Thursday, April 30, 2020

New CBO Projections Suggest Even Bigger State Shortfalls [feedly]

New CBO Projections Suggest Even Bigger State Shortfalls
https://www.cbpp.org/blog/new-cbo-projections-suggest-even-bigger-state-shortfalls

State budget shortfalls from COVID-19's economic fallout could total $650 billion over three years, we estimate based on new economic projections from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and updated projections from Goldman Sachs. The new figures — significantly higher than estimates we recently issued based on economic projections of a month ago — increase the urgency that policymakers enact additional federal fiscal relief and continue it as long as economic conditions warrant.

CBO now projects that unemployment will average 15 percent for the next six months and then fall only slowly. It will still be 9.5 percent — just short of its 10 percent peak in the Great Recession — at the end of 2021. These CBO estimates take into account the federal aid already enacted for businesses, individuals, and state and local governments.

That's considerably more pessimistic than CBO's April 2 projections and Goldman Sachs' projections of March 31 and April 15. A paper we recently issued on state fiscal conditions used Goldman's March 31 projections and the historical relationship between unemployment and state revenues to estimate that states would face $500 billion in state shortfalls in fiscal years 2020 through 2022. Averaging CBO's new projections with the latest Goldman estimates produces shortfalls totaling $650 billion, substantially deeper than during the Great Recession. (See chart.) This estimate is for state budget shortfalls only; it does not reflect the additional shortfalls that local governments, territories, and tribes face.

Federal aid provided to date will help cover some of these shortfalls but it is not nearly enough. Only about $65 billion of the aid provided in earlier COVID-19 packages is readily available to narrow these shortfalls. Using that aid and the $75 billion that states have in rainy day funds would leave states with about $510 billion in unaddressed shortfalls.

States must balance their budgets every year, even in recessions. Without substantial federal help, they very likely will deeply cut areas such as education and health care, lay off teachers and other workers, and cancel contracts with businesses. That would worsen the recession, delay recovery, and hurt families and communities. The health care cuts could also shortchange coronavirus response efforts. The large budget shortfalls could lead states and localities to raise taxes and fees, as well.

No one knows precisely how this unprecedented crisis will affect the economy, but underestimating its effects would have grave consequences for state budgets and thus for families, businesses, and communities. If federal aid ends too soon, states will have to depend much more heavily on spending cuts and tax increases to balance their budgets. Accordingly, the next relief package should include a large new round of fiscal relief, using "triggers" based on job market conditions to determine when assistance phases up or phases out.

A national trigger would ensure that relief measures continue nationwide as long as needed but no longer. Since the recovery may occur at different rates across the country, additional state-specific triggers could provide longer-lasting help in states facing greater challenges after nationwide relief triggers off.

State relief can include these triggers whether it takes the form of a higher federal Medicaid matching rate to cover Medicaid's costs — a particularly efficient method — grants to states, or (as is most likely and most efficacious) a combination of the two. Policymakers should also link measures such as expanded jobless benefits and increased SNAP (food stamp) benefits to job market indicators, so such measures continue as long as they're needed.

The Great Recession shows the potential problems from not tying relief measures to economic conditions — and letting them end too early. Although unemployment remained quite high in the years after the economy hit bottom and the recession technically ended, policymakers let critical relief measures expire prematurely, which slowed the recovery materially and increased hardship.

COVID-19 State Budget Shortfalls Could Be Largest on Record

 -- via my feedly newsfeed

3.8 million Americans sought jobless benefits last week, extending pandemic’s grip on the national workforce [feedly]

3.8 million Americans sought jobless benefits last week, extending pandemic's grip on the national workforce
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/30/weekly-jobless-claims-unemployment/?utm_source=feedly&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=wp_business

More than 3.8 million people filed for unemployment benefits last week, according to the Labor Department, as the coronavirus pandemic's economic toll burrowed deeper into the American workforce.

The outbreak and subsequent recession have wiped away all jobs created since the 2008 financial crisis. Economists estimate the national unemployment rate sits between 15 and 20 percent, compared to about 25 percent at the peak of the Great Depression.

For comparison, 4.4 million people applied for benefits for the week ending April 18., and 30.3 million have sought benefits in the past six weeks alone. That figure represents roughly 1 in 5 American workers.

There is no precedent for figures like this in modern American history.

Image without a caption

At first, national attention focused on the unprecedented wave of layoffs tied to restaurant and other non-essential businesses, said Tara Sinclair, an economist at the George Washington University and senior fellow of the Indeed Hiring Lab. But it quickly became clear that many more industries were going to be hit by the downturn. Even in the midst of a global pandemic, Sinclair pointed to recent job losses in the health care industry, as surgeries and other elective procedures are cancelled in large numbers.

AD
ADVERTISING

"No job is safe," Sinclair said.

During normal times, a few hundred thousand people might seek unemployment benefits on any given week, but millions of Americans have filed claims each week for more than a month. This has overwhelmed state processing centers and expedited the debate in Washington about how to respond to the economic turmoil. Many Americans have stopped paying their rent and other bills, and economists are predicting any recovery will stretch well into 2021, and possibly beyond.

During normal times, the economy will add a few million jobs each year. It could take many years for the economy to add back the 30 million jobs lost in the past six weeks.

Thursday's figures offer the latest snapshot at how badly - and quickly - the economy has suffered from the pandemic as people stay home and avoid travel, dining out, shopping and entertainment. Data released by the Commerce Department on Wednesday showed the U.S. economy shrank 4.8 percent from January through March, marking the biggest decline since the Great Recession. As global air travel dries up, Boeing said Wednesday it plans a 10 percent staff reduction — more than 14,000 jobs.

AD

At the same time, a growing number of states are pushing to reopen malls, factories, restaurants and other businesses, even amid worker and consumer concerns for public health.

Unemployed workers on facing an uncertain future | Voices from the Pandemic
Over 10 million Americans filed for unemployment in March. Here are some of their stories. (Monica Rodman/The Washington Post)

On Tuesday, President Trump signed an executive order giving the federal government broad powers to ensure that meat and poultry processing plants stay open. Simon Property Group, the nation's largest mall owner, plans to reopen more than four dozen properties in 10 states. Florida's Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) joined Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) in rolling back statewide restrictions.

Sinclair said it's too soon to tell whether, or how soon, jobs will return to states vying to reopen. Data from the next few weeks could spell out whether businesses are rehiring — or if the virus and declining economy keep weekly unemployment claims in the millions.

AD

"Do people feel safer going back to work? Are they getting jobs back with their old employers?" Sinclair asked. "That will help evaluate what the economy is going to look like the rest of the year."


 -- via my feedly newsfeed

The U.S Needs Way More Than a Bailout to Recover From Covid-19 [feedly]

An interesting take on a WW II like economic mobilization to meet the depression threat in the current COVID crisis. From Barry Ritholtz, a liberal investment analyst, with a better than average forecasting record.

The U.S Needs Way More Than a Bailout to Recover From Covid-19
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-04-30/bailout-isn-t-enough-for-economy-to-recover-from-coronavirus

The economic crisis created by Covid-19 is unlike any other in modern American history. Thousands are dead, and the economic fallout has been devastating. More people lost their jobs over four weeks in March and April than did so during the entire 2008-09 financial crisis. In fact, since mid-March, all of the employment gains since the last crisis ended have been lost. Of the 156 million people the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics measured as working full time then, more than 26 million—about 16.7%—were no longer receiving a paycheck as of April 23. If you add in gig workers and those who were unable to file unemployment claims because state offices were too overwhelmed, the tally was more than 20%. At this pace, we will eclipse the peak of unemployment during the Great Depression, 25%, in a matter of weeks.

This sudden collapse in economic activity, hitting every sector except for food, health care, and Netflix, is why Congress moved quickly to pass the $2 trillion CARES Act on March 27. In late April, lawmakers added $320 billion to replenish the U.S. Small Business Administration's Paycheck Protection Program. That sounds like a lot, until you learn that the first allotment, $349 billion, lasted barely a week. CARES2, another trillion-dollar stimulus, is already under congressional consideration. CARES3 won't be too far behind.

But these are all temporary salves, not long-term solutions. The current rescues only treat the symptoms of economic distress; they do nothing to address structural issues that have been a drag on middle-class household income since the 1980s. If we want to restart the engine that made this nation a superpower, we need to do something big. I mean really, really big: defeat-the-Nazis, land-a-man-on-the-moon, invent-the-internet big.

There's no small amount of irony in this coming from me. I'm the guy who wrote an entire book, Bailout Nation, arguing against bailouts for, among others, Chrysler in 1980, Long-Term Capital Management in 1998, and the failing banks of 2008-09.

But I'm not talking about a bailout. For generations, and most successfully in the Depression's aftermath, the U.S. has used public-private partnerships to drive the country's economic expansion, allowing entrepreneurs and innovative companies to take advantage of the long-term planning and financial strength of Uncle Sam. This strategy led to new industries and technologies, creating millions of good middle-class jobs in the process. This is the solution that must no longer be overlooked. What we need right now are public-private partnerships on a scale not attempted since the Depression.

When the stock market crashed in 1929, the Federal Reserve was a young institution with limited authority. Reviving the economy was the job of the White House and Congress. Programs such as the Works Progress Administration, in which the federal government hired workers to build more than half a million miles of streets and 10,000 bridges, along with airports, dams, highways, and sanitation systems, helped alleviate mass unemployment. However, the lasting economic gains came not from temporary work programs, but rather from the Reconstruction Finance Corp., a public-private entity better known as the RFC.

Louis Hyman, an economic historian and director of the Institute for Workplace Studies at Cornell, recently described RFC in the Atlantic as "an independent agency within the federal government that set up lending systems to channel private capital into publicly desirable investments. It innovated new systems of insurance to guarantee those loans, and delivered profits to businesses in peril during the Depression." Most impressive, as Hyman has noted, these programs cost taxpayers nothing.

relates to The U.S Needs Way More Than a Bailout to Recover From Covid-19
The Rural Electrification Administration helped finance thousands of miles of electrical wires to benefit farms and ranches.
SOURCE: LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

The RFC was an enormous economic multiplier. Start with the Depression-era breakdown of the banking system. That institutional collapse wasn't caused by a lack of capital; larger national banks such as National City Bank and Bank of America had idle cash. But low potential returns, combined with post-traumatic stress lingering from the stock crash, made bankers so risk-averse they wouldn't even lend to each other.

The RFC's solution in 1934 was for private bank employees to work with its subsidiary, the Federal Housing Administration, to create insurance for pools of mortgages. This led to a resurgence of financing for home purchases. Another RFC subsidiary, the Rural Electrification Administration, worked with farm cooperatives and banks to issue low-interest 20-year loans to run thousands of miles of electrical wires to rural farms and ranches—something the private sector had said would be too expensive.

During the years before World War II, the RFC created the Defense Plant Corp., offering loans and tax benefits for the manufacture of tanks, planes, and other weapons used by the Allies to fight the Nazis. The DPC helped add 50% to the country's manufacturing capacity by the war's end, according to Hyman. In 1940 it was responsible for 25% of the nation's entire gross domestic product. Hyman noted that it remade the U.S. aerospace and electronics industries, turning them into some of the largest sectors in the economy.

Half a century later, most Americans have forgotten all that these public-private partnerships accomplished—to such an extent that there is political hay to be made by demonizing government programs of any kind. We've lived off their fruits while failing to establish new programs. This void has led to a list of structural issues: underemployment, an increasing wage gap, a lack of household savings, and a looming retirement crisis.

By the time the Great Recession arrived in the late aughts, Congress resisted the idea of a big stimulus plan. That was, until Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke informed them the nation was "days away from a complete meltdown of our financial system," as then-Senator Christopher Dodd later recounted. Even then, lawmakers didn't do all that much, passing the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, which was later reduced to $431 billion, and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, a $787 billion plan that included short-term benefit extensions and tax cuts.

While Congress dithered, the response of the U.S. central bank was unprecedented. The Fed fashioned dozens of programs to put $4 trillion into credit markets. This helped to unfreeze credit markets and allowed bank lending to occur. The Great Depression had FDR; the Great Recession had Ben Bernanke.

His actions were effective in a narrow sense: He saved the finance sector. The Fed's zero-interest-rate policy stopped 2/28 adjustable-rate mortgages—loans with teaser rates that shot higher after 24 months—from resetting, which prevented defaults. This gave banks time to gradually improve their balance sheets, but it planted seeds that led to a variety of unintended consequences.

Saving the banks turned out to be a boon to property owners, homebuilders, and the private equity funds that were investing in distressed real estate, who saw their holdings quickly recover their value. But those who didn't own homes, including many people who'd lost them to foreclosure, were turned into renters.

relates to The U.S Needs Way More Than a Bailout to Recover From Covid-19
An FHA poster from the early 1940s. The Federal Housing Administration created insurance for pools of mortgages, which led to a resurgence of financing for home purchases after the Great Depression.
SOURCE: NARA

Investors did well, of course. If you still owned stock in March 2009, when the market hit its lowest point—or better yet, if you had enough capital to buy more stock—your risk-taking was richly rewarded. From those lows, the S&P 500 tripled over the next few years. Even with the recent post-Covid correction, the index is still worth four times what it was in 2009.

Most Americans don't own much in stocks. In a 2017 study, Edward Wolff, a professor at New York University and researcher at the National Bureau of Economic Research, found that the wealthiest 10% of U.S. households owned 84% of all stocks. During the recovery, the wealthiest segments of society got wealthier. I should disclose that I benefited from it personally, too. My firm, Ritholtz Wealth Management, manages more than a billion dollars in stocks and bonds. Our clients did well in part because their portfolios have benefited dramatically from rising prices. The Fed deserves credit for some of that increase in asset values.

Another enormous windfall went to those employees who had lots of company stock options. From October 2007 to March 2009, the S&P 500 fell 56%. Many companies, including AppleStarbucks, and Google, allowed their employees to trade in worthless stock options for new ones with much lower strike prices in 2009. The biggest beneficiaries were the executives who held the lion's share of issued options. As the market and the economy recovered thanks in part to the Fed's monetary efforts, these options became deep in the money. Tens of millions of dollars in risk-free profit were created for some already wealthy people.

While the financial sector recovered, Congress did little to help the rest of the economy. In the past, when household and private-sector demand collapsed, the government stepped in to replace it by spending more and cutting taxes. For reasons people still debate—ideology? deficit concerns? partisanship?—the fiscal response in 2009 was sorely lacking.

As people began to find new jobs, they were often worse than the ones they'd lost during the crisis—with lower wages and fewer (if any) benefits. Without a substantial fiscal stimulus, the good middle-class jobs associated with large public works projects or civil service employment never materialized. Gains from the economic recovery never "trickled down" to the working classes.

The 2020 economic rescue has skimmed from the responses to both the Great Depression and the Great Recession. But so far it's been heavily slanted toward the latter approach, as the Fed has slashed interest rates to zero and committed more than $2 trillion to keep rates low and credit markets liquid. The $2 trillion CARES Act aims to replace income and spending for those 92% of Americans under shelter-in-place orders until the crisis passes. Most of that CARES money will replace lost wages for employees of small and midsize businesses for a short while; the rest will cover lost revenue for a few larger businesses. There's also money going to states, cities, and hospitals.

The response has been more substantial than what the government did during the 2008-09 crisis. But it's still nowhere near enough.

We should be using RFC-like partnerships to build technological platforms and infrastructure for the future. The list of potential areas is long—but here are a few ideas:

① Climate remediation

Nine of the 10 warmest years in recorded history have occurred since 2005. What's been missing from the attempts to address global warming has been a comprehensive search for a huge technological solution to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, or perhaps a series of smaller ones that cumulatively have a substantial impact. Accelerating this process could have implications for avoiding what might very likely be humanity's next great crisis.

② Sustainable energy

One reason for modest hope in the looming climate crisis has been incremental improvements in the efficiency of wind and solar energy, along with battery storage improvements. What we need to make this energy technology much more efficient would be a Manhattan Project of sorts, aiming for fundamental breakthroughs in both the science and the technology. The resulting cheap, abundant energy would help reduce future carbon emissions and pollution—and lower costs for energy-intensive businesses.

③ Infrastructure

The U.S. once had the world's leading roads, airports, and electrical grids. We have foolishly allowed these to fall into disrepair and decay. This lowers the quality of life, hurts economic growth, and puts America at a disadvantage to rising powers in Asia. The solution is to create a Reconstruction Infrastructure Corp. to prioritize projects for repair and rebuilding. Fund it with 50- to 100-year bonds issued at 2%. Infrastructure is more than a make-work program; it's the platform that allows businesses to operate efficiently.

④ Smart roads

Speaking of platforms, it's only a matter of time before self-driving cars are here. Greater traffic capacity, faster commutes, and reduced automobile fatalities will be the happy result. But whether this happens in a few years or, more pessimistically, a few decades is unclear. What would speed things along would be a uniform set of radio-frequency devices built into roads and vehicles to allow safe navigation regardless of weather or traffic conditions. A public-private partnership could (among other things) create a set of standards that allows different vehicle manufacturers to interact safely on the open road.

⑤ Digitized health care

How is it possible that in 2020 the flow of health-care information has yet to become seamless and universal? How is this crucial sector still operating as if it were the 19th century? Prior government attempts to address this issue have been too modest. Instead, combine the government's efforts with the health-care initiative created by Warren Buffett, Jamie Dimon, and Jeff Bezos—and create a bold, comprehensive experiment.

⑥ Asteroid mining

This isn't merely something out of science fiction. Serious technologists believe we could launch a fleet of unmanned ships to mine valuable minerals. I understand that some want to go to Mars. I say aim farther, all the way to the asteroid belt, with its vast riches of industrial metals, nickel, cobalt, and likely gold and platinum.

In all of those examples, the journey is the reward. Landing a man on the moon was a triumph of ingenuity, but the economic benefits came from the technology that the Apollo program developed. Integrated circuits, fireproof materials, water purification, freeze-dried food, polymer fabrics, cordless tools—the list is so long that we take it for granted. We need to update President Kennedy's challenge, not for the national glory, but for the societywide economic benefits.

relates to The U.S Needs Way More Than a Bailout to Recover From Covid-19
Buzz Aldrin walks on the moon during the Apollo 11 mission in 1969.
SOURCE: NASA

Some will say what I'm arguing for here would be a departure from 21st century U.S. political and economic realities. But as entrepreneur and author Bhu Srinivasan points out in Americana: A 400-Year History of American Capitalism, Uncle Sam has successfully partnered with the private sector throughout our history, creating exclusive monopolies through patent protections and municipal bonds, among many other innovations. Or, to quote the venture capitalist William Janeway, the U.S. innovation economy has always been "sponsored by the state and funded by speculation."

It sometimes takes a crisis to get past the usual partisan wrangling in Congress. Right now there's a rare willingness to try more short-term stimulus. But the lesson of the past two centuries is that to benefit the U.S. population, the government needs to enact a long-lasting fiscal stimulus—a new NASA, not just an extra few hundred dollars to get us through the next few months.

Grover Norquist once said his goal for government was "to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub." It's a great punchline, right up until you need the government to fight the Nazis—or to control a global pandemic that threatens to kill millions and destroy the economy.

Time will tell if this White House and Congress are up to this enormous task. The public gets to grade the response and rescue plan in about six months—on Nov. 3.

This is no time for thinking small. America, confronted with the biggest crises, has always stepped up. We face yet another historic crisis. Once again it is time for America to go big.

Barry Ritholtz is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist and the author of Bailout Nation: How Greed and Easy Money Corrupted Wall Street and Shook the World Economy. He is the founder of Ritholtz Wealth Management.


 -- via my feedly newsfeed

Tuesday, April 28, 2020

Trump’s Cruelest Month [feedly]

Trump's Cruelest Month
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/trump-self-destruction-in-april-by-elizabeth-drew-2020-04

 -- via my feedly newsfeed

text only

ELIZABETH DREW

With the US economy spinning out of control and expected to sink to depths not seen since the 1930s, US President Donald Trump's presidency is self-destructing. This was clear throughout April, when two opposing forces, Trump's compulsive lying and the coronavirus, collided daily.

WASHINGTON, DC – T.S. Eliot famously called April "the cruelest month." If US President Donald Trump, not known as a fan of poetry, were honest with himself (another unknown), he would likely agree that this month has turned his tenure into a wasteland.

What the Stock Market Is Really Saying

LARRY HATHEWAY & ALEXANDER FRIEDMAN explain the mystery of US equities' price movements since the onset of the pandemic.
5Add to Bookmarks

PreviousNext

By April 28, the US was leading the world with nearly 57,000 COVID-19 deaths and over one million confirmed coronavirus infections. A recent analysis by the Yale School of Public Health indicates that the number of pandemic-related deaths in the early months of 2020 far exceeded the official public estimates.

Another landmark reached by the end of April was that Trump had lost the faith of much of his own party on the preeminent issue facing the country. According to an AP poll released on April 23, only 47% of Republicans believed "quite a lot" in Trump's claims of progress against the virus. And only 23% of all respondents expressed a high level of trust in him.

Trump not only squandered the time he'd had to prepare the country from when he was first informed of a possible pandemic (at least early January); he also squandered his opportunity with voters. The damage from his compulsive lying was compounded by the national alarm about the subject – two unstoppable forces that have collided almost daily in the self-serving, meandering "briefings" he insisted on leading in the White House press room. And Trump's baseless bragging about how much he has achieved collided with his desire to evade responsibility for deaths and other havoc caused by his dilatory response to the pandemic.

Predictably, the result of Trump's impulsive governing style and his determination to dominate the news cycle has been a stream of bizarre and often contradictory statements. For example, despite the US Constitution's Tenth Amendment, he recently claimed "total" power over whether and when state governments can lift public-health health restrictions.

That démarche elicited bipartisan objections, and his political advisers reminded him that the strategy was to avoid responsibility for the pandemic by shifting it to state governors. Although Trump quickly backed down, that didn't stop him from encouraging demonstrations at statehouses to protest against the very restrictions he had encouraged governors to impose.



The one thing Trump has seemed comfortable with throughout this ordeal has been firing people. Two particular targets of his vengefulness have been inspectors general of federal departments (a genus of official installed after Watergate in order to bring accountability to government agencies), especially if they played a role in Trump's impeachment in January, and people who have disagreed too publicly with his views about the current plague.

On the other hand, Trump is clearly frustrated that he cannot fire Anthony Fauci, the longtime head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who serves on the White House coronavirus task force. Fauci's status as the most widely respected authority on the pandemic has enabled him publicly to correct Trump's frequent misinformation – for example, about the unproven (and subsequently disproved) benefits of antimalarial drugs in treating COVID-19 – at the task force's daily briefings.

As April wore on, Trump's long-winded appearances at the televised briefings became tiresome to the public, and his poll ratings began to drop. Meanwhile, the lockdown policies in place in most states were slowing the increase in infections, while an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll showed that nearly 60% of the public favored stay-at-home policies over loosening restrictions on people's movements. And yet, despite warnings by Fauci and other scientists, Trump spoke enthusiastically about "opening up" the country.

It should come as no surprise that Trump has abused his power in orchestrating the federal response to the pandemic. For example, he made sure that Colorado received 100 much-needed ventilators, and made sure that Colorado voters knew it, in order to help re-elect troubled incumbent Republican senator Cory Gardner.

More alarming, Trump effectively threatened to wage germ warfare against US Postal Service workers by denying them congressionally approved virus-mitigation aid unless the USPS quadrupled rates on packages. Trump's actual target was Jeff Bezos, the CEO of Amazon and owner of The Washington Post.

As the last week in April began, more than 26 million US workers had filed for unemployment in the previous month, Congress had approved four bills amounting to $2.4 trillion in relief to business and individuals, and policymakers were debating the next round of spending. With the economy spinning out of control and expected to sink to depths not seen since the 1930s, polls were suggesting that Trump would lose November's presidential election to his presumptive Democratic challenger, Joe Biden.


Trump has become his own worst enemy. When, on April 23, he speculated from the podium of the White House briefing room that COVID-19 could be killed off by injecting household disinfectants or by ultra-violet light, even many Republicans had seen enough. White House aides said his appearances at the briefings, which he had viewed as a substitute for the frequent rallies he could no longer hold, would be curtailed. Trump himself, evidently stung by the widespread mockery that followed his comments, dismissed the briefings, tweeting that his participation was "not worth the time and effort!"

But he couldn't stay away. After only a few days, he took to the podium again, determined to get a head start on May.

Sunday, April 26, 2020

Tale of Two Economies Will Determine Post-Lockdown Growth - Bloomberg

Tale of Two Economies Will Determine Post-Lockdown Growth

by Rich Miller and Michelle Jamrisko

 You think: US and China? No. Manufacturing/tech vs Services? yes. Oh. Wait a minute. That IS China vs US! eek

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-26/tale-of-two-economies-will-determine-post-lockdown-growth

Getting companies to resume operations and factories to reopen is one thing. Persuading consumers to brave catching the coronavirus and go out to shop, eat, travel or watch sports is another.

"Nothing about reopening the economy will be easy, but restarting businesses will be more straightforward than restarting aggregate demand," Moody's Analytics Chief Economist Mark Zandi said.

The result: An uneven reboot for the global economy, with manufacturing and the nations dependent on it bouncing back fairly quickly, while more communal service-sector activities and countries lag.

That will keep pressure on governments and central banks to continue their support as their economies claw their way back from the deepest worldwide downturn since the Great Depression.

Deep Global Recession

The IMF is predicting a 2020 global contraction of 3%

Source: International Monetary Fund

Policy makers from the Bank of Japan, the Federal Reserve and European Central Bank all meet this week, with investors on the lookout for any further steps they might take to aid their battered economies.

Some nations' recoveries "are a little more V-shaped because there's a little bit more manufacturing, a little more tech," Catherine Mann, Citigroup Inc. chief economist and former chief economist for the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, told Bloomberg Television April 23. "That might be a South Korea or Taiwan. And then there are other economies that are extremely tourism dependent. Those are facing L's. Something like a Thailand, a Singapore."

The U.S. revival is likely to be gradual, as some states reopen for business sooner than others, Deutsche Bank Securities economists said in an April 24 report. By the end of the year, the U.S. will have recovered only about 40% of the output and employment it lost during the crisis.

This has ramifications for the November election. If consumers hold back and the economy fails to meaningfully recover, that would put President Donald Trump's chances for winning re-election at risk.

Trump on Friday hailed the coming restart. "There is a tremendous pent up demand. We will open big!" he declared in a tweet.

Governor Kemp Reopens Businesses In Georgia

A worker gives a customer a pedicure at a nail salon in Atlanta, Georgia, on Friday, April 24, 2020.

Photographer: Elijah Nouvelage/Bloomberg

Some businesses will enjoy a one-time boost as stay-at-home orders are eased. Think barber shops and hair salons. And there's always a chance that stir-crazy consumers worldwide could surprise economists by flocking back to the shops.

But that carries perils of its own -- as German Chancellor Angela Merkel highlighted in a closed-door meeting of her Christian Democratic party on April 20. She told her fellow politicians that "discussion orgies" about loosening lockdowns threatened to destroy the progress in fighting the pandemic, according to a participant.

Singapore serves as a warning in that regard. It's gone from being seen as a global standard bearer for taming the deadly virus to the home of Southeast Asia's largest recorded outbreak.

"The one way not to reopen the economy is to have a rebound that we can't take care of," Anthony Fauci, the top infectious-disease expert on the White House coronavirus task force, said about the risk of a resurgence.

It's not just a fear of being infected that could keep consumers out of the malls. Anxiety over job loss and shrinking savings also could prompt them to husband their resources and cut back on spending, economists say.

The lopsided economic revival is playing out in China, home of the initial coronavirus outbreak.

China's Economy Comes to a Stop

An historic collapse in Chinese growth

Source: National Bureau of Statistics

"There has been policy-directed resumption of factories on the supply side, but the picture for a demand recovery is more mixed." said Selena Ling, head of treasury research and strategy at Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp. "There is talk about pent-up Chinese demand for some high-end luxury goods," she added. "But general demand at the man of the street level is more subdued."

Chinese industrial production in March was down about 1% from a year earlier, while retail sales were off almost 16%, according to calculations by Bank of America Corp. economists.

Marriott International Inc. Chief Executive Officer Arne Sorenson told Bloomberg Television on April 20 that occupancy at the company's roughly 350 hotels in mainland China has risen to about 25% from 6% to 8% in the first week of February.

"It's still down massively from where what it should be," he added, noting that the normal rate is around 70% to 80%.

In Germany, the powerful automobile industry worries that buyers will be scarce as the country reopens for business. It's pushing for a "cash for clunkers" program to spur sales after the crisis.

Measures that could strengthen demand "in times of strong insecurity among customers" would be "worth considering," Daimler AG said in a statement.

U.S businesses also are bracing for a long slog as the world's largest economy begins to reopen.

Sustainable Recovery

"Given the combined effects of the pandemic and associated financial impact on the global economy, we believe that it could be up to three years before we see a sustainable recovery," Delta Air Lines Inc. CEO Ed Bastian told analysts on April 22.

With Americans over 65 years old accounting for 20% of consumer spending, demand could be constrained for a while given this group's heightened vulnerability to the virus, according to Deutsche Bank Securities Chief Economist Torsten Slok.

Yale University senior lecturer Stephen Roach called the idea of a V-shaped U.S. recovery "a pipe dream."

"With all this clamoring for economic liberation, we'll get workers back on the job," he said, referring to Trump's call for selected states to reopen their economies. But fear of a fresh virus outbreak will "hold back consumer demand to unprecedentedly low levels."

"Supply without demand doesn't work," the former Morgan Stanley executive added. "We're going to be operating at low levels of economic activity for the foreseeable future."