. The outlook is for continued improvement in the national economy and ultimately more jobs in Colorado.

Over the past 25 years, the Colorado economy has more closely resembled the U.S. economy (the world’s most diverse). As a result the state’s fortunes have mirrored those of the nation.

For that reason, much attention is given to projections for Real GDP growth. While output is not a leading indicator, Real GDP forecasts provide insight into the factors that will drive change in the national economy in the months ahead.

Overall, most expectations for 2010 have been raised slightly over the past month. The justification for these increases is the buildup of inventories, increased consumption, and improved consumer confidence. These are positive signs that will carry over into 2011.

To review briefly… Currently, most output projections for 2011 are in the range of 1.7% to 3.5%.

On the employment side of the equation, the 2011 outlook range varies from flat, or slightly negative, (Colorado Demography Office, November) to growth in the range of 33,000 employees, or 1.8% (Jeff Thredgold, September). Both OSPB and the Colorado Legislative Council, the two agencies that provide forecasts for the state government, will present their updated forecasts for the state during the second half of the month. CBER takes a middle ground with 15,000 jobs added.

This past week, Congress introduced a potential game-changer.   Legislation has overwhelmingly passed the Senate that would extend the Bush tax cuts, reduce payroll taxes, and extend the unemployment insurance benefits. If passed, this legislation has the potential to increase consumer confidence, spur additional spending, strengthen demand, and ultimately add jobs. (At the state level, this may have the potential the push job growth to the upper end of the above mentioned range – 30,000+.)

The downside is that the legislation will significantly increase debt, potentially worsen income equality, increase dependence on financing from foreign lenders, and reduce potential funding for other essential investments that might stimulate long-term growth such as financial support for aerospace and technology, other scientific research, education, homeland security, infrastructure, and health care.

There are two schools of thought. On one hand, it is believed that addition stimulus is necessary and that this legislation along with the recent quantitative easing will make the difference. At the same time, it has been said that the leaders are determined to buy a good economy without regards to the long-term cost at a time when the only solution is time.

Time will tell.

©Copyright 2011 by CBER.