Showing posts with label Gluskin Sheff. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gluskin Sheff. Show all posts

Monday, June 25, 2012

We Are Living in a "Modern-Day Depression"

The Federal Reserve cut its growth forecast for the second half of 2012 and 2013 last week, raising concerns yet again about the potential for a "double-dip" recession. While some, notably the cycle watchers at ECRI, believe the U.S. economy is definitely heading for another recession (or already there), Gluskin Sheff's chief economist and strategist David Rosenberg goes a big step further.
"We are living in a modern-day depression," he declares.

This dramatic statement is based on several factors, including the record number of Americans living on Food Stamps — 46 million or 1-in-7 in 2011. Because these benefits are now given in the form of electronic debit cards, we don't have bread lines like in the 1930s, but they are there in virtual form. And that's just the most obvious form of government support for its struggling citizenry. (See: Marion Nestle on The (Big) Business of Food Stamps: "Here's Where the Profits Come In") "Government transfers to the personal sector now makes up nearly one-fifth of total household income," Rosenberg writes. "Even Lyndon Johnson, architect of the 'Great Society', would blush at that."

 The Housing Bust: Despite recent signs of stabilization, the national housing market remains depressed, with nearly 30% of mortgage holders under water. This is particularly troubling for Baby Boomers, who had viewed their homes as a major source of potential income for retirement but now wear them as a "ball and chain," Rosenberg quips. Unemployment: As with housing, Rosenberg dismisses the job market's improvement in recent years. He cites the "real" unemployment rate — currently 14.8% -- and the fact the country is still down 5 million jobs from its 2007 peak. Read more >>


Wednesday, July 8, 2009

Chilling Truth Behind Govt Unemployment Lies

Since 2000 the government has used the Birth-Death Model to account for the birth and death of businesses which exaggerates the number of jobs being created each month, and alters the unemployment figures in the government's favor. Mish and others have pointed this out endlessly but it's worth repeating. Anthony Mirhaydari reminds us that "John Williams of Shadow Government Statistics specializes in removing these questionable tweaks to the government's statistical data to better align current numbers with the methodology used to gather historical data. After reviewing the data, Williams believes that 'the June jobs loss likely exceeded 700,000.' David Rosenberg of Gluskin Sheff notes that the fall in the number of hours worked in June (to a record low of 33 per week) is equivalent to a loss of more than 800,000 jobs.

"There are similar issues with the way the unemployment rate is measured. The headline rate only jumped from 9.4% to 9.5% because of a drop in the number of people in the workforce. The more inclusive "U-6" measure of unemployment, which includes discouraged workers, jumped from 16.4% to 16.5%. But even this doesn't adequately capture the situation on the ground: Back in the Clinton Administration, the definition of discouraged worker was changed to only include those that had given up looking for work because there were no jobs to be had within the last year. By adding these folks back in, William's SGS-Alternate Unemployment Measure rose to a jaw-dropping 20.6%.

"This brings us to another issue: expiring unemployment benefits. Continuing unemployment claims fell 53,000 to 6.7 million last week, but Deutsche Bank's chief U.S. economist Joseph LaVorgna wonders how much of this decline is due people exhausting their standard 26-week benefit. He says: "We are concerned about what will happen when a significant share of out-of-work individuals' benefits completely expire, because this could lead consumer spending to re-weaken, hence jeopardizing a fragile recovery. Unless the economy starts getting traction here in the third quarter, we could face a situation where people find that they have no job and no unemployment benefits. For these people, 2009 will feel an awful lot like 1932. As a result, spending cuts will be deep and dramatic."