Re: BLS Daily Report
I'm sorry to hear this. This posting has been a reliable and informative aspect of PEN-L for a long time. Thanks, Dave. Gil is no more. There are apparently valid concerns here at BLS that prevent me from forwarding it, or any part of it, on a regular basis. I hope that it has been of assistance to you. This is the last message. Dave
Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Sabri Oncu wrote: Hey, I also hired a few science Ph.Ds from very respectable schools for boring programing jobs (Ravi would know what I mean if I say they were required to write FORTRAN programs) for about $50K. i see what you mean, but fortran is a pleasure compared to what a lot of software was written in back in the days: cobol! ;-) with the downturn in the economy strange things such as salary bargaining have cropped up: i heard a story the other day from a friend, who was earning in the six figures doing the trendy new stuff (SAP or some such), that at a recent interview, towards the end, he was given an option to beat the minimum salary that previous candidates had been willing to take! a recent issue of business week published various upbeat predictions (including one from the dean of columbia's b-school) about how mba's are going to be back up, in order to make up for the fact that b-school graduates are doing poorly: the data mentioned in the article mentioned as low as 60% recruitment rates for fresh top b-school graduates, and the disappearance of 5 figure sign-on bonuses etc. the best way to stay above the water and keep up with a yuppie lifestyle, at this point, seems to be to either biotech or somehow position oneself in the defense pipeline... --ravi
Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
From: Sabri Oncu [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PEN-L [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:24781] Re: BLS Daily Report Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 16:19:02 -0700 From today's BLS daily report: Education increases income, says USA Today, in its page 3B box showing median household income, based on education. According to it, households in which there is a professional degree have an income of $100,000; those with a doctorate degree, $97,325; households in which there is a Masters degree have an income of $74,476; those with a bachelor's degree $64,406; households with an associate degree, $49,279; those with some college, no degree, $44,149; households that include a high school graduate, $35,744; households with an education consisting of ninth to 12th grade, $21,737, and households that include someone with below a ninth grade education, $17,261. Income is based on 1999 data from the U.S. Census and the College Board. Here is an anecdote from a former hiring authority: Not that long ago, I was asked to hire a few recent graduates for some data entry jobs. Without exception, the ones I hired were very smart young fellows with bachelor' s degrees from respectable universities like UC Berkeley, Brown, Tulane and the like. What these young fellows with degrees in economics, physics, mathematics, engineering and the like were making were about $25,000 or so. Most of these young men and women accepted the jobs because they were interested in some experience that would help them go to an MBA program. Now, how does this compare to the above mentioned $64,406 for the median household with a bachelor's degree? What kind of a household is this median household and how relevant it is to look at the median in this context? By the way, you don't need degrees in those areas for data entry, nor you have any hope to save enough to apply for an MBA degree at a decent school here in Berkeley, unless your family has the means to support you. So most of these young men and women were stuck with boring jobs with nowhere to go. Hey, I also hired a few science Ph.Ds from very respectable schools for boring programing jobs (Ravi would know what I mean if I say they were required to write FORTRAN programs) for about $50K. Something is wrong with this USA Today picture or was I working at a firm/firms from Mars? Sabri The income is by household, not individual. I´d be interested in seeing disaggregations of this data by college major, college attended, GPA, etc. What explains the large difference between some college attended, bachelor´s degree and associate degree? Sabri mentions that he hired econ, math, and physics majors for data entry for $25,000 a year, which raises the question:what is the median income for useless (I know that they are not actually useless and many intelligent people choose to study these fields, but they are not immediately marketable or apparently much in demand by business) undergrad majors such as these? _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
You wrote: The income is by household, not individual. I know. Of all the ones I hired, only one of the PhDs was married but his wife did not work so his income was his household income. That means all of the incomes I mentioned were household incomes since, with the exception of him, my guys were also single individual households. As far as useless degrees go, we had an unmarried English Ph.D. in the accounting department of one of the firms I worked at, so she was a single individual household too, and she wasn't making half of $97,325 (the median income for a household with a PhD according to USA Today) for sure. I have seen anthropology PhDs working for less than $20K in documentation departments, sociology PhDs working for less than $30K in quality assurance (testing software for bugs) departments, what have you. You cannot imagine how boring this software testing is, whether the tester is a sociology PhD or not. Well. I would say, there is no point of studying anthropology, sociology, English, mathematics, physics, music and the like. We all need Business Administration degrees. I particularly recommend an MBA. Sabri
Re: BLS Daily Report
From today's BLS daily report: Education increases income, says USA Today, in its page 3B box showing median household income, based on education. According to it, households in which there is a professional degree have an income of $100,000; those with a doctorate degree, $97,325; households in which there is a Masters degree have an income of $74,476; those with a bachelor's degree $64,406; households with an associate degree, $49,279; those with some college, no degree, $44,149; households that include a high school graduate, $35,744; households with an education consisting of ninth to 12th grade, $21,737, and households that include someone with below a ninth grade education, $17,261. Income is based on 1999 data from the U.S. Census and the College Board. Here is an anecdote from a former hiring authority: Not that long ago, I was asked to hire a few recent graduates for some data entry jobs. Without exception, the ones I hired were very smart young fellows with bachelor' s degrees from respectable universities like UC Berkeley, Brown, Tulane and the like. What these young fellows with degrees in economics, physics, mathematics, engineering and the like were making were about $25,000 or so. Most of these young men and women accepted the jobs because they were interested in some experience that would help them go to an MBA program. Now, how does this compare to the above mentioned $64,406 for the median household with a bachelor's degree? What kind of a household is this median household and how relevant it is to look at the median in this context? By the way, you don't need degrees in those areas for data entry, nor you have any hope to save enough to apply for an MBA degree at a decent school here in Berkeley, unless your family has the means to support you. So most of these young men and women were stuck with boring jobs with nowhere to go. Hey, I also hired a few science Ph.Ds from very respectable schools for boring programing jobs (Ravi would know what I mean if I say they were required to write FORTRAN programs) for about $50K. Something is wrong with this USA Today picture or was I working at a firm/firms from Mars? Sabri
RE: BLS Daily Report
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS, DAILY REPORT, TUESDAY, MARCH 5, 2002: Average job tenure fell to 7 years in 2001 from 8 years in 2000 and 9 in 1999, says a survey of about 2,900 of its laid-off clients by outplacement concern Drake Beam Morin (The Wall Street Journal, Work Week feature, page A1). that's an amazing change over just two years. Jim Devine
RE: Re: RE: BLS Daily Report
RE It's not easy to read the tenure numbers - tenure could rise in a weak job market, as people hold on to what they have, and fall in a strong one, as they feel confident about changing jobs The national numbers don't show that much of a change between 1983 and 2000 And I believe I read recently that whereas firms for many years tried to layoff older and higher paid workers (who tended to have long tenure) they often now target younger/less skilled (who tend to have lower tenure) Eric
Re: Re: RE: BLS Daily Report
Well Manitoba and other Canadian provinces seem intent on training nurses to export to the US. Poorer provinces, such as Manitoba, also pay to train nurses who consequently migrate to richer provinces such as Alberta. We do the same thing with doctors. Our local rural hospital has 2 doctors from South Africa and 1 from Poland. Saskatchewan is noted for its lack of Canadian trained doctors in rural areas. Cheers, Ken Hanly - Original Message - From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 4:39 PM Subject: [PEN-L:21814] Re: RE: BLS Daily Report The nurses do not exist in those numbers. He is grandstanding -- unless we can kidnap nurses from elsewhere. On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 02:28:26PM -0800, Devine, James wrote: so what does pen-l think of the following? California hospitals will need 5,000 more workers to meet proposed minimum nurse-staffing levels released Tuesday by California Gov. Gray Davis. Davis' plan requires a minimum of one nurse for every five patients in medical wards -- and fewer patients per nurse in labor and delivery, emergency rooms and critical-care units. (The New York Times, page A15). Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: BLS Daily Report
so what does pen-l think of the following? California hospitals will need 5,000 more workers to meet proposed minimum nurse-staffing levels released Tuesday by California Gov. Gray Davis. Davis' plan requires a minimum of one nurse for every five patients in medical wards -- and fewer patients per nurse in labor and delivery, emergency rooms and critical-care units. (The New York Times, page A15). Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: RE: BLS Daily Report
The nurses do not exist in those numbers. He is grandstanding -- unless we can kidnap nurses from elsewhere. On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 02:28:26PM -0800, Devine, James wrote: so what does pen-l think of the following? California hospitals will need 5,000 more workers to meet proposed minimum nurse-staffing levels released Tuesday by California Gov. Gray Davis. Davis' plan requires a minimum of one nurse for every five patients in medical wards -- and fewer patients per nurse in labor and delivery, emergency rooms and critical-care units. (The New York Times, page A15). Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Re: RE: BLS Daily Report
it also encourages hospitals to kick patients out. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine Michael Perelman writes: The nurses do not exist in those numbers. He is grandstanding -- unless we can kidnap nurses from elsewhere. so what does pen-l think of the following? California hospitals will need 5,000 more workers to meet proposed minimum nurse-staffing levels released Tuesday by California Gov. Gray Davis. Davis' plan requires a minimum of one nurse for every five patients in medical wards -- and fewer patients per nurse in labor and delivery, emergency rooms and critical-care units. (The New York Times, page A15).
Re: Re: RE: BLS Daily Report
Michael, It is interesting that last week in Winnipeg there was a 'job fair' where hundreds of American hospitals sent recruiters to entice Canadian (Manitoban) nurses to the US, Texas and North Carolina were particularly prominent. We have just re-introduced a two-year registered nurse training program to address the nurse shortage here and the American states were sending up recruiters to lure our recent graduates away with signing bonuses, moving and living allowances, etc -- simply because apparently the US is unwilling to pay to train its own supply of nurses. In other words, pure exploitation of the public education system of its colonies. Have you people no shame? ;-) Paul Phillips, Economics University of Manitoba Date sent: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:39:35 -0800 From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:[PEN-L:21814] Re: RE: BLS Daily Report Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The nurses do not exist in those numbers. He is grandstanding -- unless we can kidnap nurses from elsewhere. On Wed, Jan 23, 2002 at 02:28:26PM -0800, Devine, James wrote: so what does pen-l think of the following? California hospitals will need 5,000 more workers to meet proposed minimum nurse-staffing levels released Tuesday by California Gov. Gray Davis. Davis' plan requires a minimum of one nurse for every five patients in medical wards -- and fewer patients per nurse in labor and delivery, emergency rooms and critical-care units. (The New York Times, page A15). Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BLS Daily Report
Dave Richardson's daily report notes: BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS, DAILY REPORT, MONDAY, JANUARY 7, 2002l The unemployment rate increased 0.2 percentage point to 5.8 percent in December, the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced. U.S. payrolls declined by 124,000 in December and have dropped by 1.1 million in the final 4 months of 2001. Manufacturing continued to suffer the heaviest job losses, followed by air transportation, retail trade, and help supply. ***However, the losses were offset by employment gains in services and government,*** BLS said. I have noticed that a number of forcasters have noted the less than expected rise in unemployment indicates that the economy is beginning to rebound from the recession. But if one of the reasons that the rise in unemployment was due to the increase in government employment, how much of that is at the state level which, due to requirements for balanced budgets, means that curtailment of employment will occur if the recession cuts into state revenues. In other words, is the recent increase in public employment sustainable, or will subsequent cuts to state revenues reverse the procedure and lead to falling public employment? Anybody got any ideas? Paul Phillips, Economics, University of Manitoba
RE: Re: BLS Daily Report
State revenue forecasts came in below expectations last year, so retrenchment has already begun. As state legislatures begin convening I suspect they will take a pessimistic view of revenues (which probably are a lagging indicator anyway) and move accordingly. There is little indication the Feds are going to help them out, so if the forecasts of recovery by summer are wrong, the U.S. could be pretty deep in doo-doo. mbs I have noticed that a number of forcasters have noted the less than expected rise in unemployment indicates that the economy is beginning to rebound from the recession. But if one of the reasons that the rise in unemployment was due to the increase in government employment, how much of that is at the state level which, due to requirements for balanced budgets, means that curtailment of employment will occur if the recession cuts into state revenues. In other words, is the recent increase in public employment sustainable, or will subsequent cuts to state revenues reverse the procedure and lead to falling public employment? Anybody got any ideas? Paul Phillips, Economics, University of Manitoba
Re: BLS Daily Report
On Wednesday, January 2, 2002 at 09:10:51 (-0500) Richardson_D writes: BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS, DAILY REPORT, FRIDAY, DECEMBER 31, 2001: Mass layoff events totaled 2,699 in November resulting in job losses for 293,074 workers while 350 of those events were directly or indirectly related to the September 11 terrorist attacks, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The total number of layoff events and the total number of persons affected were the highest for any November on record since the data series began in 1995. After the September 11 attacks, BLS added a new classification -- non-natural disaster -- for use in the quarterly reporting of extended mass layoffs. Those events involved nearly 104,000 workers between September 15 through November 11, BLS reports (Daily Labor Report, page D-1). How exactly do they determine that a layoff was directly or indirectly related to the 9/11 and not directly related to the employer's need for an excuse? Bill
Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
William S. Lear wrote: On Wednesday, January 2, 2002 at 09:10:51 (-0500) Richardson_D writes: BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS, DAILY REPORT, FRIDAY, DECEMBER 31, 2001: Mass layoff events totaled 2,699 in November resulting in job losses for 293,074 workers while 350 of those events were directly or indirectly related to the September 11 terrorist attacks, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The total number of layoff events and the total number of persons affected were the highest for any November on record since the data series began in 1995. After the September 11 attacks, BLS added a new classification -- non-natural disaster -- for use in the quarterly reporting of extended mass layoffs. Those events involved nearly 104,000 workers between September 15 through November 11, BLS reports (Daily Labor Report, page D-1). How exactly do they determine that a layoff was directly or indirectly related to the 9/11 and not directly related to the employer's need for an excuse? ftp://146.142.4.23/pub/news.release/mmls.txt Impact of the September 11 Attacks After the events of September 11, BLS added a new code for reason for layoff, 'non-natural disaster,' for use in the quarterly reporting of extended mass layoffs (those lasting more than 30 days). This allows for the identification of workers separated from companies as a direct or indirect effect of situations such as the September 11 attacks. BLS also implemented interim reporting of extended mass layoffs in order to analyze the layoff impact of those attacks on a more timely basis. In the 10 weeks following the September 11 attacks (the weeks ending September 15 through November 17), employers reported 350 events involving 103,781 workers separated as a direct or indirect effect of the attacks. Thirty-one states reported extended mass layoff activity related to the September 11 incidents. However, 69 percent of these events and 64 percent of the associated separations occurred in just six states--California, Nevada, New York, Illinois, Texas, and Florida. Among the workers laid off because of the terrorist attacks, 42 percent, or 43,795, had been employed in the scheduled air transportation industry. An additional 29 percent, or 30,399 workers, had been employed in hotels and motels. Thirty-one percent of the employers reporting extended mass layoffs related to the attacks indicated they anticipated some type of recall.
Re: BLS Daily Report
Richardson_D wrote: For the economists among us: how much does industrial production have to fall before the US is ineligible to be called an industrialized country? :-) Boswell, James. 1934-64. Life of Johnson, 6 vols. (Oxford: Oxford University Press). ii, p. 464: Very little business appeared to be going forward in Lichfield. I found however two strange manufactures for so inland a place, sail-cloth and streamers for ships: and I observed them making some saddle-cloths, and dressing sheep skins: but upon the whole, the busy hand of industry seemed to be quite slackened. Surely, Sir, (said I,) you are an idle set of people.Sir (said Johnson) We are a City of Philosophers: we work with our Heads, and make the Boobies of Birmingham work for us with their hands. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BLS Daily Report
On Friday, November 2, 2001 at 14:39:57 (-0500) Richardson_D writes: ... The U.S. auto industry recorded its best month in history, using the lure of no-interest loans to boost sales 24.4 percent, but risking future damage to the companies' bottom line. None of the Detroit-area Big Three auto makers has quantified the fiscal burdens of the unprecedented financing deals, but industry analysts say the no-interest loans cost the companies about $2,500 for the median-priced $24,000 vehicle. ... So, the vaunted efficiency of free markets produces a unit cost of over 10 percent for a loan? Or am I wrong and should I assume that the $2,500 is pure opportunity cost? I'd be curious to know the difference (numeric) between the two figures, if available. Bill
Re: BLS Daily Report
At 02:39 PM 11/2/01 -0500, you wrote: One government measure shows that deflation is here, says Floyd Norris writing in The New York Times (page C1). The government's quarterly growth report, which showed that the economy shrank in the third quarter, reported a decline of 0.4 percent, at an annual rate, in prices for personal consumption expenditures. It was the first quarterly fall in nearly half a century, since the second quarter of 1954, at the end of a recession. The number is calculated in a more sophisticated way than the more widely followed consumer price index, and it is a figure that the Federal Reserve watches. Fed chairman Alan Greenspan prefers the core figure for personal consumption expenditures, which excludes food and energy. It is still barely positive, at 0.3 percent. What is new here is that deflation is spreading from the industrial world to consumers. hey, cool! we can see if Irving Fisher's debt-deflation theory of depressions works. I hope it doesn't. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine NTMail K12 - the Mail Server for Education
Re: BLS Daily Report
Jim wrote: hey, cool! we can see if Irving Fisher's debt-deflation theory of depressions works.I hope it doesn't. Dear Jim, Can what is below may be related with that theory as well? I would appreciate your comments, as well as the comments of others. Sabri Oncu + Warning signs Oct 25th 2001 From The Economist print edition Asia's slump could once again strain the region's financial system The economic news from East Asia gets worse by the day. Singapore is suffering its worst recession for almost 40 years: real GDP fell by 5.6% in the year to the third quarter. Taiwan, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Thailand and the Philippines are already in or close to recession. How vulnerable is Asia to another financial crisis? In 1997 pegged exchange rates, high foreign-currency borrowing and weak bank supervision left many Asian financial systems horribly vulnerable to a sharp fall in exports and capital outflows. Most of the region's economies now have flexible exchange rates, current-account surpluses, large foreign reserves and sounder banking systemsall of which suggests that another crisis is unlikely. But a new report by Sun-Bae Kim at Goldman Sachs in Hong Kong reaches a more sobering conclusion: not only is Asia suffering a more severe economic shock than it did before the crisis of 1997-98, but its financial system is, overall, no stronger than it was then. One gauge of the size of the economic shock hitting the financial system is the slowdown in the rate of growth of nominal GDP. This is a proxy for the capacity of the economy to generate cash flow, from which debts must be serviced. Most economies have seen a much sharper fall in nominal growth over the past year than leading up to the 1997 crisis (see chart). In Malaysia, the year-on-year rate of nominal GDP growth has fallen from 20% in early 2000 to minus 2% in the second quarter of this year. How bad this cash-flow shock is depends upon the level of private-sector debt, and upon how many of the outstanding loans are already non-performing. In East Asia as a whole, private-sector debt is smaller in relation to GDP than in 1997, but non-performing loans now amount to 15% of GDP, up from 11% before the 1997 crisis. If the economic shock is bigger, do financial systems have thicker buffers than in 1997? They certainly look healthier today on various measures of liquidity. In 1997 foreign lenders triggered a liquidity crunch by refusing to roll over loans. Today, the foreign borrowing of the financial system amounts to 30% of foreign-exchange reserves, down from 70% in 1997. On various measures of solvency, however, many Asian financial systems look wobbly. The average capital-adequacy ratio of the banks is slightly lower than at the end of 1996. Ratios of government debt to GDP are much higher today than in 1997, leaving governments less able to bail out banking systems again. Public-sector debt has risen from an average of 28% of GDP at the end of 1996 to 45% of GDP today. The worrying conclusion is that although Asia's financial system is less vulnerable to a sudden liquidity crisis, there is a risk of a deeper, more drawn-out deflation, exacerbated by domestic debtsimilar to that in Japan. China alone looks better placed than in 1997: the economic shock currently hitting China is milder than in the lead-up to the previous crisis, when deflation was more severe. Nor does its financial system look significantly more exposed (thanks largely to a currency that is only partially convertible). Goldman Sachs reckons that the most vulnerable financial systems are in Malaysia, Taiwan, Thailand and Indonesia.
Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
This looks bad, very bad. It's a good article, though. One crucial thing that leaps out it that it wasn't fixed exchange rates weren't the problem. The exchange-rate regime simply changes the form of a crisis. Further the E. Asian banks and financial systems didn't completely recover from 1997, as the article makes clear. The problem is of capital adequacy, which suggests that these banks will go 'rupt when the world recession deepens. With the US, Japan, and Euroland doing so poorly, E. Asia will sink. This will bounce back to depress the US further. A wild ride... Warning signs Oct 25th 2001 From The Economist print edition Asia's slump could once again strain the region's financial system The economic news from East Asia gets worse by the day. Singapore is suffering its worst recession for almost 40 years: real GDP fell by 5.6% in the year to the third quarter. Taiwan, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Thailand and the Philippines are already in or close to recession. How vulnerable is Asia to another financial crisis? In 1997 pegged exchange rates, high foreign-currency borrowing and weak bank supervision left many Asian financial systems horribly vulnerable to a sharp fall in exports and capital outflows. Most of the region's economies now have flexible exchange rates, current-account surpluses, large foreign reserves and sounder banking systemsall of which suggests that another crisis is unlikely. But a new report by Sun-Bae Kim at Goldman Sachs in Hong Kong reaches a more sobering conclusion: not only is Asia suffering a more severe economic shock than it did before the crisis of 1997-98, but its financial system is, overall, no stronger than it was then. One gauge of the size of the economic shock hitting the financial system is the slowdown in the rate of growth of nominal GDP. This is a proxy for the capacity of the economy to generate cash flow, from which debts must be serviced. Most economies have seen a much sharper fall in nominal growth over the past year than leading up to the 1997 crisis (see chart). In Malaysia, the year-on-year rate of nominal GDP growth has fallen from 20% in early 2000 to minus 2% in the second quarter of this year. How bad this cash-flow shock is depends upon the level of private-sector debt, and upon how many of the outstanding loans are already non-performing. In East Asia as a whole, private-sector debt is smaller in relation to GDP than in 1997, but non-performing loans now amount to 15% of GDP, up from 11% before the 1997 crisis. If the economic shock is bigger, do financial systems have thicker buffers than in 1997? They certainly look healthier today on various measures of liquidity. In 1997 foreign lenders triggered a liquidity crunch by refusing to roll over loans. Today, the foreign borrowing of the financial system amounts to 30% of foreign-exchange reserves, down from 70% in 1997. On various measures of solvency, however, many Asian financial systems look wobbly. The average capital-adequacy ratio of the banks is slightly lower than at the end of 1996. Ratios of government debt to GDP are much higher today than in 1997, leaving governments less able to bail out banking systems again. Public-sector debt has risen from an average of 28% of GDP at the end of 1996 to 45% of GDP today. The worrying conclusion is that although Asia's financial system is less vulnerable to a sudden liquidity crisis, there is a risk of a deeper, more drawn-out deflation, exacerbated by domestic debtsimilar to that in Japan. China alone looks better placed than in 1997: the economic shock currently hitting China is milder than in the lead-up to the previous crisis, when deflation was more severe. Nor does its financial system look significantly more exposed (thanks largely to a currency that is only partially convertible). Goldman Sachs reckons that the most vulnerable financial systems are in Malaysia, Taiwan, Thailand and Indonesia. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine NTMail K12 - the Mail Server for Education
Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Tom Walker wrote: Doug Henwood wrote, remember, the U.S. economy has expanded for about 75% of the time since the end of WW II That sounds like an underestimate to me. All I've got handy is annual GDP figures for Canada, 1962-99. They show 3 years out of 38 contracting. Assuming those 3 minus years contracted for 4 consecutive quarters and throwing in another 12 quarters of contraction for good measure, leaves about 85% expansion. This crude reckoning corroborates the guess I made before cranking up my spreadsheet. I wouldn't expect the U.S. record for the entire post wwII period to be worse. I hadn't checked my numbers in a while, but you're right - it's close to 85% (using the NBER monthly dating). From 1854-1919, it was just 55% of the months in expansion. But I should point out that if you walk out in the rain, you are probably not getting hit by raindrops on more than 15% of your body surface at any one time. That 15% can get you awful wet. Numbers that are least accurate at turning points are like brakes that work most of the time except for sudden stops or on steep hills. So let me see if I've got this right - the BLS shouldn't use a more accurate technique because there's a one in ten chance it will be briefly inaccurate? Turning points, after all, are even briefer than recessions themselves - we're talking about a few months out of many years. And they produce plenty of other numbers - e.g. the household survey and the unemployment claims figures - which do give an accurate and almost-real time picture of what's going on. Doug
Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/11/01 05:34PM - remember, the U.S. economy has expanded for about 75% of the time since the end of WW II, though you'd never know that by reading PEN-L - CB: What percentage of the time before WWII did the U.S. economy expand ?
Re: BLS Daily Report
If I didn't know you better, Doug, I'd have guessed the So let me see if I've got this right gambit is a holdover from your adolescent right-wing Yale period. You can take the boy out of the Buckley, but you can't take the Buckley out of the boy. Jez kiddin'. No, of course you don't have it right. The BLS can produce stats based on whatever technique it thinks is appropriate to whatever purpose. Smart folks should understand that whatever stats comes out of the BLS will be used for some purposes it's not suited for, often by people who should know better. The briefness of turning points is not the issue. Someone could have a perfect driving record for 35 years, take his eyes off the road for 5 seconds and plow through a crowd of school children in an intersection. The casualties will be just as dead or maimed as if the guy was chronic violater. Trust me on this, Doug. I'm not a reader/consumer/recycler of ready-made statistics. It's my job to mold fully formed stats out of raw data. I'm good at it, too (references on request). There's more than one way to skin a stat. But -- so let me see if I've got this right -- plenty of other numbers? an accurate and almost real-time picture of what's going on? There's a saying, do you want it now, or do you want it done right? To glibly claim that numbers can be simultaneously accurate and almost real-time is to disparage the hard work that statisticians do and the complexity and ambiguity of the materials they work with. How many great meals have you had that were prepared in a microwave? Numbers that are BOTH accurate and instantaneous (stock indexes, for example) are fundamentally trivial, which is evidenced by their volatility. Doug Henwood wrote, So let me see if I've got this right - the BLS shouldn't use a more accurate technique because there's a one in ten chance it will be briefly inaccurate? Turning points, after all, are even briefer than recessions themselves - we're talking about a few months out of many years. And they produce plenty of other numbers - e.g. the household survey and the unemployment claims figures - which do give an accurate and almost-real time picture of what's going on. Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
Re: BLS Daily Report
Sales at wholesalers fell in May and inventories rose more than at any time in the last 6 months, a sign that businesses may be reluctant to order more goods until the economy picks up. A bit of rational behaviour that helps put the whole at risk: I won't buy until things get better, which won't happen until others who won't buy until things get better, suddenly buy while things are getting worse ... The United States economy is getting a boost from an unexpected source: falling energy costs ... Add the impact of lower interest rates, coming tax rebates, and an upturn in stock prices, and some economists now see modest growth in the year's second half, up from nearly zero this spring. In effect, cheaper energy acts like a tax cut, fattening consumer wallets. All very nice, except the BLS Report told us yesterday of ... a little secret in the employment report that you should know about. The Labor Department said payroll employment fell 114,000 in June. What it did not tell you is that this reported change includes a bias adjustment factor that adds about 160,000 jobs a month. This bias factor is basically picked out of thin air, and is supposed to capture employment in newly started firms that Labor misses in its survey. In other words, Labor doesn't know how many new hires occurred at new companies, so it assumes a number. In its June report, it continued to guess that it missed 155,000 new hires. The problem is, that when the economy slumps, so do new business start-ups. A good indicator of new business starts is the Conference Board's index of help-wanted advertising. This index has plummeted back to levels last seen at the end of the 1990 recession. Which little statistical fib might mean these fatter consumer wallets will be counteracted by the fact there are fewer of them. Economic forecasts indicate that while the slumping U.S. economy won't slide into recession, it is enduring a flat spot that will last longer than originally predicted before growth finally rebounds sometime next year, says St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank President William Poole. Poole stressed in an interview with USA TODAY that he was merely repeating the consensus forecast, not making one of his own. Because he doesn't believe it, because no-one says why there should be such a rebound. Overseas demand doesn't look likely to help, months of rate cuts aren't budging an inventory fattened in a sated economy nor a substantial capacity utilisation shortfall ... a real resumption of growth won't occur until next year, he said (USA Today, page 2B). So everyone keeps telling us, but why should it? Where's the demand boost gonna come from. In neither department (nor in the equity markets) are we seeing a sign that months of rate cuts and the prospect of a drawn out bunch of incremental tax cuts are inducing capitalists to invest or employ ... or consumers to buy that third refrigerator. So what am I missing, penpals? Cheers, Rob.
Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Rob Schaap wrote: All very nice, except the BLS Report told us yesterday of ... a little secret in the employment report that you should know about. The Labor Department said payroll employment fell 114,000 in June. What it did not tell you is that this reported change includes a bias adjustment factor that adds about 160,000 jobs a month. This bias factor is basically picked out of thin air, and is supposed to capture employment in newly started firms that Labor misses in its survey. In other words, Labor doesn't know how many new hires occurred at new companies, so it assumes a number. In its June report, it continued to guess that it missed 155,000 new hires. The problem is, that when the economy slumps, so do new business start-ups. A good indicator of new business starts is the Conference Board's index of help-wanted advertising. This index has plummeted back to levels last seen at the end of the 1990 recession. Which little statistical fib might mean these fatter consumer wallets will be counteracted by the fact there are fewer of them. This is not a fib. The Wall Street Journal editorial page, where this article originally appeared, predictably spun it as a bunch of lying incompetents in the governemnt picking numbers out of the air, but that's not fair. The BLS imputes this number because they've found over the years that it's more accurate most of the time, because in expansions - remember, the U.S. economy has expanded for about 75% of the time since the end of WW II, though you'd never know that by reading PEN-L - their employer survey underestimates actual job growth, for just the reason mentioned, startup firms not covered by their survey universe. It's an entirely reasonable thing to do, and has proven more accurate than the raw survey number over the long term. It's wrong at turning points; it underestimates job creation early in recoveries, and overestimates it at peaks and early in recessions. But that's not most of the time (which you'd never know from reading PEN-L). Doug
Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
G'day Doug, It's wrong at turning points; it underestimates job creation early in recoveries, and overestimates it at peaks and early in recessions. But that's not most of the time (which you'd never know from reading PEN-L). Fair enough. But we have had evidence for well over a year (in productivity, profits, capacity utilisation, business start-ups, and equity markets) that we could be recession-bound. So BLS is right to warn us. Perhaps it should have done so in the words you use above. But I reckon my question stands, don't you? Cheers, Rob.
Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Rob Schaap wrote: Which little statistical fib. . . Doug responded: This is not a fib. I generally have a lot of respect for the data produced by the BLS. They do a very good job at trying to figure out what is going on in the economy. They occasionally do introduce adjustments to take care of biases but these adjustments are generally very well motivated. However, casual users of BLS data often fail to noted some of the details behind the series the BLS generates and, so, often misuse/misunderstand these series. For instance the BLS reacted very well, and appropriately, to the attacks made against the CPI a few years ago. They didn't do anything to their series just to respond to the political pressure put on it by congress. Eric
Re: BLS Daily Report
Doug Henwood wrote, remember, the U.S. economy has expanded for about 75% of the time since the end of WW II That sounds like an underestimate to me. All I've got handy is annual GDP figures for Canada, 1962-99. They show 3 years out of 38 contracting. Assuming those 3 minus years contracted for 4 consecutive quarters and throwing in another 12 quarters of contraction for good measure, leaves about 85% expansion. This crude reckoning corroborates the guess I made before cranking up my spreadsheet. I wouldn't expect the U.S. record for the entire post wwII period to be worse. But I should point out that if you walk out in the rain, you are probably not getting hit by raindrops on more than 15% of your body surface at any one time. That 15% can get you awful wet. Numbers that are least accurate at turning points are like brakes that work most of the time except for sudden stops or on steep hills. Tom Walker Bowen Island, BC 604 947 2213
Re: BLS Daily Report
Richardson_D wrote: said a senior economist at CIBC World Markets Inc. in Toronto. When trade is falling in both directions, that is a sign that both domestic and foreign demand are falling. (The New York Times, page C6). Concise, coherent and cogent. Where would we be without senior economists, eh? Sigh, Rob.
Re: BLS Daily Report
The BLS wrote: Labor Secretary Chao, in her first budget presentation to congressional appropriators, outlined on May 2 what she views as highlights in the Bush Administration's first budget proposal for the Labor Department. These include an $8.1 million funding increase for the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which is dedicated to improvements [sic] in the consumer price index so their emphasis is on reducing the estimated rate of inflation? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: BLS Daily Report
BLS DAILY REPORT, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 18, 2001: The Federal Reserve reports a rebound in manufacturing, especially in autos, boosted total production of the nation's industrial sector to a 0.4 percent seasonally adjusted rise in March. But the burst of factory output could not make up for a very bleak January and February. As a result, the industrial sector -- including manufacturing, mining, and utilities -- registered a 4.7 percent annualized rate of decline for the first quarter. It was the largest quarterly drop since the first quarter of 1991, when the economy was in the last phase of the 1990-91 recession (Daily Labor Report, page D-22). nonetheless, the Fed cut rates in a seemingly panicked way. Is it possible that they're freaking out about international events? or rising saving by consumers? or what? -- Jim Devine - This message was sent using Panda Mail. Check your regular email account away from home free! http://bstar.net/panda/
Re: BLS Daily Report
nonetheless, the Fed cut rates in a seemingly panicked way. Is it possible that they're freaking out about international events? or rising saving by consumers? or what? -- Jim Devine There is a clear tone of consternation in the WSJ's front page account of the decision to cut. AG has been fairly pleased with the slowdown, as real economy numbers have held up better than expected. His only rationale for cutting on March 20 was to appease the markets, though he had to do so without looking anxious. The article all but says that the dog is being wagged by the tail at this point--the FOMC now acts on the hopes of such ephemera as "the announcement effect." The journal isn't sure they like this or not, because it concedes that the reality of the bubble. Christian
Re: BLS Daily Report
from the BLS daily report: Excessive consumer and business debt, coupled with the fallout from the recent downturn in the stock market, are the primary threats to U.S. economic growth, according to a survey by the National Association for Business Economics. this sure fits with what I've been saying: consumer and business debt are two of the three Bears that threaten the "Goldilocks Economy" (along with the growing external debt). They threaten to make the recession -- if it happens -- long and/or deep. If it doesn't happen, these debts will continue to grow, making the eventual recession even worse. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Nurses are distinctly underpaid in relation to their responsibilities -- in the hospital, they are the ones who keep you alive. maggie Jim Devine wrote: I have no complaints about PAs. When I was on the HMO, the doc's office assigned me to the PA (since they treated me as a second-class citizen). Then I went on the Preferred Provider plan and got the doc himself. He's fine, but too much into prescribing pills as a solution to all ills. I'm back on the HMO now (I've got to cut costs!) so I'm a second-class citizen again (I get sent out to get my blood checked for cholesterol rather than having it done in-house), but I wouldn't mind seeing the PA again. Many nurses complain about the high pay that PAs get, though. At 08:17 PM 02/27/2001 -0600, you wrote: Yeah, but Physicians Assistants make more, on average, than nurses and can go into practice for themselves. Also, at least for women, PAs often provide better care than MDs -- for ex., PAs are midwives and provide routine gynecological care. I went to a PA for years instead of a gyno, and she pulled me through a couple of problems the gynos couldn't identify. Also, PAs are frequently trained in abortion and can provide services in a doctors office in many places where there are absolutely no other service providers available. maggie coleman Jim Devine wrote: Some nursing jobs have been taken over by Physicians' Assistants, who are basically low-paid MDs. At 12:17 PM 2/26/01 -0800, you wrote: Part time nurses under temporary contracts are doing quite well, although hospitals are downgrading many traditional nursing jobs to have non-professionals take over. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901 Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine
Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Also, full time nurses work short staffed and forced over time on a routine basis. My mother was just is for cancer surgery and the night nurses worked 12 hour shifts all the time. maggie coleman Michael Perelman wrote: Part time nurses under temporary contracts are doing quite well, although hospitals are downgrading many traditional nursing jobs to have non-professionals take over. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901
Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Yeah, but Physicians Assistants make more, on average, than nurses and can go into practice for themselves. Also, at least for women, PAs often provide better care than MDs -- for ex., PAs are midwives and provide routine gynecological care. I went to a PA for years instead of a gyno, and she pulled me through a couple of problems the gynos couldn't identify. Also, PAs are frequently trained in abortion and can provide services in a doctors office in many places where there are absolutely no other service providers available. maggie coleman Jim Devine wrote: Some nursing jobs have been taken over by Physicians' Assistants, who are basically low-paid MDs. At 12:17 PM 2/26/01 -0800, you wrote: Part time nurses under temporary contracts are doing quite well, although hospitals are downgrading many traditional nursing jobs to have non-professionals take over. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901 Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
I have no complaints about PAs. When I was on the HMO, the doc's office assigned me to the PA (since they treated me as a second-class citizen). Then I went on the Preferred Provider plan and got the doc himself. He's fine, but too much into prescribing pills as a solution to all ills. I'm back on the HMO now (I've got to cut costs!) so I'm a second-class citizen again (I get sent out to get my blood checked for cholesterol rather than having it done in-house), but I wouldn't mind seeing the PA again. Many nurses complain about the high pay that PAs get, though. At 08:17 PM 02/27/2001 -0600, you wrote: Yeah, but Physicians Assistants make more, on average, than nurses and can go into practice for themselves. Also, at least for women, PAs often provide better care than MDs -- for ex., PAs are midwives and provide routine gynecological care. I went to a PA for years instead of a gyno, and she pulled me through a couple of problems the gynos couldn't identify. Also, PAs are frequently trained in abortion and can provide services in a doctors office in many places where there are absolutely no other service providers available. maggie coleman Jim Devine wrote: Some nursing jobs have been taken over by Physicians' Assistants, who are basically low-paid MDs. At 12:17 PM 2/26/01 -0800, you wrote: Part time nurses under temporary contracts are doing quite well, although hospitals are downgrading many traditional nursing jobs to have non-professionals take over. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901 Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine
Re: BLS Daily Report
Part time nurses under temporary contracts are doing quite well, although hospitals are downgrading many traditional nursing jobs to have non-professionals take over. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901
Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Some nursing jobs have been taken over by Physicians' Assistants, who are basically low-paid MDs. At 12:17 PM 2/26/01 -0800, you wrote: Part time nurses under temporary contracts are doing quite well, although hospitals are downgrading many traditional nursing jobs to have non-professionals take over. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901 Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: BLS Daily Report
I always appreciate Dave's posts -- a valuable service to us all, especially since the latest one has the Morgan Stanley forecast that agrees with my feeling that the odds for a recession are increasing. Here is the beginning of the article that I mentioned: Tech Equipment makers such as Lucent and Cisco Systems as creditors. Lucent Technologies has been a leader in this category, with about 5% of its sales last year coming from transactions it financed. The company's commitments to customers skyrocketed to $7 billion as of Sept. 30, of which about $1.6 billion is actually loaned, from $2.3 billion in commitments in September 1998. Rival financiers include Nortel Networks, which announced this week it would boost its financing for customer purchases to more than $2 billion by the end of next year, up from $1.1 billion at the end of 2000. Other lenders: Alcatel, Cisco Systems, Motorola and Qualcomm. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BLS Daily Report
At 11:06 AM 11/22/00 -0500, you wrote: The New York Times profiles a family on page A22 that it describes as "an average American family in nearly every way, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics". There are two children, both parents work, and they earned about $40,000 combined last year, slightly more than the year before. The television set is new, and the miles are their cars are piling up. They have no health insurance and do not own a house. The biggest difference between them and millions of other working families is their occupation. "Trapeze artists," their tax forms read. aren't all working people trapeze artists, in a way? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: BLS Daily Report
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/22/00 11:48AM aren't all working people trapeze artists, in a way? ((( CB: I know balancing my budget has been quite an act for years.
Re: BLS Daily Report
Marc Linder seems to lead several lives. Remember Anti-Samuelson. Richardson_D wrote: The issue of mandatory overtime has become one of concern in the labor relations arena. Employee advocates contend that employers use mandatory overtime to reduce the costs of hiring more workers and paying benefits. Companies counter that worker shortages have made overtime a crucial component of their operations. As a major workplace issue, mandatory overtime "cuts across union and nonunion industries," said Marc Linder, author of a new book about overtime law entitled "Moments are the Elements of Profit: Overtime and the Deregulation of Working Hours Under the Fair Labor Standards Act." ... (Daily Labor Report, page C-1). -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901
Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Michael Perelman wrote: Marc Linder seems to lead several lives. Remember Anti-Samuelson. He's a law prof at the University of Iowa, who seems to publish a book a year. He co-authored a history of Brooklyn that came out about a year ago, and Void Where Prohibited, which uses restrictions on workers' freedom to take pee breaks to talk about employer control of time on the job. Excellent stuff. Doug
Re: BLS Daily Report
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/20/00 12:08PM BLS DAILY REPORT, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2000: -clip- The percentage of young Americans holding summer jobs fell again this year, due to the strong economy, expanded summer-school programs and the growing popularity of unpaid internships, the Labor Department said (The Wall Street Journal's Work Week feature, page 1). (( CB: Gee, I wonder why UNpaid internships are popular. Are they popular with the interns ?
RE: Re: BLS Daily Report
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Charles Brown Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 12:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:2089] Re: BLS Daily Report [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/20/00 12:08PM BLS DAILY REPORT, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2000: -clip- The percentage of young Americans holding summer jobs fell again this year, due to the strong economy, expanded summer-school programs and the growing popularity of unpaid internships, the Labor Department said (The Wall Street Journal's Work Week feature, page 1). (( CB: Gee, I wonder why UNpaid internships are popular. Are they popular with the interns ?
RE: Re: BLS Daily Report
sure. if your family is wealthy enough so that you don't care about money, they're a way to build your resume. They're a way to use family and other connections. In effect, it's a way that the class origins of the privileged are preserved. mbs (( CB: Gee, I wonder why UNpaid internships are popular. Are they popular with the interns ?
Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
These figures sound like an underestimate. I thought the figure in the latest edition of State of Working America was an additional 250 hours a year, with couples in $30,000-$75,000 range averaging 3800 hours annually. Time pressures like these mean that it is ever harder to maintain the myth that the family can stand alone, as an autonomous social unit. No wonder that for the first time in a generation, the U.S. electorate seems somewhat more receptive to an expansion of social programs. Joel Blau Timework Web wrote: > The average American employee works just 2 more hours a week than in > 1982, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. But Randy E. Ilg, a > senior economist at the Bureau, says that figure probably understated > the problem because women have been surging into the work force, and > their generally shorter hours appear to have pulled down the average. > Only in the workweek statistics by households does the increase jump off > the page . . . Aside from the 2 hour figure "understating the problem", it is the only time in -- what? -- over 150 years that average annual hours INCREASED over more than a decade. It is an unprecedented reversal of what had been until recently an inexorable trend. Seen in that light, an increase of "just" 2 hours a week is extraordinary. More light will be shed on this issue by the forthcoming book _Working Time: International Trends, Theory and Policy Perspectives_, edited by Lonnie Golden and Deborah M. Figart, from Routledge in November 2000. I will gladly forward a table of contents to anyone who's interested. Tom Walker Sandwichman and Deconsultant 215-2273
Re: BLS Daily Report
Is this Black hole a metaphor , or is it mathematically exact analogy ? CB (( __The current account deficit -- the broadest measure of the U.S. trade gap -- hit yet another record high last quarter. But there is little evidence so far that it is hurting the U.S. economy or the dollar, according to The Wall Street Journal (page A2). The Labor Department said that over-all import prices climbed 0.2 percent in August, after remaining unchanged in July. The price of petroleum imports rose a moderate 0.6 percent in August, after dropping 1.6 percent in July and soaring 10.6 percent in June. __Lurking in the middle of an otherwise perfect American economy is a black hole in the form of an enormous trade deficit -- more than $400 billion (4 percent of the gross domestic product) and still rising, as the Commerce Department reports. In astrophysics, a black hole sucks everything, including light, into them, and nothing ever gets out. Everyone -- from Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan to public and private analysts in the rest of the world -- worries that, like a real black hole, the trade deficit will cause America's current economic success to simply disappear. In fact, Congress is so worried that it established a U.S. Trade Deficit Review Commission to investigate the dangers and how they might be avoided. The commission [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/18/00 03:33PM BLS DAILY REPORT, THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2000: Today's News Release: "Producer Price Indexes -- August 2000", indicates that the Producer Price Index for Finished Goods decreased 0.2 percent in August, seasonally adjusted. This index showed no change in July and increased 0.6 percent in June. The index for finished goods other than foods and energy edged up 0.1 percent in August, the same rate as in July. Prices received by manufacturers of intermediate goods fell 0.2 percent, following a 0.2 percent advance a month earlier. The crude goods index decreased 1.5 percent, after falling 1.1 percent in July. With little fanfare, the workplace has become a safer place to be, writes Alan B. Krueger, Bendheim Professor of Economics and Public Affairs at Princeton University, writing the "Economic Scene" in The New York Times (page C2). Since 1992, the number of work-related injuries and illnesses has fallen 25 percent, to 6.7 per 100 full-time workers from 8.9. This unexpected improvement translates to at least a $125 billion annual lift for the economy. The decline in injuries is remarkable because it reverses a historical pattern discovered by Robert S. Smith of Cornell in 1972: Injuries usually rise when unemployment falls because work intensity increases and many inexperienced workers are hired. Yet the tightest labor market in a generation has coincided with the lowest work-related injury and illness rate since the Bureau of Labor Statistics started tracking it. The decline does not appear to be a mere reporting phenomenon. Although studies have found that employers tend to under report injuries about 10 percent, the under reporting appears constant over time. Also, the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries -- which are unlikely to be underreported -- indicates a 13 percent drop in the fatality rate since 1992. In response to escalating costs, some states tightened eligibility standards for benefits and restricted employees' choice of medical providers in the 1990's. But a new study by Leslie Boden of Boston University and John Ruser of the Bureau of Labor Statistics suggests that only a small share of the decline in injuries and illnesses can be traced to these factors. Probably a more important effect of ballooning workers' compensation insurance costs is that many managers recognized that occupational injuries had a significant effect on the bottom line. Instead of viewing injury costs as unavoidable, they developed safety programs to cut risks. The 1990's investment boom in new and safety plants and equipment probably abetted this effort. The United States current account deficit the broadest measure of foreign trade, widened to a record in the second quarter as imports outpaced exports, the Commerce Department says. The deficit rose 4.6 percent, to $106.14 billion in the second quarter, surpassing the earlier record of $101.51 billion set in the previous quarter. The widening was driven primarily by a rise in the deficit for goods. Earlier, the Labor Department said import prices in August rose a modest 0.2 percent (The New York Times, in a Reuters dispatch, page C2). __The current account deficit -- the broadest measure of the U.S. trade gap -- hit yet another record high last quarter. But there is little evidence so far that it is hurting the U.S. economy or the dollar, according to The Wall Street Journal (page A2). The Labor Department said that over-all import prices climbed 0.2 percent in August, after remaining unchanged in July. The price of petroleum imports rose a moderate
RE: Re: BLS Daily Report
Is this Black hole a metaphor , or is it mathematically exact analogy ? CB In either the July or August Federal Reserve Bulletin, they do sound pretty scared about the trade deficit. Also the latest issue of Foreign Policy has a piece by Martin Wold titled "The Mother of All Meltdowns" http://foreignpolicy.com [the essay ain't on the site unfortunately]. Also, does the Krueger report go into the whole ergonomics controversy over carpal tunnel and repetitive strains [litigation that was first broughtforward by a NYTimes writer if I recall correctly]? Ian == __The current account deficit -- the broadest measure of the U.S. trade gap -- hit yet another record high last quarter. But there is little evidence so far that it is hurting the U.S. economy or the dollar, according to The Wall Street Journal (page A2). The Labor Department said that over-all import prices climbed 0.2 percent in August, after remaining unchanged in July. The price of petroleum imports rose a moderate 0.6 percent in August, after dropping 1.6 percent in July and soaring 10.6 percent in June. __Lurking in the middle of an otherwise perfect American economy is a black hole in the form of an enormous trade deficit -- more than $400 billion (4 percent of the gross domestic product) and still rising, as the Commerce Department reports. In astrophysics, a black hole sucks everything, including light, into them, and nothing ever gets out. Everyone -- from Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan to public and private analysts in the rest of the world -- worries that, like a real black hole, the trade deficit will cause America's current economic success to simply disappear. In fact, Congress is so worried that it established a U.S. Trade Deficit Review Commission to investigate the dangers and how they might be avoided. The commission [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/18/00 03:33PM BLS DAILY REPORT, THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2000: Today's News Release: "Producer Price Indexes -- August 2000", indicates that the Producer Price Index for Finished Goods decreased 0.2 percent in August, seasonally adjusted. This index showed no change in July and increased 0.6 percent in June. The index for finished goods other than foods and energy edged up 0.1 percent in August, the same rate as in July. Prices received by manufacturers of intermediate goods fell 0.2 percent, following a 0.2 percent advance a month earlier. The crude goods index decreased 1.5 percent, after falling 1.1 percent in July. With little fanfare, the workplace has become a safer place to be, writes Alan B. Krueger, Bendheim Professor of Economics and Public Affairs at Princeton University, writing the "Economic Scene" in The New York Times (page C2). Since 1992, the number of work-related injuries and illnesses has fallen 25 percent, to 6.7 per 100 full-time workers from 8.9. This unexpected improvement translates to at least a $125 billion annual lift for the economy. The decline in injuries is remarkable because it reverses a historical pattern discovered by Robert S. Smith of Cornell in 1972: Injuries usually rise when unemployment falls because work intensity increases and many inexperienced workers are hired. Yet the tightest labor market in a generation has coincided with the lowest work-related injury and illness rate since the Bureau of Labor Statistics started tracking it. The decline does not appear to be a mere reporting phenomenon. Although studies have found that employers tend to under report injuries about 10 percent, the under reporting appears constant over time. Also, the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries -- which are unlikely to be underreported -- indicates a 13 percent drop in the fatality rate since 1992. In response to escalating costs, some states tightened eligibility standards for benefits and restricted employees' choice of medical providers in the 1990's. But a new study by Leslie Boden of Boston University and John Ruser of the Bureau of Labor Statistics suggests that only a small share of the decline in injuries and illnesses can be traced to these factors. Probably a more important effect of ballooning workers' compensation insurance costs is that many managers recognized that occupational injuries had a significant effect on the bottom line. Instead of viewing injury costs as unavoidable, they developed safety programs to cut risks. The 1990's investment boom in new and safety plants and equipment probably abetted this effort. The United States current account deficit the broadest measure of foreign trade, widened to a record in the second quarter as imports outpaced exports, the Commerce Department says. The deficit rose 4.6 percent, to $106.14 billion in the second quarter, surpassing the earlier record of $101.51 billion set in the previous quarter. The widening was driven primarily by a rise in the deficit for goods.
Re: BLS Daily Report
The durability of the recent productivity surge will help ensure that the U.S. economy stays on a steady path of solid expansion without threat of inflation heating up and ending the longest period of growth in the nation's history, a Federal Reserve official and leading business economists say during the first day of the National Association for Business Economics' annual meeting in Chicago. In large part, the productivity gains of the last few years have been linked to the tight labor market, as businesses have resorted to greater capital investment to achieve efficiencies, the economists say. If and when overall economic growth slows to the point where labor market tightness eases, productivity growth might ebb, some analysts suggest. So the Fed is paying attention to the usually-ignored "Verdoorn's Law," which argues that demand-side stimulation encourages labor productivity growth? If so, they should avoid hiking interest rates, so as to maintain labor-market tightness and productivity growth. Or are they heeding Marx's writings in Capital, volume I, ch. 25, in which he argues that tight labor-power markets encourage labor-power-saving technical change? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: BLS Daily Report -- frictional U and political suppression
Once one gets beyond the quips of a Conference Board wag, one finds a residue of "so-call frictional employment", to the extent that "Even in the nation's burgeoning high-tech hubs, thousands of well-educated people are out of work." Following the excerpt from the BLS, I have appended a discussion paper written by Franz Segbers for a conference on Faith Communities and Social Movements: Facing Globalization. Segbers' first two theses don't necessarily contradict Ken Goldstein's glib assurance that "as long as you are breathing and ambulatory, you can find a job." Instead they raise questions about what kind of a job, under what conditions and for what pay? Submerged at the end of thesis nine in Segbers' paper is a provocative claim that I would like to bring forward and highlight: "If work were to be redistributed, then the paradigm of capital could be shattered. For this reason, the possibility of workers experiencing a sense of emancipation through a reduction of working hours has been politically suppressed." I have said as much many times myself. I also happen to have documented key episodes in the history of this suppression. But I continue to wonder why I can't seem to get Pen-l interested in a sustained discussion of this political suppression, as it has been transmitted through the discourse of economics. ___ From the BLS Daily: __The U.S. unemployment rate is 4 percent, near a 30-year low. For college graduates, it is now less than 2 percent, says Ken Goldstein of the Conference Board, who quips that "as long as you are breathing and ambulatory, you can find a job." With the economy registering a net gain of about 200,000 jobs a month during this expansion, it would seem that there aren't many good excuses for being jobless. Yet, even a good economy spawns a degree of so-called frictional unemployment, as workers enter the job force for the first time or voluntarily leave one position to search for another. Even in the nation's burgeoning high-tech hubs, thousands of well-educated people are out of work. Corporate acquisitions and restructuring take a particular toll on the highest paid and the most experienced. According to Challenger, Gray, and Christmas, a Chicago-based outplacement firm, employers announced 670,000 job cuts in 1999, up from 615,000 in 1993, when the firm began keeping track. Companies' fast-shifting needs have decimated the professional networks of some white-collar workers who find themselves jobless and have made others less eager to take personal risks. "They have to be willing to relocate, to go into retraining, or to take a pay cut," says Jerome Watters, an economist with the Bureau of Labor Statistics [Dallas]. "It can be very difficult." ... (Robert Tomsho in Wall Street Journal, page A1). __The 4 percent U.S. unemployment rate reflects the circumstances of 5.6 million people over age 16, says The Wall Street Journal (page A12). The largest group, by occupation, are 1.5 million people who previously held technical, sales, or administrative support jobs. About 1.2 million of the unemployed are operators, fabricators, and laborers. But the jobless pool also includes 681,000 managers and professional specialty workers. Education presents a different breakdown. More than half a million of the unemployed people 25 or older are college graduates, and close to a million more have had some college courses. At the other end of the spectrum, about 765,000 lack high school diplomas. To be counted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, people must have looked for a job during the previous 4-week period and be available for work. ... About 44 percent had either lost their jobs or completed temporary jobs, while 37.5 percent were resuming their search after being out of the job market for longer than 4 weeks. More than 6 percent were just entering the job market. More than 12 percent said they had left jobs voluntarily. ... Besides the unemployed, there are about 3.4 million part-time workers who say they can't find full-time jobs. The historically low jobless rate would rise to about 7.3 percent if it included these people and so-called marginally attached workers who are no longer searching for work on a regular basis, says Steve Hipple, an economist at the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Good times have failed to raise the incomes of the one-third of adults who haven't gone beyond high school, says Louis Uchitelle in The New York Times (July 23, "Week in Review," page 1). ... A steady third of adults 25 and older have only finished high school -- and that percentage does not seem likely to come down soon for a host of reasons. ... Half of the nation's jobs are classified by the Labor Department [BLS] as not requiring a college education. Yet for many employers, high school diplomas are simply not enough. ... Higher level jobs for the college educated are among the fastest growing, the Labor Department reports --
Re: BLS Daily Report
This article might be worth discussing in more detail. Max, is it on the EPI web? Richardson_D wrote: BLS DAILY REPORT, THURSDAY, JULY 20, 2000 An important but frequently overlooked factor in the nationwide decline in crime over the past few years has been the corresponding decline in the unemployment rate, writes Bob Herbert in his "In America" column (New York Times, op-ed page). Aggressive policing and long prison sentences get most of the attention. ... Now a study by a pair of Washington economists, Jared Bernstein and Ellen Houston, appears to confirm that a job is one of the most effective weapons in the nation's crime-fighting arsenal. ... The study by the Economic Policy Institute looked at crime rates and employment statistics in several regions of the country between 1989 and 1998 and found evidence to support that theory. ... The study looked specifically at unemployment rates for young men. ... -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BLS Daily Report
Everything that I read suggests that flexible hours means that employers want workers to be more flexible. Richardson_D wrote: BLS DAILY REPORT, FRIDAY, JUNE 23, 2000: Flexible hours -- "the most strongly sought, but most elusive workplace benefit" -- are likely to occupy an increasingly prevalent presence in the American workplace over the next decade, a management consultant tells a national industrial relations specialists'.gathering. Just as child care benefits, which rarely existed in the American workplace 10 years ago, have become increasingly common today, flexibility in hours will become part of the workplace over the next decade, Paul Rupert, of Work Family Directions, told the opening session of a 2-day forum sponsored by the Industrial Relations Research Association (Daily Labor Report, page A-6). -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901
Re: BLS Daily Report
Thanks for this, I've forwarded it to the crashlist but without attribution: in future do you want me to forward it in your name, or would you like me to sub you to the List? Mark Jones http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList - Original Message - From: "Richardson_D" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2000 10:45 PM Subject: [PEN-L:18270] BLS Daily Report BLS DAILY REPORT, THURSDAY, APRIL 20, 2000 RELEASED TODAY: A total of 1.7 million injuries and illnesses that required recuperation away from work beyond the day of the incident were reported in private industry workplaces during 1998. The total number of these cases has declined in each year since 1992. In contrast, the number of injuries and illnesses reported with only restricted work activity rather than days away recuperating has increased during this same time period by nearly 70 percent to over 1,000,000 cases in 1998. ... Since 1993, truck drivers have experienced the largest number of injuries and illnesses with time away from work. The inflation adjusted weekly earnings of most U.S. workers climbed 3.7 percent over the year ended in the first quarter of 2000, according to BLS. In current dollars or without adjustment for inflation, the weekly pay of the nation's 98.2 million full-time wage and salary employees rose 6.9 percent between the first quarters of 1999 and 2000. The CPI-U increased 3.2 percent over the same period, making the real pay gain 3.7 percent. ... (Daily Labor Report, page D-25). Higher prices for oil imports and a Boeing strike that lowered aircraft exports helped widen the U.S. trade deficit to a record $29.2 billion in February, the Commerce Department says. ... The Secretary of Commerce says that about half the increase is due to higher petroleum prices. ... (Daily Labor Report, page D-1; Washington Post, page E3)_The United States trade deficit widened to a record in February, elevated by surging oil prices and growing demand for imports. The deficit in goods and services trade grew in February as imports climbed to a record and exports fell for a second consecutive month. ... (New York Times, page C14; USA Today, page 3B)_The U.S. trade deficit, continuing its record-breaking pace of last year, widened in February as high oil prices led a big jump in imports. Aside from oil prices and Boeing labor woes, economists said the underlying cause of the expanded deficit remains the same strong U.S. economic growth and consumer demand coupled with weak economic growth overseas, said a National Association of Manufacturers economist. ... (Wall Street Journal, page A2). Base salaries were expected to rise at about 4.4 percent this year, or about the same rate as last year, as more companies use stock options and profit sharing to supplement pay. An American Compensation Association survey showed that 63 percent of the companies offered stock-based plans to employees in 1999. Almost 57.2 percent extended stock options to hourly and nonunion employees (Washington Post, page E17). For years, antipoverty efforts have stressed work, education, and marriage as the way up the economic ladder for the single, jobless mothers who seemed to account for the bulk of urban poverty. Now a new analysis of census data shows that in New York City, in the midst of an economic boom, poverty rates rose sharply among just the kind of families with children that were supposed to be safe: those that include two parents, a worker, and a household head with more than a high school degree. Comparing three years ended in 1998 with the last comparable stretch of prosperity, in the late 1980's, the study found that the overall rate of poverty in New York City among families with children climbed to 32.3 percent, from 29.3 percent, despite a rise in education and employment that would have been expected to reduce poverty. The official federal poverty threshold is $13,133 for a family of three. The survey was released by the nonprofit Community Service Society of New York and suggests a collision of several trends: the growing gap between rich and poor, a surge in immigration, and, as welfare changes push recipients off the rolls, increasing competition for low-end jobs with eroding wages. ... (New York Times, page A25). The Labor Department commissioned a new survey to research the impact of the Family and Medical Leave Act, an effort that it hopes will be under way in the next couple of months. The survey will be conducted by Westat Inc., which released a survey in October 1995 that found approximately two-thirds of employers covered under the 1993 law had changed their personnel policies to comply with it, mostly by increasing the reasons for which leave can be taken. The new survey will include research into how family and medical leave can be made more accessible and affordable. It is intended to update the 1995 research on the law's
RE: Re: BLS Daily Report
Thanks for this, I've forwarded it to the crashlist but without attribution: in future do you want me to forward it in your name, or would you like me to sub you to the List? Mark Jones http://www.egroups.com/group/CrashList I have subbed you to my new list, LongWave2000, where we will discuss the reversion of the market indices to their pre-existing long run growth trends, notwithstanding the minor hiccups of the past ten days. mbs
Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: BLS Daily Report
Mark Jones wrote: Doug Henwood wrote: Hmm, well last I checked, which was year-end 1999, the SP 500 was at 2.9 times its long-term trend price (long-term defined as since 1871). So just going back to the trendline would take the index down by 2/3, to a Dow-equivalent of 3735. And, as any student of Robert Shiller knows, trend overshoots on the high end are usually followed by trend overshoots on the low end, Dow 2000 isn't an unlikely target. That's why you're calling it LongWave2000, right? But the other day you wrote that 'the worst is over', no? Short-term, I meant. I think the great bull market (1982-2000?) is basically over, though. Doug
RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: BLS Daily Report
Doug Henwood wrote: I think the great bull market (1982-2000?) is basically over Bull markets aren't usually followed by plateaux, are they? My infamous bet with poor Max was also based on a back-of-envelope calculation that the Dow would logically fall to 3k. BTW, even that would not mean 'the end of capitalist civilisation as we know it', as other soi-disant marxists reproach me wrongly for arguing. I can't say I wouldn't get my pleasure from which the pain in the City though, not to speak of wall st. What _does_ interest me is to speculate about/analyse the consequences and implications for the world [dis]order. Mark Jones
Re: BLS Daily Report
At 05:27 PM 3/10/00 -0500, you wrote: With little evidence from the survey or other data that growth has slowed-despite four interest-rate increases since last June--the Fed is expected to raise rates again at a March 21 policy making meeting. The Fed wants slower growth to make sure inflation remains under control. ...(Washington Post, page E2) What's interesting in press reports is that they never seem to mention the fact that all else constant, a Fed rate hike later this month will cause the dollar exchange rate to rise further. This means that one of the major anti-inflationary forces unleashed will be a fall in US net exports, which among other things raises US indebtedness to the rest of the world. The US net international investment position is already at abysmal levels, perhaps as bad as it's been since the numbers have been collected. Also, if US interest rates rise, that raises the amount that the US has to pay the rest of the world on the outstanding debt. This encourages the deficit on the international income account to rise, which also encourages US indebtedness to rise. How long can the US increase its debt before faith in the dollar fails? The question, of course, is whether or not Europe and Japan will also raise interest rates. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://liberalarts.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Re: BLS Daily Report
I thought that this stuff had been put to rest. Richardson_D wrote: BLS DAILY REPORT, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 1,2000 More than three years after concluding that the Consumer Price Index overstated inflation by 1.1 percentage points a year, a group of prominent economists says changes made to the index since then have narrowed the overstatement to about 0.8 of a percentage point a year. Their estimate is included in a report prepared for Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the New York Democrat, by the General Accounting Office, which conducts investigations and audits for Congress. ... The economists were the members of a commission established by Congress to study the price index, which is widely used not just as a barometer of inflation but to set wages in union agreements and to recalculate tax brackets and Social Security benefits each year. The commission, headed by Michael J. Boskin of Stanford University, spent 18 months studying the index. In December 1996, the commission's five members reported that a variety of statistical problems had created an upward bias in the price gauge of between 0.8 and 1.6 percentage points annually, with their best guess being 1.1 percentage point. Since then, the Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics has made seven changes in the way it calculates the index. In a letter accompanying the accounting office's report, Katharine G. Abraham, the commissioner of labor statistics, said the agency was continuing to develop and evaluate improvements to the index, but that it did not think it possible to put a specific number on the degree to which the index overstates inflation. ... Because of the ways in which the price index is used, even modest reductions in any upward bias could result in smaller wage increases for some workers, lower payments to Social Security recipients and higher tax bills for some people. ... (Richard W. Stevenson in New York Times, page C14). -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901
Re: BLS Daily Report
BLS Daily Report: "The number of work stoppages hit an all-time low in 1999, with only 17 reported, BLS said. The 17 work stoppages amounted to half the number reported in 1998 and the lowest since BLS started keeping records in 1947. In the early 1950s, the high point of work stoppages, nearly 500 stoppages a year idled workplaces. The previous low was in 1997 when BLS reported 29 stoppages." Timothy Fogarty: "Under active lobbying from business leaders, the U.S. Congress passed the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947. This legislation constrained the spread of union organization especially in its designation of certain union activities as unfair labor practices. In addition, in the early 1950s, unions were placed on the defensive by allegations of communist infiltration. These developments stunted much of the momentum that had previously fostered the growth of unions. After 1955, labor relations were increasingly subdued as union power waned." Stuart Ewen: "The 1930s and then the 1960s were periods in which the challenge to the business system became widespread. If you want to see the flowering of corporate public relations strategies look at the decade following those periods. After World War Two a kind of gung-ho corporate public-relations strategy tries to present the private business system as the quintessence of the American Way -- a kind of commercialistic rendition of democracy. This became almost a national ideology used to roll back policies and ideas that came out of the 1930s New Deal -- for example, the very idea that government might compete with business by providing public housing. In the 1960s people began to wonder if democracy was being violated by a destabilized business system. In the 1970s and 1980s, with the triumph of Reagan and Thatcherism, there comes to fruition a set of national public relations strategies catalyzed by the political issues of the Sixtes." On page 308 of _PR!: a social history of spin_, Ewen mentions the Public Relations Advisory Board of the National Association of Manufacturers. The board was responsible for developing the "American Way" public relations counter-offensive against the labor policies of the New Deal. In 1938 the board was made up of representatives of major corporations, among them McGraw-Hill Book Company. McGraw-Hill also ran a regular public relations forum. A report on the forum in the October 1939 Public Opinion Quarterly (p. 704-709) makes it clear that the labor issue was an over riding concern. After the war, in 1946, the McGraw-Hill Book Company published _The American individual enterprise system, its nature, evolution and future_ written by the Economic principles commission of the National Association of Manufacturers. Since the turn of the century, the Association had put "educating public opinion" high on their agenda and has produced much "educational" literature. Also, as Philip Wright wrote in the 1915 Quarterly Journal of Economics article, "It endeavored to interest the college world in its propaganda. . ." Roger Burlingame's 1959 corporate bio of McGraw-Hill, _Endless Frontiers_ gives a fascinating account of a species of textbook marketeers called "college travelers" that expanded rapidly with the advent of the G.I. Bill after the end of World War II. The traveler's job was to go from campus to campus talking to faculty, showing them the M-H textbooks in their field, sounding them out about what they are teaching, what they are writing about, what they need in a textbook, coaching the young faculty on how they might make their output more saleable. Tom Walker
Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Hey, Paul, haven't you heard? We can't afford the social insurance programs we've had in the past. Because of decades of capital accumulation and increasing GDP/capita, our societies have become poorer. Anyone who doesn't know this hasn't been reading the papers or watching TV. Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anyone tell me why the US economy, reputably the strongest and most vibrant (in terms of technological improvement) in the world, is increasingly forced to dragoon its aged to work in order to maintain the minimal (frequently poverty level) standard of its senior citizens? Is this the equivalent of child labour in the Third world? Paul Phillips, Economics, University of Manitoba The Social Security retirement age will increase for 150 million working Americans beginning this month, the Social Security Administration said. The increase in the full retirement age begins with individuals born in 1938, whose normal retirement age will be 65 years and 2 months. The age increases in two-month increments for workers born between 1939 and 1943 until the retirement age reaches 66 and remains there for all workers born through 1954. For those born after 1954, the retirement age begins to increase again in two-month increments until it reaches age 67 for those born in 1960 or later, the SSA said. The increase in the retirement age was included in the Social Security Amendments of 1983 (Daily Labor Report, Jan. 25, page A-8). DUE OUT TOMORROW: Employment Cost Index -- December 1999
Re: BLS Daily Report
Can anyone tell me why the US economy, reputably the strongest and most vibrant (in terms of technological improvement) in the world, is increasingly forced to dragoon its aged to work in order to maintain the minimal (frequently poverty level) standard of its senior citizens? Is this the equivalent of child labour in the Third world? Paul Phillips, Economics, University of Manitoba The Social Security retirement age will increase for 150 million working Americans beginning this month, the Social Security Administration said. The increase in the full retirement age begins with individuals born in 1938, whose normal retirement age will be 65 years and 2 months. The age increases in two-month increments for workers born between 1939 and 1943 until the retirement age reaches 66 and remains there for all workers born through 1954. For those born after 1954, the retirement age begins to increase again in two-month increments until it reaches age 67 for those born in 1960 or later, the SSA said. The increase in the retirement age was included in the Social Security Amendments of 1983 (Daily Labor Report, Jan. 25, page A-8). DUE OUT TOMORROW: Employment Cost Index -- December 1999
Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Child labor? Not quite. The narrow-gauged answer is that unlike most social insurance systems, the American social security system is supposed to be self-financing--i.e. it is supposed to be financed from payroll taxes alone and not take money from general revenues. This means that in the last three social security "crises"--1977, 1983, and the late 1990s, the conservative drift of social policy has tried to push back the retirement age, as the only way to make the fund self-sufficient. From a broader perspective, however, you're more on the mark, because what you are seeing is obeisance to the market, and the increase in the number of hours worked per year among all Americans regardless of age--up about 250 hours per year since about 1970. Joel Blau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anyone tell me why the US economy, reputably the strongest and most vibrant (in terms of technological improvement) in the world, is increasingly forced to dragoon its aged to work in order to maintain the minimal (frequently poverty level) standard of its senior citizens? Is this the equivalent of child labour in the Third world? Paul Phillips, Economics, University of Manitoba The Social Security retirement age will increase for 150 million working Americans beginning this month, the Social Security Administration said. The increase in the full retirement age begins with individuals born in 1938, whose normal retirement age will be 65 years and 2 months. The age increases in two-month increments for workers born between 1939 and 1943 until the retirement age reaches 66 and remains there for all workers born through 1954. For those born after 1954, the retirement age begins to increase again in two-month increments until it reaches age 67 for those born in 1960 or later, the SSA said. The increase in the retirement age was included in the Social Security Amendments of 1983 (Daily Labor Report, Jan. 25, page A-8). DUE OUT TOMORROW: Employment Cost Index -- December 1999
[PEN-L:12977] Re: BLS Daily Report
Is there a document that explains the difference between the new and old classification systems and (ideally) demonstrates a crosswalk? Peter Richardson_D wrote: BLS DAILY REPORT, TUESDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1999 Under the new industrial classification system devised by the federal government, about 114,000 information services businesses employed more than 3 million people and had receipts totaling $623 billion in 1997, according to figures released by the Census Bureau. Employment in the four broadest categories of information services industries was greatest in broadcasting and telecommunications, with a total of 1.4 million in 1997. There were about 1 million people working in publishing industries, 349,500 employed in information services and data processing services, and nearly 276,000 in motion picture and sound recording industries. Census compiled the estimates from its 1997 economic census of the information services industries, using for the first time the new North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). ... All federal agencies are in the process of implementing the NAICS. Last March, Census released its first report using the new system, finding evidence about the importance of technology in the U.S. economy. ... (Daily Labor Report, page A-7).
[PEN-L:12961] Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
If someone said that "high school" is affordable to most Americans that would probably be found quite unacceptable. Why is it that the state's obligation to provide education to everyone who can benefit does not extend to post-secondary education?University should be free, as it is in Cuba. I don't know what the situation in Europe is but I expect in many countries tuition is less than in the US or paid for by the state. In the former USSR it seems to me I recall that students used to complain about their living expenses! Cheers, Ken Hanly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Tuition might be affordable, but in my classes I would guess the typical student works 15 to 20 hours a week. This outside work has increased enormously in the past two decades and represents the chief cause in the decline in what we can teach in a typical semester. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:12952] Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
William S. Lear wrote: Is there information available as to the increases in tuition at various levels over, say, the past 20 years? See http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/Digest97/d97t312.html. Full listing of tables is at http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/Digest97/listtables.html. Doug
[PEN-L:12951] Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Tuition might be affordable, but in my classes I would guess the typical student works 15 to 20 hours a week. This outside work has increased enormously in the past two decades and represents the chief cause in the decline in what we can teach in a typical semester. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:12950] Re: BLS Daily Report
On Tuesday, October 26, 1999 at 12:11:05 (-0400) Richardson_D writes: ... For most Americans, college remains affordable, according to a graph in USA Today (page 1A). More than half of the students who were attending a 4-year institution during 1999 to 2000 paid less than $4,000 in tuition and fees. Almost three-quarters pay tuition of less than $8,000. The percentages given show 51 percent pay under $4,000; 21 percent, $4,000 to $7,999; 6 percent, $8,000 to $11,999; 8 percent, $12,000 to $15,999; and 7 percent, $20,000 and over in tuition and fees. Source of the data is The College Board. Is there information available as to the increases in tuition at various levels over, say, the past 20 years? Bill
[PEN-L:12798] Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Jim Devine wrote: Does anyone know what the theory is that the new definition of the poverty line is based on? is this based on Patricia Ruggles' research? Among others. See http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/povmeas.html. Doug
[PEN-L:12791] Re: BLS Daily Report
The Census Bureau has begun to revise its definition of what constitutes poverty in the United States, experimenting with a formula that would drop millions more families below the poverty line. The bureau's new approach would in effect raise the income threshold for living above poverty to $19,500 for a family of four, from the $16,600 now considered sufficient. Suddenly, 46 million Americans, or 17 percent of the population, would be recognized as officially below the line, not the 12.7 percent announced last month, the lowest level in nearly a decade. A strong economy has undoubtedly lifted many families but not nearly as many as the official statistics suggest. Housing, like health insurance, is a big hurdle. The poor are twice as likely as the nonpoor to rent rather than own their homes, according to a Labor Department study. The nation's poor are four times as likely as the nonpoor to have their utilities cut off, the Labor Department also found (Louis Uchitelle, writing in The New York Times, page 1). Does anyone know what the theory is that the new definition of the poverty line is based on? is this based on Patricia Ruggles' research? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/~JDevine
[PEN-L:12730] Re: BLS Daily Report
At 04:59 PM 10/14/99 -0400, Dave Richardson forwarded: BLS DAILY REPORT, THURSDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1999: ... As the economy continues to grow and suburban jobless rats remain at record low levels, seasonal employees have become such rare finds that retailers warn that this holiday season promises to be the most difficult ever, says The Washington Post (page E1). ... If these jobless rats want to work for my employer, they should contact me. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/~JDevine
[PEN-L:9857] Re: BLS Daily Report
A brief response to the latest word from BLS about workplace fatalities: 1. BLS attempts to tabulate fatal workplace injuries primarily; most fatal diseases are not recorded. The rule of thumb in this business is that there are 10 occupational disease fatalities for each fatal injury. 2. BLS greatly undercounts the rate of fatal occupational injury. The best source is NIOSH's Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI), which appears after a longer delay than BLS. Journalists and others should look to this source for their numbers. No one, to my knowledge, has ever investigated the extent to which the BLS fatality rate is correlated over time with better measures of serious risk on the job. So each year, when the new BLS numbers are released, a spate of news stories appears which make pronouncements on occupational safety and health that have no real factual basis. The best single discussion of occupational fatality rates, traumatic and nontraumatic, is the study done for NIOSH by J. Paul Leigh et al. There is a summary in the Jan. 1997 Annals of Internal Medicine; the full report (which may be available from NIOSH) will appear in book form later this year or sometime next year, published by U of Michigan Press. Peter
[PEN-L:8995] Re: BLS Daily Report
Though it may be bad manners to bask in the misfortune of others, it is now apparent that the economic crisis that began in Asia 2 years ago turned out to be a great tonic to the U.S. economy. But now, with Asian economics on the mend, their gain could mean some pain here. The U.S. economy now faces the prospect of a modest slowdown as interest rates and prices for many goods inch up, forcing companies and consumers to curb their free-spending ways. ... (Washington Post, page E1). In what way was the 1997 Asian economic crisis a "great tonic" to the US economy? Is it because the price of US imports fell? How much real recovery is there in Asia? or is it just financial markets and banks that are doing better there? How long can the US keep having such large balance of trade (and current account) deficits? Is there some sort of natural limit to US foreign borrowing? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
[PEN-L:8997] Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Jim Devine wrote: In what way was the 1997 Asian economic crisis a "great tonic" to the US economy? Is it because the price of US imports fell? That, plus massive capital inflows (ca. $1 trillion since 1995). How much real recovery is there in Asia? or is it just financial markets and banks that are doing better there? Korean industrial production has been rising for several months, and officialdom (including U.S. pundits in the category) is worried that things are mending too quickly for the kinds of "radical reforms" that are "needed." Still, recoveries from deflations tend to be weak and subject to many false starts. How long can the US keep having such large balance of trade (and current account) deficits? Is there some sort of natural limit to US foreign borrowing? Nothing natural about it. Doug
[PEN-L:8603] Re: BLS Daily Report and the offending piece
More good news? The Washington Post views the record personal savings deficit as "giving the Fed ammunition" to justify a rate rise. But the other side of the coin is that it makes the upward adjustment of interest rates precarious. An increase in debt service costs has to either erode disposable income available for consumption or accelerate the upward spiral in the personal savings deficit. Balanced budget hawks always used the analogy of the household to warn against the danger of government deficits. If the analogy holds for the government, what about the households themselves? Perhaps it is just coincidence that personal savings went into deficit at the same time the fed pulled the October rescue from the "global meltdown" of the financial system out of a hat. Or maybe personal debt was the hat out of which the last rescue was pulled. If it's the latter, I'd like to know what is the NEXT hat out of which the NEXT rescue will be pulled? Seems to me the extraordinarily VOCIFEROUS equanimity about the expected Fed rate hike (due out at 18:15 GMT today) is as "profoundly silly" as the left's propensity to claim the sky is falling. The firmament is NOT well-attached, Doug, it's levitated. BLS DAILY REPORT, TUESDAY, JUNE 29, 1999 Personal spending rose 0.6 percent in May, outpacing the 0.4 percent gain in personal income, the Commerce Department reports. Personal saving hit a record low of minus 1.2 percent in May.. . The nation's savings rate hit another all-time low in May, as Americans' spending rose faster than their income. Economists say the figures give the Fed more ammunition to justify an expected interest-rate increase this week. ... (Washington Post, page E5)_Spending rose in May at a faster pace than income, helping prolong the economic expansion as consumers go deeper into debt. Consumers continue to spend on cars, appliances, electronics, and clothing, making the U.S. economy the world's strongest. ... (New York Times, page C12)_U.S. consumers continue their giddy spending in May. ... (Wall Street Journal, page A2). regards, Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/worksite.htm
[PEN-L:3276] Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
William S. Lear wrote: Dave, any way you can turn off the Microsoft crud that always follows the text? I don't get any Microsoft crud at the bottom of mine. Maybe Eudora's smart enough to repress it. Doug
[PEN-L:3275] Re: BLS Daily Report
Dave, any way you can turn off the Microsoft crud that always follows the text? Bill On Thu, February 11, 1999 at 15:42:40 (-0500) Richardson_D writes: BLS DAILY REPORT, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1999: ...
[PEN-L:2981] Re: BLS Daily Report
It would be interesting to know what the composition of this NAS panel is. Any friends of EPI? Peter Dorman Richardson_D wrote: BLS DAILY REPORT, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 1999 Next month, a newly appointed committee convened by the National Academy of Sciences will begin a 2-year study of a wide range of issues related to cost of living indexes, most notably the CPI. Brookings Institution economist Charles Schultze chairs the 12-member panel, and the other members hold academic posts at major U.S,. colleges and universities. The study is broadly defined as addressing "conceptual" measurement, and other statistical issues in the development of cost-of-living indexes," according to Christopher Mackie, the study director at the Committee on National Statistics at the NAS. ... The committee's first meeting is tentatively set for March 19, at the academy's headquarters in Washington, D.C. BLS is a "partial sponsor" of the Schultze committee's study, Mackie said. However, neither the statistics agency nor any other party that contributes to the financing of the study is allowed to play a role in determining the scope or outcome of the study, Mackie emphasized. Under the proposed schedule, the first meeting will be open to the public and is likely to include a statement by BLS Commissioner Katharine Abraham. Abraham declined to comment on the study, except to say that the agency welcomes the involvement of an NAS panel because of its well regarded expertise and stature on technical issues. ... Zvi Griliches, professor of economics at Harvard University, is the only member of the 12-person NAS committee who also served on the Boskin panel, called the Advisory Commission to Study the CPI. ... (Pam Ginsbach in Daily Labor Report, page A-10).
[PEN-L:2986] RE: Re: BLS Daily Report
It would be interesting to know what the composition of this NAS panel is. Any friends of EPI? Peter Dorman Next month, a newly appointed committee convened by the National Academy of Sciences will begin a 2-year study of a wide range of issues related to cost of living indexes . . . Katherine Abraham is a friend of ours. Zvi G, who was on the Boskin Commission, was the only one of that group who betrayed significant ambivalence about the output of the Commission. I don't know who else is on the panel. mbs
[PEN-L:2843] Re: BLS Daily Report
Richardson_D forwarded from the BLS: BLS has asked for $7 million to complete the revisions to the CPI to make it reflect more accurately cost-of-living changes Wanna bet that means a still-lower CPI? Doug
[PEN-L:2801] Re: BLS Daily Report
BLS DAILY REPORT, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1999 "This economy is the wonder of the economic world," Robert Dederick, consultant with the Northern Trust Co., tells the Bureau of National Affairs. "This is rewrite the [economic] textbook time. While the consumer continues to buy as if there is no tomorrow, the housing market is rip-roaring, and inflation is in check. It's a central banker's dream in a world that is a central banker's nightmare." Will wonders never cease? My advise for aspiring textbook rewriters -- wait and see. Wait and see. Judging strictly from the current volume of exuberant hyperbole, a hard rain is going to fall. regards, Tom Walker
[PEN-L:2657] Re: BLS Daily Report
__The AFL-CIO, pointing to new statistics from BLS that show membership in unions increased by more than 100,000 in 1998, says the organizing strategy laid out by the federation's leadership more than three years ago is working. In what is called putting a positive spin . . . The density of union membership in the workforce, however, decreased from 14.1 percent in 1997 to 13.9 percent in 1998. ... (Daily Labor Report, page A13). . . . on bad news. Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:2416] Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Tom Walker wrote: RELEASED TODAY: Median weekly earnings of the nation's 96.2 million full-time wage and salary workers were $541 in the fourth quarter of 1998. This was 5.9 percent higher than a year earlier, compared with a gain of 1.5 percent in the CPI-U over the same period. ... Four and a half percent is quite an astonishing increase in real median weekly earnings. The three-year increase in real weekly earnings for all of 1998 - 7.0% - is the highest since the BLS started the all private workers series in 1964, eclipsing 1973's previous record of 6.2%. For manufacturing workers, the 1995-1998 figure was 6.1%, which is lower than the golden age numbers, but still the highest since the early 1970s. Longer hours contributed a lot to recent performance, though; real hourly earnings for all private sector workers were up just 1.9% from 1995 to 1998; in the late 60s/early 70s, the figures were in the 4-7% range. Doug
[PEN-L:2005] Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
G'day Ellen and Jim, Jim writes: IMHO, the strength of the US stock market first and foremost reflects the strength of the US profit rate I get confused here. Many 1998 annual reports within the Fortune 500 pointed at DECLINING profits, no? And might we not be conflating 'core business' performance with profits made on the stock markets? I mean, if a firm spends a heap on buy backs ( other stocks, too, I s'pose) on a roaring Wall St, simply because of CEO stock options and the fact that making the widgets of yore doesn't offer the returns you can get from shares - why, wouldn't profit statements actually be reflecting Wall St (and a bubble at that) rather than underpinning it? Sorry if this is crap. I just gotta know, that's all. Cheers, Rob.
[PEN-L:2003] Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Ellen quotes: BLS DAILY REPORT, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 6, 1999 The prevailing view at the three-day meeting of the American Economic Association was that high stock prices probably reflect the economy's actual strength and not a speculative bubble that could burst. ... In the minds of many economists, the stock market serves mainly as a gauge of the real economy and a stimulus for spending. Ellen writes: Over the last few days, I have been looking over data on wages, exports, bankruptcies, etc. in the former so-called emerging markets. International capital, it seems, is really putting the screws to the laboring classes in Asia and South America. Asian assets are on sale at rock-bottom prices; commodity prices are so low, they're practically giving them away. Is this not the triumph of capitalism? Little wonder the Dow hit 9500. IMHO, the strength of the US stock market first and foremost reflects the strength of the US profit rate, with the speculative bubble being present but secondary. Orthodox economists tend to conflate what's good for capital (the profit rate, a high stock market) with what's good for the people (the GDP and its distribution, with limited negative environmental impact, etc., etc.) So it's natural that they would make this mistake. The question is whether the high US profit rate will persist given the mess that the rest of the world is in, not to mention the dynamic problems the result when an economy enjoys (and suffers from) a high and rising profit rate. (See my 1994 RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY paper, on-line at: http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/subpages/depr/D0.html or /Depr.html) Can the "triumph of capitalism" (or more accurately of some sectors of US capitalism) persist? It didn't after 1929, the previous period of similar capitalist triumphalism. So the question is: are we currently in the historical analogy of 1929 or of 1927? Ellen, it was good to see you at the convention! Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
[PEN-L:2004] Re: BLS Daily Report
strength and not a speculative bubble that could burst...In the minds of many economists, the stock market serves mainly as a gauge of the real economy and a stimulus for spending. I guess that means that "in the minds of many economists" the real economy grew 2.5% yesterday but then shrunk a bit today. Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:2002] Re: BLS Daily Report
At 10:45 AM 1/7/99 -0500, you wrote: BLS DAILY REPORT, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 6, 1999 The prevailing view at the three-day meeting of the American Economic Association was that high stock prices probably reflect the economy's actual strength and not a speculative bubble that could burst. ... In the minds of many economists, the stock market serves mainly as a gauge of the real economy and a stimulus for spending. Over the last few days, I have been looking over data on wages, exports, bankruptcies, etc. in the former so-called emerging markets. International capital, it seems, is really putting the screws to the laboring classes in Asia and South America. Asian assets are on sale at rock-bottom prices; commodity prices are so low, they're practically giving them away. Is this not the triumph of capitalism? Little wonder the Dow hit 9500. Ellen Frank
[PEN-L:2007] Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
On Thu, 7 Jan 1999, Jim Devine wrote: Ellen writes: Over the last few days, I have been looking over data on wages, exports, bankruptcies, etc. in the former so-called emerging markets. International capital, it seems, is really putting the screws to the laboring classes in Asia and South America. Asian assets are on sale at rock-bottom prices; commodity prices are so low, they're practically giving them away. Is this not the triumph of capitalism? Little wonder the Dow hit 9500. IMHO, the strength of the US stock market first and foremost reflects the strength of the US profit rate, with the speculative bubble being present but secondary. Orthodox economists tend to conflate what's good for capital (the profit rate, a high stock market) with what's good for the people (the GDP and its distribution, with limited negative environmental impact, etc., etc.) So it's natural that they would make this mistake. The question is whether the high US profit rate will persist given the mess that the rest of the world is in, not to mention the dynamic problems the result when an economy enjoys (and suffers from) a high and rising profit rate. (See my 1994 RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY paper, on-line at: http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/subpages/depr/D0.html or /Depr.html) Can the "triumph of capitalism" (or more accurately of some sectors of US capitalism) persist? It didn't after 1929, the previous period of similar capitalist triumphalism. So the question is: are we currently in the historical analogy of 1929 or of 1927? It seems, though, that US capital has found ways to benefit from the mess in the rest of the world. GE, for example, made huge purchases in Asia, which it had been eyeing and organizing for some time but had found them too expensive. The capital goods are so cheap now that even if it takes years for Asia to recover, GE will make out like bandits. And their stock will continue to soar. It's the old maxim about a crisis causing consolidation of capital, but the winners and losers were already mapped out before the crisis started. If we believe that profit rates equalize across sectors, then this banditry should create rising profitability in the US by raising the opportunity cost of investing. This would not preclude shrinkage in the "real" sector; in fact, it might even encourage it. Cheers, Tavis
[PEN-L:2010] Re: BLS Daily Report
Seems like "a" ,not "the", triumph of capitalism. Charles Brown "Ellen T. Frank" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/07 12:16 PM At 10:45 AM 1/7/99 -0500, you wrote: BLS DAILY REPORT, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 6, 1999 The prevailing view at the three-day meeting of the American Economic Association was that high stock prices probably reflect the economy's actual strength and not a speculative bubble that could burst. ... In the minds of many economists, the stock market serves mainly as a gauge of the real economy and a stimulus for spending. Over the last few days, I have been looking over data on wages, exports, bankruptcies, etc. in the former so-called emerging markets. International capital, it seems, is really putting the screws to the laboring classes in Asia and South America. Asian assets are on sale at rock-bottom prices; commodity prices are so low, they're practically giving them away. Is this not the triumph of capitalism? Little wonder the Dow hit 9500. Ellen Frank
[PEN-L:2008] Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Gosh, well I didn't get to any of those sessions where people were being so pollyannaish about the US stock market. OTOH lots of us have gotten burned predicting imminent collapses, etc., that have not happened, or were followed more than compensatory runups, as in the second half of last year. Nevertheless, I note that yesterday's Financial Times reports that the US $ has hit a recent low against the Japanese yen, partly triggered by comments by E. Seikekabaru (sp?), known as "Mr. Yen", that the US stock market is overvalued and that the US economy will shortly slow significantly. He used the term "bubble." Of course he could be wrong and this is January, when the "January Effect" of unusually rapidly rising stock prices frequently happens. But then October is often a time of unusual declines and this last one saw a record runup. Oh well, we shall just have to wait and see. Good to see a number of you in New York. Barkley Rosser On Thu, 07 Jan 1999 09:45:19 -0800 Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ellen quotes: BLS DAILY REPORT, WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 6, 1999 The prevailing view at the three-day meeting of the American Economic Association was that high stock prices probably reflect the economy's actual strength and not a speculative bubble that could burst. ... In the minds of many economists, the stock market serves mainly as a gauge of the real economy and a stimulus for spending. Ellen writes: Over the last few days, I have been looking over data on wages, exports, bankruptcies, etc. in the former so-called emerging markets. International capital, it seems, is really putting the screws to the laboring classes in Asia and South America. Asian assets are on sale at rock-bottom prices; commodity prices are so low, they're practically giving them away. Is this not the triumph of capitalism? Little wonder the Dow hit 9500. IMHO, the strength of the US stock market first and foremost reflects the strength of the US profit rate, with the speculative bubble being present but secondary. Orthodox economists tend to conflate what's good for capital (the profit rate, a high stock market) with what's good for the people (the GDP and its distribution, with limited negative environmental impact, etc., etc.) So it's natural that they would make this mistake. The question is whether the high US profit rate will persist given the mess that the rest of the world is in, not to mention the dynamic problems the result when an economy enjoys (and suffers from) a high and rising profit rate. (See my 1994 RESEARCH IN POLITICAL ECONOMY paper, on-line at: http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/subpages/depr/D0.html or /Depr.html) Can the "triumph of capitalism" (or more accurately of some sectors of US capitalism) persist? It didn't after 1929, the previous period of similar capitalist triumphalism. So the question is: are we currently in the historical analogy of 1929 or of 1927? Ellen, it was good to see you at the convention! Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html -- Rosser Jr, John Barkley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:2009] Re: BLS Daily Report
Barkley Rosser wrote, Of course he could be wrong and this is January, when the "January Effect" of unusually rapidly rising stock prices frequently happens. But then October is often a time of unusual declines and this last one saw a record runup. Oh well, we shall just have to wait and see. As I understand Say's law, for every seller, there's a buyer, eh?. Obviously, then there's as much money to be made during a stock market decline as during a rise. Or as Malthus said, "What an accumulation of commodities! Quels debouches! What a prodigious market would this event occasion!" (quoted by Keynes on page 364 of the General Theory of Employment) Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:1988] Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Doug writes: Ok, the adjustments to the CPI so far have lowered it by 0.4 points, and here we've got another 0.2. It looks like the Boskinites have won. Last time I said that, people disagreed, but I'm going to say it again. Not to minimize the bad news concerning this reestimation, but the good news, as Dave Richardson pointed out awhile back, is that lower measured inflation rates mean that the Fed is less likely to get pressured to step on the brakes. BTW, Doug, I didn't see you at the economics convention. I still owe you a beer (or four). I guess I'll have to send you a cyber-beer. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
[PEN-L:1994] Re: BLS Daily Report
Doug Henwood wrote, sounds like the Fed is worried about the stock market, now that the crisis period in Asia is fading. The president of the Atlanta Fed gave a speech the other day that evoked bubblish fears, though in that careful way Fedsters do. I was wondering when someone was going to notice. What's the market up so far this year? 5%? Tom Walker http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
[PEN-L:1992] Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily Report
Jim Devine wrote: Not to minimize the bad news concerning this reestimation, but the good news, as Dave Richardson pointed out awhile back, is that lower measured inflation rates mean that the Fed is less likely to get pressured to step on the brakes. I'm way out of touch here in southwestern Virginia this week, but it sounds like the Fed is worried about the stock market, now that the crisis period in Asia is fading. The president of the Atlanta Fed gave a speech the other day that evoked bubblish fears, though in that careful way Fedsters do. BTW, Doug, I didn't see you at the economics convention. I still owe you a beer (or four). I guess I'll have to send you a cyber-beer. 'Cause I'm way out of town this week. How's the convention? I heard there was a party for the Long Term Capital guys. Doug
[PEN-L:1962] Re: BLS Daily Report
Richardson_D wrote: "Consumer Choice and the CPI: Tossing a Variable Into the Market Basket" is the title of a "Trendlines" article by John M. Berry in the Washington Post. Berry says that BLS has been publishing an experimental version of the CPI that adjusts for consumer substitution of an item when a similar one goes up in price. A version of this formula, to be used officially beginning next month, lowers the index's annual increase by about 0.2 percentage points. ... This change, one of a series of alterations the agency has made in the CPI over the past several years to make it a truer measure of shifts in the cost of living, will be important for a wide swath of the U.S. population. For instance, it will reduce the annual cost-of-living adjustments in many government benefit programs, such as Social Security, relative to what the COLAs would have been without the change. It also will slightly reduce the annual adjustments made in parts of the personal income tax code to offset inflation, such as the size of personal exemptions, the standard deduction, and the so-called income break points between different tax brackets. ... When BLS Commissioner Katharine G. Abraham announced in April that the new formula, known as a geometric mean, would be used beginning in January, she noted that substitution isn't a simple matter. ... Ok, the adjustments to the CPI so far have lowered it by 0.4 points, and here we've got another 0.2. It looks like the Boskinites have won. Last time I said that, people disagreed, but I'm going to say it again. Doug
Re: [PEN-L:1576] Re: Re: Re: BLS Daily report
On Tue, 15 Dec 1998, Doug Henwood wrote: Michael Perelman wrote: In response to Tom's question below, I suspect that the Bank of International Settlements may be correct in so far as they go. The norm is not for a company to remove jobs via direct investment in a facility abroad. Outsourcing is a more likely route. Outsourcing need not involve direct investment. Besides, the Bank statement is unclear if t would even pick up the direct investment that leads to outsourcing. For example, GM wants to outsource an auto part. I invest in a shop in Bolivia to make the part, but not direct investment links the change to GM's laying workers off. Well how about this? The table shows total employment in U.S. motor vehicles and equipment up 265,000 from Jan 90-Nov 98 - or 216,000 looking at just production workers alone. In parts and accessories, the numbers are +167,000 and +130,000. After declining from the 1970s into the early 1990s, motor vehicles have increased their share of total employment since. Another point - though lots of people generalize about "globalization" trends from the auto industry, it represents well under 1% of total employment. Over 7 times as many people work in finance as in motor vehicles; 10 times in health, 20 times in government, and 22 times in retail. Doug Even services are "globalized". however, overseas shares of output, employment, etc. to total national output, employment, etc. is still very small. In other words, the whole question of globalization has been perhaps overblown. Anthony D'Costa EMPLOYMENT IN U.S. MOTOR VEHICLE INDUSTRY motor MV vehiclesparts equipment accessories --total total produc total produc employment 1/70 879 683 382 30671,018 1/80 852 627 388 30490,729 1/90 737 540 373 290 108,946 2/92 804 616 414 327 108,077 11/98 1,002 756 539 421 126,775 change to 11/98 from -- number 1/70 +123 +73 +157 +114 +55,757 1/80 +150 +129 +151 +117 +36,046 1/90 +265 +216 +167 +130 +17,829 2/92 +198 +140 +125 +94 +18,698 percent 1/70+14.0%+10.7%+41.1%+37.3%+78.5% 1/80+17.6%+20.6%+38.9%+38.4%+39.7% 1/90+36.0%+40.0%+44.7%+45.0%+16.4% 2/92+24.6%+22.7%+30.2%+28.8%+17.3% % of total 1/70 1.24% 0.96% 0.54% 0.43%100.0% 1/80 0.94% 0.69% 0.43% 0.33%100.0% 1/90 0.68% 0.50% 0.34% 0.27%100.0% 2/92 0.74% 0.57% 0.38% 0.30%100.0% 11/98 0.79% 0.60% 0.43% 0.33%100.0%
Re: [PEN-L:1573] Re: BLS Daily report
There is plenty of arguments and evidence as why FDI in LDCs do not displace jobs in the home countries in the same magnitude as popular perceptions might warrant. The reason is different segments of the production process or different types of production are normally farmed out. In other words skill intensities vary. However, this does not mean that home countries do not suffer from job losses in those sectors. The losses result from technological change. Un- semi-skilled work tends to get technologically substituted in the home country because of high wage costs. Low wage imports add to that burden. On the average, skill intensity of imports from LDcs tend to be much lower than competing industries in the home country. Most importantly, on the average, FDI is not determined by low wages. If that were the case, we would not have about 70% of global FDI taking place within the triad (US, WEur, Japan). Anthony P. D'Costa Associate Professor Comparative International Development University of Washington 1900 Commerce Street Tacoma, WA 98402, USA Phone: (253) 692-4462 Fax : (253) 692-5612 On Tue, 15 Dec 1998, Tom Kruse wrote: We read: BLS DAILY REPORT, MONDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1998 [snip] Outflows of foreign direct investment from rich to poor countries are having only a limited negative impact on employment in source economies, according to the Bank for International Settlements. ... "Fears that jobs are being destroyed in the industrialized countries when multinational enterprises invest in low-wage countries are only in part supported by the evidence," according to a working paper prepared by the bank. ... The authors point out that because of the low degree of substitution between employees in parent companies and their affiliates abroad, even where there may be some displacement of home-country workers due to Foreign Direct Investment, "such effects are likely to have been only moderate" ... (Daily Labor Report, page A-9). Comments anyone? This would seem to really challenge the "exporting manufacturing and other good jobs" thesis of globalization. I suppose we'd first need to know what "only in part" means. And what exaclty does substitution mean? That the overseas worker directly substitutes the US worker? What if in the transfer of the production process innovation occurs, eliminating a one-to-one correpsondence between jobs before in the US and jobs after overseas? Any insights? Tom Tom Kruse Casilla 5812 / Cochabamba, Bolivia Tel/Fax: (591-4) 248242 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PEN-L:1573] Re: BLS Daily report
There's a huge literature on this topic, which I don't have time to get into right now. (I summarized and critiqued the first wave of it in a report I wrote to the Labor Dept. back in 1995.) All I will say right now is that the question has generally been ill-posed. (1) It looks for absolute job loss, when the correct measure, in labor market terms, is the impact of marginal decreases in demand on wages. See also Dani Rodrik on this. (2) It misses entirely the political-economic mechanism, through which pressures on firms' investment decisions and countries' current accounts are translated into business-friendly economic policies. Rodrik sort of gets this. (3) On a technical level, every study I've seen makes neoclassical assumptions concerning the effects of international trade, market clearing, marginal productivity pricing, etc. that effectively beg the question. I've already gone on too long. Student papers to read. Peter Dorman
