LOL, the blog of the St. Louis Fed gaslights you on gasoline prices by jumping through hoops to make the current outrageous prices disappear

 While nominal gas prices have increased rapidly over the past few months, real gas prices were still lower than they were for most of the 2006-2014 period.

More in "Gaslighting gas prices", April 21, 2022.

They don't pay those economists the big bucks for nothing:

[W]e compute by dividing the nominal price by the consumer price index (CPI) and multiplying by 127.5, the value of the CPI in January 1990.

Talk about gaslighting.

Look, US Regular All Formulations (GASREGW), which is what the blog post used, peaked around the 4th of July in 2008 around $4.11/gallon. 

Here's what a popular inflation calculator says about that:

We estimate it would take $5.54 on June 12, 2022 to have equal purchasing power with $4.11 on July 4, 2008.     

Just using a simple CPI calculator here puts $4.11 in 2008 at $4.94  . . .  already IN 2020.

We are mostly certainly paying the highest prices ever for gasoline.

Be happy, right? At least we're not Hong Kong.

 

 

Median household income now buys about 17% of the median sales price of a house, a new low: Joe Biden is the Barack Obama of unaffordable housing, only worse

 Housing affordability has never been so bad.

The median sales price in 1Q2022 climbed to $428,700.

Median household income in January 2022 is estimated at $74,099, which buys 17.3% of the median house sold in the United States.

Official annual figures through 2020 are indicated in this chart.

 

 

LOL, the record used goes back only to 2009

 Producer prices rise 11.2%; Biggest gain on record...

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PPIFID

The oldest measure goes back to 1913:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PPIACO .

The percent change from a year ago is really bad, as in 1974 bad, but hardly the "biggest gain on record", as you can plainly see.

 

 

 

LOL, according to this stupid definition by a university pinhead, there are only 23.8 million middle class workers

“If you are holding a position that is non-managerial, non-executive level, doesn’t have a lot of decision power, you would have been classified in our study as working class,” Addo says [here].

In February 2022 there were 128.2 million total private employees. 104.4 million of them were "production and nonsupervisory".

 

That's a ratio of workers to supervisors of about 4.4:1 in the private sector. In the federal government, the ratio's much worse, somewhere between 7-10:1. That's probably closer to the truth also for the entire government sector,  which is 22.2  million strong.

 

The supervisors are the elite minority, hello. 

The best proxy for middle class has always been homeownership: house, condo, whatever. It's one of the most basic things which has defined us and more importantly united us for generations. There was a time when everyone said, rich and poor alike, that they were middle class, it was that strong of an American ideal. 

Now we're stuck with a bunch of eggheads trying to divide us by overthrowing definitions.

Total households in 2020 numbered about 128.5 million in the United States. Roughly 84 million were owner occupied at the time, 42 million renter occupied, a ratio of 2:1.

 

The average size of a household in 2020 was about 2.53: (84 + 42) 2.53 = 319 million (a relatively small additional number of Americans lives in subsidized housing, military housing, and institutionalized housing).

A broad swath of Americans, 66%, lives in an owned home, with about a third distributed at the top and the bottom renting out of either convenience or necessity.

 

And most of them are by definition nonsupervisory employees.

Democrats won control of all the important levers of federal government in 2020, but "democracy is on life support"

I'll say.

With Democracy on Life Support, GOP Wants to Pull Plug

Brad Bannon, The Hill

 

Democracy as brought to you by Democrats in 2020 has meant surrender to the Taliban in Afghanistan, 

 

The Science ™ mutating every four weeks,

 

doubling down on a vaccine which hasn't "shut down the virus", 

 

a 30.5% increase to currency in circulation since Democrats took the House in 2018,

 

inflation raging by nearly 11% over the period and people pretending not to know why,

 

the purchasing power of the US dollar falling by 9.6%,

 

the total public debt up $8 trillion, 37%, 

missing full-time jobs of at least 13 million,

 

illegal immigration soaring under Biden to the third-highest in 97 years, 

 

toleration of unprecedented race riots and violent crime in every major American city,

 

designating parents irate over public schools propagandizing students about race "terrorists",

 

and that's just off the top of my head, which I still have because Democrats don't own the Supreme Court . . . yet.

 

 

 

 

 

Currency in Circulation is up over 24% Oct 2019 to Oct 2021 and people wonder why there is inflation

 https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CURRCIR

In 2020 global debt to global GDP soared to 356%

Global debt finished 4Q at $281 trillion:  3.56x = $281 trillion, so x = $78.93 trillion global GDP.

US GDP in 2020 was $20.9 trillion, TCMDO was $83.49 trillion (almost 400%).

What could go wrong, right? You are fully invested in stonks, amirite?!

The problem is that the global corporate sector has been caught in the COVID-19 shock with unprecedented levels of financial leverage; global debt on non-financial corporations was $71 trillion at the end of 2018, representing 93% of global GDP.

 

 

 

Beyond parody: Delusional Rush Limbaugh says red states are paying for all this emergency spending

Here:

"The red states are gonna create capital and money to transfer to pay these people their stupid welfare costs (and whatever else they’re using to bleed this country dry), while their population sits home, doesn’t work, waits for the federal check to show up — and they sit around and they trash the supposedly reckless red states. I cannot tell you how this irritates me".

No one is "paying" for anything. It's all borrowed. And Limbaugh's personal portfolio is probably buying a bunch of it, as is every portfolio out there, from individual investors to institutional, to sovereigns, etc. The entire world craves the safety and security of US Treasury securities and can hardly get enough of them, but Limbaugh thinks Republican states are carrying the whole world on their shoulders.

Even as Limbaugh was yammering away spouting stupid, 10-year Treasury securities were flying out the door at record low rates at auction:

"The U.S. Treasury held an auction for $32 billion of 10-year notes in Tuesday afternoon, selling them at a record low yield of 0.70%". 

Federal debt has soared from $23.5 trillion on March 16th to $25.1 trillion on May 11th, and it'll keep soaring.

The Federal Reserve Bank's balance sheet has soared from $4.1 trillion on February 26th to $6.7 trillion on May 6th, and it will keep soaring.

And they are just getting started:

"The central bank had previously balked at direct aid to nonfinancial businesses, but is set to finance trillions in relief across nearly every sector of the economy amid a historic downturn".

Meanwhile Federal Reserve lending operations at ultra-low rates continue to keep businesses alive which should have died long ago. They were doing it before Trump came along, did it with Trump's assent after his election, and will keep doing it.

The Trump administration has signed off on this gargantuan repudiation of free market capitalism, but Rush Limbaugh thinks it's all paid for by Joe Sixpack.

Trump marks the end of Republicanism's "fiscal conservative" brand for at least a generation, and that's what really irritates Rush Limbaugh. He's hitched his wagon to a wayward horse and now it's in the ditch along with the rest of the country.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Don't catch a "cold" down there in that puddle.

CNN Business is stupid: "Women now hold more jobs than men"

Here's the lede:

Women held slightly more jobs than men in December — the first time that's happened in nearly a decade. 

That's based on the Establishment Survey, which undercounts civilian employment by the millions.

The Household Survey shows 84 million men employed in December 2019, 74.8 million women. Employed women have never outnumbered employed men in the entire post-war history of the data.

Housing update: Case Shiller National Home Price Index hit 212 in October 2019, 51% above 140

The Case Shiller National Home Price Index hit 212 in October 2019, 51% above 140. The full data at the new iteration of the index since February 2018 is behind a registration wall. 

The 140 level was the level around which the index tracked for most of the post-war until the year 2000, in a range between 120 and 160.

Since then it's been as high as 235 in 2005 and 2006 during the housing bubble, and as low as 151 in February 2012 after the bubble sort-of popped. A real correction might have taken prices to 120 or even below.

Clearly the index never returned to the post-war experience, which was mostly slightly below 140. Keeping housing prices high became a Federal Reserve objective and bragging point after the Great Financial Crisis of 2008, achieved by manipulating interest rates lower.

The median sales price of an existing home in the US is currently $271,300 through November 2019, a price which is traditionally considered affordable to any individual making $104,346 per year and up.

Seeing that's just 8.5% of individual wage earners in 2018, the median sales price of an existing home is currently UNAFFORDABLE to 91.5% of wage earners.

Most people have to put together two incomes to afford such a house. But in a country where the median wage is south of $33,000 per year in 2018, two incomes only gets you to $66,000, which affordably buys you a house worth about $171,600 or so, $100,000 less than the current median sales price.

In my immediate vicinity, there's exactly two such single family homes on the market right now which are affordable to a couple making $66,000. Everything else costs much, much more.

This is a picture of declining equal opportunity.

The rising share of workers not making the average wage

Note that under Bill Clinton, many important things happened which were detrimental to the middle class:

Bill Clinton raised taxes shortly after taking office in 1993 even though he had run promising not to.

Part-time employment soared as a result. 

Borrowing from home equity lines also soared as the middle class struggled to maintain its lifestyle in the wake of the recent recession, reducing "owners' equity in real estate" dramatically.

And, of course, the percentage of Americans not making the raw average wage ballooned by 2.6 points under Clinton, and by 4.1 points total by 2018.  

The difference between a payroll population not making the raw average wage in 2018 at 63.3% vs. 67.4% is 6.87 million.

That's roughly equivalent to the number of homes lost to foreclosure in the housing debacle, which bottomed in the spring of 2012. The share not making the average wage first hit 67% that same year.

This history since 1990 is a picture of the middle class under pressure and actually shrinking.

The only good thing that can be said about it is that the trend is flat since 2015, not worsening.

The fools at CNBC write the dumbest headlines about jobs

"Strong job growth is back: Payrolls jump in June well above expectations"

The Civilian Employment Level is cyclical. It routinely bottoms in January and peaks in the summer with the cycle of seasonal part-time and full-time, the latter peaking in the summer months when millions of new graduates from high school and college get their first jobs.

So it is completely natural to have higher expectations for good jobs numbers in the summer, especially after four months of poorer performance than 224,000 Total Nonfarm Payrolls.

But if we were really having a jobs boom, "strong job growth", it would look like this, not like Trump's record so far with just two months out of thirty above 300,000:

April 2019: 882K dropped out of labor force, labor force contracted 726K, employment level contracted 103K, participation rate fell to 62.8% (the 2016 average), average weekly hours so far in 2019 down 0.4 from 2018 average

Data.

Data.

Data.

Data.

Data.

But other than that it's an economic boom because total nonfarm is up 263K.

Rush Limbaugh doesn't know what he's talking about when he says there are more job openings than workers

Total nonfarm job openings: 7,581,000

A: Unemployment level: 6,235,000

B: Not in labor force want a job now: 5,222,000

C: Not in labor force age 25-54: 22,015,000

A is the official unemployment level. To be counted in it you have to be counted in the labor force.

B is the number of people in addition to the unemployed who are unemployed but aren't counted as such because they are not in the labor force. These are the people unemployed longer than one year who say they still want a job when they are surveyed.

C is all the people of prime working age who aren't in the labor force and aren't counted as unemployed. Some of B are included in this number. This group averaged 21.3 million in both 2006 and 2007, before the shit hit the fan, and got as high as almost 24 million in 2015. It averaged 22.7 million last year. The data goes back only to 1982 but shows that in the 1980s and some of the 1990s that this group shrank during jobs recoveries just as it is shrinking now. There is lots of potential labor here sitting on the sidelines.

In any event, A + B means at least 11.5 million jobless with 7.6 million openings.

Advantage: employers.

P. S. I have seen the very same jobs with the very same companies advertized for years on end. How do they never get filled, hm?

I remember when Trump promised a 10% spending cut in Jan 2017, now Kudlow announces a 5% cut after Republicans spend us blind: 100% politics, 0% serious

Trump to whack DC with 10% cut to discretionary spending, 20% cut to personnel

What a crock that turned out to be.

Federal employment is exactly in Feb 2019 where it was in Nov 2016: 2.799 million. 

And outlays? Look at the outlays!

Outlays in fiscal 2017 were up 3.3% from 2016, up another 4.8% in 2018, and up again in fiscal 2019 a whopping 5.6%.

Overall for fiscal 2019 spending is up 14.4% from 2016.

Just in time for the next election cycle, however, Larry Kudlow is out promising a spending cut of 5%.

Total BS.

What amounts to the second estimate of Q4GDP is out today, and the calendar year 2018 figure is just 2.9%

2016: 1.6%

2017: 2.2%

2018: 2.9%

America has not had a 3.0% real GDP or better year since 2005 . . . fourteen years ago.

Pathetic. Disgusting. An indictment of the policies of both political parties and of American business.

No jobs, no hope, no America I once knew at all.

H. Ross Perot's $13/hr factory jobs going to Mexico in 1992 should pay $27/hr today adjusted for inflation but pay only $18

The giant sucking sound clip from 1992 is here.

Perot characterized factory wages in 1992 as typically paying between $12 and $14 per hour.

Adjusted for inflation the $13 job in 2017 would pay nearly $27 per hour. The reality is it pays a lot less than that. Factory work in Michigan today basically starts at $15, up only 25% not 107%. The average manufacturing job paying $21+ is composed of a lot of such lower paying positions.

The reality is in Michigan that the top eventual $18/hr advertised wage is the equivalent of less than $9/hr in 1992.

The jobs have gone out of the country, expanding middle classes abroad while impoverishing our own at home.

Andrew Yarrow: Over 20 million men are not employed, five times the official 4 million

Excerpted from his book Man Out, here:

We’re left with the reality that the percentage of men not employed today is about three times what it was during the Truman and Eisenhower eras: well over 20 million men. Not the four million officially deemed to be unemployed.

The unemployment level for men averaged 4.18 million in 2016 and 3.73 million in 2017.

Noah Smith embraces the Trump narrative: "There’s no doubt that the U.S. economy is in a boom"

Here for Bloomberg.

After examining several indicators, which, however, are not unequivocal for their interpretation despite saying "no doubt", Noah Smith comes down on the side of improved sentiment as the cause of the current "boom".

On that we agree. There's a boom in sentiment.

The problem is, too many people are importing that improved sentiment into their reading of the data, and into their choice of the data.

For example, Smith focuses on job openings to unemployed, which is a tiny measure (6.66 million in June) of what's really going on in the labor market. But the broadest measures of unemployment still show 15.9 million unemployed, underemployed, and no longer counted in the labor force. There is still huge slack in the labor market, which is one reason why wages for the vast majority of workers are not rising like they would in a real economic boom (2.7% y/y in July vs. in the 4s in 2006/7).

Similarly Smith discusses the percent of population employed aged 25-54, but clearly misses that it's most definitely not "back to 2006 levels" as he claims (H1 2018 is at 79.2%, still below the 2006 average of 79.8% and also below the average of either half of 2006). The broadest measure of the percent employed, on the other hand, still shows a huge gap between now and the pre-Great Recession average when over 6 million more were employed than are at present (60.5% now vs. 62.9% then, on average).

The case is similar with domestic investment.

Smith chooses to highlight "Shares of gross domestic product: Gross private domestic investment: Fixed investment: Nonresidential (A008RE1Q156NBEA)" to show that "investment as a percentage of the economy is at about the level of the mid-2000s boom". But the current level in H1 2018 at 13.7% is also identical to H2 2014. Was that indicative of a boom? Did we blink and miss it? How about in H1 2008 when it was again at 13.7%? Was that indicative of a boom? If so, why did the economy then promptly crash in H2 2008?

A broader measure of domestic investment, however, "Shares of gross domestic product: Gross private domestic investment (A006RE1Q156NBEA)", shows us well off the 2006 peak and even the more recent 2015 level. Whatever we call what we have right now, the current 17.7% is still far below the 19.8% level of H1 2006, which itself failed to equal the boom level of the year 2000 (19.9%).

With all that cash unleashed by the tax reforms and sloshing around in the economy, one would think things would look a lot better than this, which simply shows that most of that money indeed went elsewhere.

GDP has been temporarily goosed by the tax reforms in concert with a fresh gusher of federal deficit spending. But those are one-offs. They will not, and cannot, be repeated over and over again in short succession.

We know what comes next.

Political reality in Michigan summer 2018

The left is still here, waiting to be roused.

Barack Obama 2008:  2,872,579

Barack Obama 2012:  2,564,569

Donald Trump 2016:  2,279,543

Hillary Clinton 2016: 2,268,839

While Hillary's deficit to Trump was just 10,704 votes, to Obama it was between 295,730 and 603,740 votes.

Somebody here in Michigan really disliked Hillary.

Who could it be?

Bernie Sanders 2016 Democrat primary: 598,943

Hillary Clinton 2016 Democrat primary: 581,775

Donald Trump 2016 Republican primary: 483,753

all other Republicans 2016 primary: 842,836

Trump admitted in December 2016 in remarks in Grand Rapids that "a bunch of people didn't show up" in November, which is the real reason he won here. Obviously a mix of Bernie supporters/black people couldn't bring themselves to vote for Hillary in the general.

But they didn't just go away.

Trump approval in Michigan in June 2018 is at 44%, disapproval at 52%. He was at 48/40 in January 2017. That growth of disapproval combined with erosion of approval looks problematic for Michigan Republicans in November.

Michigan's employment level, though much improved, still hasn't recovered to pre-Great Recession levels, and is flat to slightly declining in early 2018. GDP on the other hand is better than the pre-Great Recession period, but is flat in the mid-threes. These things argue for continued Republican governance, but cheerleaders for a Trump boom will encounter a disconnect with the actual experience of people. They are advised to cool it.