Ellison Chair in International Floriculture
Ellison Chair in International FloricultureTeaching, Research, Extension and Service

Inflation fears calmed…for now.

by

I received an interesting question from a green industry grower this morning:

I appreciate your informative blog. Thanks. In the January conference we heard that on the rebound inflation will devalue dollars and we should convert cash to inventory as goods will increase in value. We also were advised to convert to fixed rates on loans. Our banker is unsure if we will see this inflation as we have in exiting past recessions. It seems that spending will continue to be weak for several years and commodities which were falsely valued high by traders are still in oversupply and profitable with foreign oil still draining too many dollars from the US at a healthy profit to producers and suppliers. Do you have any thoughts on this now you could post?

I think the best way to attack this question is by examining the usual components of inflation — that is, trends in the producer price index and the consumer price index.

In their report released on Aug 18, the BLS reported that wholesale prices in the U.S. fell more than forecast in July as energy costs receded, capping the biggest 12-month drop on record and showing inflation will not be an immediate concern for Federal Reserve policy makers.

The 0.9 percent decrease in prices paid to factories, farmers and other producers followed a 1.8 percent gain in June. Excluding food and fuel, so-called core prices unexpectedly fell 0.1 percent.

A record amount of excess capacity will prevent production bottlenecks from developing, indicating wholesale prices will be slow to recover even as the economy improves. A lack of inflation was one reason Fed policy makers last week reiterated a pledge to keep the benchmark interest low for an “extended period.”

On the consumer side of things,

U.S. consumer prices fell last month at their fastest annual pace since 1950, an indication that inflation isn’t a threat to the economy or the Federal Reserve. The consumer price index was unchanged on a monthly basis in July from June, the Labor Department said Friday, matching economist expectations, according to a Dow Jones Newswires survey.

The core CPI, which excludes food and energy prices, rose 0.1%, which was also in line with expectations. Unrounded, the CPI posted no change last month. The core CPI advanced 0.091% unrounded.

Consumer prices plunged 2.1% compared to one year ago, the largest 12-month decline since January 1950. Most Fed officials think a positive inflation rate around 2% is consistent with their dual mandate of price stability and maximum employment.

Even regarding inflationary pressures from an increase in the money supply, most economists now (in 2009) feel less inflationary pressures are likely. For example, Mark Perry reports:

There are some economists who are concerned about future inflation because of the loose, expansionary monetary policy in 2008. I don’t think inflation will be a problem, and here’s why:

The chart above shows the annual growth rate in the M2 money supply (percent change from the same month in the previous year, data here) monthly from January 1960 to July 2009. Notice that:

1. There was sustained double-digit money growth in two periods in the 1970s, and that is what generated the high double-digit inflation in that decade. There was double-digit M2 growth for 29 consecutive months from March 1971 to July 1973 (and nine straight months above 13%), and then again for 30 consecutive months from July 1975 to December 1977, with a high of almost 14% growth in early 1972 (see chart above).

2. There was double-digit M2 growth in 1983, but only for 12 months from January to December of 1983, and this monetary expansion wasn’t enough to cause inflation (see chart below). Inflation never rose above 5% for many years after the double-digit money growth of 1983.

3. There was double-digit money growth in September, November and December of 2001, but inflation in subsequent years never got above 5% (see chart below).

4. The peak monetary expansion of M2 in 2008 was below the peaks in 1971-1972, 1976-1977, 1983 and 2001 (see chart above), and during the recent monetary expansion there has been only one month of double-digit money growth, and that was the peak of 10% in January 2009.

Bottom Line: Without sustained double-digit M2 growth, we won’t have anything close to double-digit inflation. And the historical evidence during the two most recent experiences of double-digit money growth in 1983 and 2001 demonstrates that short periods of double-digit money growth aren’t enough to bring about inflationary pressures. And since recent M2 growth during the “loose” monetary policy of 2008 is actually lower than in 1983 and 2001, there probably can’t be any inflationary pressures that will lead to problems with future inflation. In other words, a single month of double-digit M2 growth in January 2009 isn’t expansionary enough to create inflation.
Hope this helps, Mr. Grower.

Core inflation holding relatively steady

by

According to Brian Wesbury and Bob Stein (click here), “Inflation is the leading menace to the economy.” Although I usually agree with their postulate, I don’t see inflation as much of a “menace” right now. The core CPI inflation on an annual basis was 2.5% in July, barely above the 10-year average of 2.21%, below the levels close to 3% between mid-2006 to early 2007, and way below the 4.58% average since 1970 (see graph below).

IMHO, unless and until the core CPI inflation starts to rise, inflation is not a big problem. For example, inflation was a huge problem in the 1970s and early 1980s, but it was when CORE CPI INFLATION was increasing by double-digits, not just oil, energy and food prices. By definition, inflation is a phenomenon when all prices, in general and on average, are rising, not just food and energy. With core inflation so low and stable, I don’t see how inflation can be a menace. And with oil prices plummeting and the dollar soaring, look for August inflation, both overall and core, to moderate.

These are the good old days…

by

Interesting commentary from Jeff Jacoby in yesterday’s Boston Globe (click here). Goes back to the adage of whether you consider the glass half full or empty, or just another thing to wash!

There are a lot of comparisons in the media of today’s economic conditions to the inflationary 1970s and even the Great Depression and the 1930s (see shaded areas below). The chart below shows the annual Misery Index from 1930 to 2008, calculated as the sum of a) the CPI inflation rate and b) the unemployment rate.

Notice that today’s single-digit Misery Index of 9.7% isn’t anywhere near to the double-digit levels throughout both the 1930s and the 1970s, with peaks around 20% in both decades. The Misery Index is also lower today than during most of the 1980s.

Not to dismiss the current economic contraction, but a long-term perspective on the part of green industry managers is needed. This is the 11th “recessionary” time period over the last 60 years. My point — it is not the first, nor will it be the last — on average they occur every 6 years.

We could even go so far to say they are a part of normal business cycles. A clear-minded, deterministic, strategically visionary mindset will probably be the only thing separating those who survive and those who don’t. Stay tuned to future posts on specific strategies to compete in a down economy!

The effect of the media on gas prices

by

Harvard economist Martin Feldstein explained in today’s WSJ (click here) that the relationship between future and current spot oil prices (spot price + carrying cost = futures price) implies that an expected change in the future price of oil will have an immediate impact on the current spot price of oil.

When oil producers concluded that the demand for oil in China and some other countries will grow more rapidly in future years than they had previously expected, they inferred that the future price of oil would be higher than they had previously believed. They responded by reducing supply and raising the spot price enough to bring the expected price rise back to its initial rate.

Hence, with no change in the current demand for oil, the expectation of a greater future demand and a higher future price caused the current price to rise. Similarly, credible reports about the future decline of oil production in Russia and in Mexico implied a higher future global price of oil – and that also required an increase in the current oil price to maintain the initial expected rate of increase in the price of oil.

Once this relation is understood, it is easy to see how news stories, rumors and industry reports can cause substantial fluctuations in current prices – all without anything happening to current demand or supply.

University of Michigan economist Mark Perry also notes that the spot price of oil will fluctuate even without speculators playing a role. After all, speculators have no control over the global supply of, or global demand for, physical barrels of oil. Speculators respond to market conditions, they don’t create market conditions.

Now here is the good news. Any policy that causes the expected future oil price to fall can cause the current price to fall, or to rise less than it would otherwise do. In other words, it is possible to bring down today’s price of oil with policies that will have their physical impact on oil demand or supply only in the future.

Increasing the expected future supply of oil would reduce today’s price. Any steps that can be taken now to increase the future supply of oil, or reduce the future demand for oil in the U.S. or elsewhere, can therefore lead both to lower prices and increased consumption today.