Posts Tagged ‘Ben Bernanke’
David Stockman’s Non-Recovery Part 2: The Crash Of Breadwinners And The ‘Born-Again’ Jobs Scam

After exposing the faux prosperity of the immediate post-2009 “wholly unnatural” recovery and explaining the precarious foundation of the Bernanke Bubble, David Stockman’s new book ‘The Great Deformation’ delves deeper (in Part 2 of this 4-part series) into the dismal internals of the jobs numbers and only the utterly politicized calculation of the “unemployment rate” that disguises the jobless nature of the rebound. To be sure, the Fed’s Wall Street shills breathlessly reported the improved jobs “print” every month, picking and choosing starting and ending points and using continuously revised and seasonally maladjusted data to support that illusion. Yet the fundamentals with respect to breadwinner jobs could not be obfuscated.

 

(Read more…)

Via David Stockman’s book The Great Deformation,

The Wall Street meltdown of September 2008 accelerated the recessionary forces already in motion, causing a total job loss of 7.3 million between the December 2007 peak and the end of the recession in June 2009. That the Fed’s bubble finance had camouflaged the failing internals of the American economy then became starkly apparent. Nearly three-fourths of this reduction was accounted for by the above mentioned loss of 5.6 million breadwinner jobs; that is, nearly 8 percent of their pre-recession total. That devastating hit left the nation with only 66.2 million prime jobs and set the clock back to the level of early 1998. This is an astonishing fact: before any of the Greenspan-Bernanke maneuvers to coddle Wall Street and pump up the wealth effects elixir—that is, the 1998 LTCM bailout, the 2001–2003 rate-cutting panic, the August 2007 Bernanke Put, and the Fed’s post-Lehman tripling of its balance sheet – there were more breadwinner jobs than there are today. Since the BlackBerry Panic the Fed has relentlessly pumped freshly minted cash into the bank accounts of the twenty-one government bond dealers. Not surprisingly, therefore, there has been a jarringly divergent outcome between Wall Street and Main Street.

By September 2012, the S&P 500 was up by 115 percent from its recession lows and had recovered all of its losses from the peak of the second Greenspan bubble. By contrast, only 200,000 of the 5.6 million lost breadwinner jobs had been recovered by that same point in time. To be sure, the Fed’s Wall Street shills breathlessly reported the improved jobs “print” every month, picking and choosing starting and ending points and using continuously revised and seasonally maladjusted data to support that illusion. Yet the fundamentals with respect to breadwinner jobs could not be obfuscated.

On the eve of the 2012 election, for example, there were 18.3 million jobs in the goods-producing sectors: manufacturing, mining, and construction. These core sectors of the productive economy had taken a beating during the Great Recession, shedding 3.5 million jobs, or 15 percent. Yet after three and a half years of so-called recovery, the jobs count in the goods-producing sectors had not rebounded in the slightest; it had actually declined slightly from the 18.5 million jobs recorded at the end of the recession in June 2009.

Likewise, there were 7.8 million jobs in finance, insurance, and real estate, meaning virtually no gain from the 7.7 million jobs at the end of the recession. As to lawyers, accountants, engineers, architects, and computer designers, there was no pick-up there, either: the 5 million jobs counted by the BLS in September 2012 barely exceeded the 4.8 million recorded in June 2009; and in the information industries—publishing, broadcasting, telecommunications, motion pictures, and music—the data had slightly deteriorated, with the 2.8 million jobs posted in June 2009 slipping to 2.6 million in the month before the 2012 election.

Similarly, the 10 million jobs in transportation and wholesale distribution in September 2012 had changed hardly a tad from June 2009. Finally, the other heavy-duty category of breadwinner jobs—that is, government employment (outside of education) where average compensation exceeds $65,000 annually—had actually gone south. The 11 million of these high-paying jobs on the eve of the 2012 election had shrunk by more than 4 percent since the recession ended in June 2009.

In short, after forty months of “recovery” there was virtually no change in every category of breadwinner jobs that had been slammed by the Great Recession.

THE “BORN AGAIN” JOBS SCAM

These data are extremely important. They belie the sunny paint-by-numbers jobs picture peddled by the Fed to distract the public from the fact that monetary policy is all about fueling the speculative urges of Wall Street, not the economic health of Main Street. This obfuscation is especially true with respect to the aforementioned headline gain of 3 million jobs. Never told is the fact that the majority of these, as indicated above, were part-time jobs in bars, restaurants, retail emporiums, and temporary employment agencies.

That fully 55 percent of the rebound has been in low-paying, part-time jobs not only illuminates the phony nature of the Fed’s so-called recovery, but it also comes with a news flash; namely, every one of these 1.6 million new part-time “jobs” had already been “created” once before. During the second Greenspan bubble the part-time job count had risen from 34.7 million in early 2000 to 37.2 million in December 2007. In still another episode of Charlie Brown and Lucy, however, the football had been moved backward during the Great Recession. By June 2009, in fact, the part-time job count had tumbled all the way back to its turn of the century starting point at 34.7 million.

What happened by election eve of 2012, therefore, was nothing more than a partial retracement. At that point the BLS reported 36.4 million part-time jobs, meaning that after three and a half years of “recovery” just 60 percent of the gain from the 2000–2007 bubble had been recouped. These were self-evidently “born again” jobs, but in a display of astounding cynicism the Bernanke Fed claimed to be meeting its statutory mandate to promote maximum employment.

The larger truth is that when these job rebirths are set aside there isn’t much left. The part-time job sector has gained an average of just 11,000 authentically new jobs per month during the twelve years between early 2000 and September 2012, thereby contributing hardly a drop in the bucket relative to the working-age population growth at 150,000 per month.

In fact, this “born again” syndrome actually applies to the entire non-farm payroll, and the modest rebound it has registered since the recession officially ended in June 2009. As shown by the data, the Greenspan-Bernanke policy was the monetary equivalent of a Billy Graham crusade: the same jobs got “saved” over and over.

Thus, there had been 130.8 million total jobs in January 2000, and this figure had reached 138.0 million by the December 2007 peak. The Great Recession sent the jobs count tumbling all the way back to the starting point, actually dipping slightly lower to 130.6 million by June 2009. Then, after forty months of “recovery,” the BLS reported 133.5 million nonfarm payroll jobs for September 2012. The Bernanke bubble had thus “recreated” only 40 percent of the jobs that had been “created” by the Greenspan bubble the first time around.

That the Bernanke bubble policies have not recouped even half of the total payroll gains that the Fed had already previously counted is still another testament to the sham nature of the “recovery.” When the Fed’s pump-and-dump cycling of the macro-economy is set aside, it becomes starkly evident that the American economy has been nearly bereft of sustained job growth. For the entire twelve-year period since early 2000, it has generated a net gain of only 18,000 jobs per month, a figure that is just one eighth of the labor force growth rate.

The reason for this anemic figure on total payroll growth is that the great expanse of the nation’s economy outside of the HES complex has been a jobs disaster area. Alongside the rounding-error growth in the part-time sector, the 66.4 million breadwinner jobs in September 2012 represented a drastic shrinkage from the approximate 72 million jobs in that category recorded in January 2000. This was the smoking gun: the prime breadwinner jobs market has been shrinking by a net of 35,000 jobs per month for more than twelve years!

Indeed, the tiny gain of 5,000 breadwinner jobs per month since June 2009 means that it would take 90 years to recoup the 5.6 million such jobs lost during the recession; that is, it would take until the twenty-second century to get back to the job count that existed at the end of the twentieth century! The absurdity of it surely puts paid to the notion that a conventional business recovery is underway.

Indeed, it is only the utterly politicized calculation of the “unemployment rate” that disguises the jobless nature of the rebound. Upward of 8 million working-age Americans were no longer classified as being in the labor force due to purely arbitrary counting rules. In fact, the unemployment rate on the eve of the 2012 election would have posted at about 13 percent based on the same labor force participation rate as January 2000, and would have clocked closer to 20 percent if further adjusted for the drastic shift from full-time to part-time employment.

    



 
“Tomorrow Is The Big Day”

From Mike O’Rourke of Jones Trading

Fed-stivities

Drum roll please … Tomorrow is the big day. 

(Read more…)

Market participants have been primed and prepared to watch for any changes to the Fed’s forecast.  The current Fed forecasts for key metrics are as follows.  The 2013 Unemployment Rate is 7.4%.  For the 2014 Unemployment Rate, the Fed is forecasting 6.85%.  The Fed’s 2013 real GDP forecast is 2.55% and its 2014 forecast is 3.15%.  The game plan that Fed watchers have telegraphed is as follows.  If the Fed’s economic forecast remains unchanged, the reduction in the amount of QE purchases (a.k.a. tapering ) should commence in September or October.  If the forecast is raised, then look for tapering to commence in July or September.   If the economic forecast is lowered, then tapering is pushed back to December or 2014.  The charts below illustrate the Consensus Forecast and the Fed’s forecast for the Unemployment Rate and real GDP for 2013 and 2014. 
 
There is a belief among many in the market that now that the Chairman has jawboned the equity market sideways and the bond market down, the Fed will back off.  The thinking is now that bond yields are rising (including some rates), the Fed would like to remain low, and the Chairman could indicate tapering is postponed.  We believe this thinking is the result of having a Fed Chairman for 7 years who has done nothing but ease.  To be fair, when his tenure commenced the Chairman did finish Chairman Greenspan’s tightening cycle in early 2006.  When it came to ending QE or Twist in the past, the end dates were all clearly telegraphed early on in the program.  The process for QE3 has been quite different.  We don’t ascribe to the Pavlovian view that the Fed will continue to postpone the inevitable.  That being said, the belief in the Fed’s lack of tightening credibility has paid handsomely over the years.
 
We expect the forecast to remain unchanged and the reduction in asset purchases to commence in the Fall.  Let’s start with the premise that the Unemployment Rate forecast carries the most importance per Jon Hilsenrath’s WSJ article.  Although the Fed’s forecasts have often been way off base and far more optimistic than Wall Street economists, the Central Bank’s Unemployment forecast has been its strength in 2013.  The Fed’s 7.4% is only a rounding error away from the street’s 7.5%.  Before the uptick to 7.6% in May, the Unemployment Rate low ticked at 7.5% in April.  The Fed’s Summary of Economic Projections provides, “Projections for the unemployment rate are for the average civilian unemployment rate in the fourth quarter of the year indicated.”  As such, with the current rate at 7.6%, it is very likely the rate is at or below the Fed’s 7.4% target by year end.  For additional context, the Unemployment Rate dropped by 80 basis points in 2011 and 70 basis points in 2012.  Similar drops for 2013 and 2014 would place the rate at 7.1% and 6.6% respectively.  Those are not forecasts, but simply illustrations that the Fed forecast is quite reasonable.  Another key factor in the Unemployment Rate argument is the growing belief that the decline in participation is demographic and less job creation is necessary to bring down the rate.
 
The Fed’s far less successful forecasting has been in the realm of real GDP.  As the charts below illustrate, the Fed has been far more optimistic than street expectations or reality.  The Fed forecast has been consistently 35% above the street forecast.  So while there is room for the Fed’s GDP forecast to come down, it is at the same premium to consensus it has been for the last couple of years. 
 
The final reason that we believe the Fed will keep the forecast intact (thus indicating tapering) is because of the drama.  The Fed has rightfully been the target of a great deal of criticism for how the “taper talk” has been managed.  Does Bernanke want to continue to drag this out, or leave if for the next Chairman?  We don’t think so.  So what did the Fed do?  It went and told Jon Hilsenrath and Greg Ip exactly what to tell the market to look for.  That way everyone has the same expectations and theoretically, the same interpretation of the data.  In typical Bernanke fashion, he has set the expectations stage without ever making a statement or taking ownership.  Thus, if there is adverse reaction, he has deniability, but if the reaction is benign, he has started tightening (although he will claim it is easing) and the market accepted it.

    



 
Market Echoes June 2012 FOMC As Dow Swings Most Since Oct 2011

For the sixth day in a row, the Dow managed a triple digit gain/loss – the first time since Sep/Oct 2011 – as markets appear to playing out a perfect echo of last year’s June FOMC meeting with a ~3% 4-day gain in the run-up to the decision only to give it all back in the next few days. In the same way as last year, despite the rally in stocks, VIX (hedging) is rising, credit is diverging (hedging), and bonds are bid (though this appears more a Taper-off trade this time). Today’s volume was among the lowest of the year (even accounting for holiday trading days) but that didn’t stop the Dow ended up within a Hilsenrath headline of its all-time highs (though VIX near YTD highs, credit near YTD high spreads, and bonds close to YTD (Read more…) yields). Silver, gold, and copper were hit hard today (-1.8% on the week) as WTI surged back up to $98.50; the USD retraced back to unchanged on the week (JPY -1%); Treasury yields are now up 4-5bps on the week (unch today); and while stocks looked good off the Friday surge, the last few minutes today saw them give back some of the exuberance back as hedgers turned to sellers (helped by a smash’n'grab in HYG) but all-in-all, equity investors seem very confident that Bernanke won’t let them down.

Sixth day in a row of triple-digit moves…

 

and this is what happened at last June’s FOMC… when everyone it seemed was convinced QE3 was coming (and was disappointed).

 

But the last couple of days’ exuberance in stocks is tempered by hedging in stocks…

 

and credit…

 

The USD is unchanged on the week as EUR is rising and JPY is weakening…

 

WTI surged as copper, silver and gold all fell in line on the week…

 

Charts: Bloomberg and Capital Context

Bonus Chart: The Great Recoupling…