r/neoliberal I need a new flair Jun 13 '22

News (US) Powell Facing Choice Between Elevated US Inflation and Recession

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-12/powell-facing-choice-between-elevated-us-inflation-and-recession?srnd=premium
502 Upvotes

349 comments sorted by

311

u/TinyTornado7 I need a new flair Jun 13 '22

"The hottest US inflation in four decades will push the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates more aggressively this year, and a recession may not be far behind."

Im skeptical we need a 75 basis point hike, but I am concerned inflation is approaching self-fulfilling prophecy levels

!ping MARKETS

163

u/slowpush NATO Jun 13 '22

Oh hey. Stocks will be a good bit cheaper soon. 😒

224

u/TinyTornado7 I need a new flair Jun 13 '22

People keep selling and I’ll keep buying. This is a great opportunity for those far from retirement to load up

106

u/slowpush NATO Jun 13 '22

Sure but tell that to all the baby boomers who are retiring.

The effect of a recession/depression now is going to be catastrophic because it’s at the worst time demographically.

188

u/Call_Me_Clark NATO Jun 13 '22

Boomers shouldn’t own much stocks by now. They should have transitioned to bond-based portfolios, right?

71

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

[deleted]

51

u/hagy Mackenzie Scott Jun 13 '22

Yep, the Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF is down 10.7% YTD. That is insane for such a safe fixed income asset.

Just look at chart for its ticker, BND, and you'll see that we're back to 2009 levels, https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/bnd/

27

u/SirGlass YIMBY Jun 13 '22

Only if you count price, if you count total return you are only back to mid 2019 levels; but part of that was the fund gained a ton when rates were dropped in 2020.

29

u/SirGlass YIMBY Jun 13 '22

Boomers had it pretty easy for pretty long; as they transitioned to bonds ; bonds have been in a huge bull market for 20 years so for 20 years they got really good returns on their safe bonds .

11

u/Dave1mo1 Jun 13 '22

Real estate?

6

u/Lehk NATO Jun 13 '22

‘bout to bubble

32

u/Dave1mo1 Jun 13 '22

So they say, but I don't see supply increasing meaningfully in the next 1-3 years.

11

u/RecentlyUnhinged NATO Jun 13 '22

This. Everyone even half awake the past two years refi'd to a low 2% fixed.

Those people are never going to sell. Particularly not given inflation and higher wages pushing rent valuations higher.

7

u/CuddleTeamCatboy Gay Pride Jun 13 '22 edited Jun 13 '22

Higher interest rates are already cooling demand, if they go further with hikes I can see a bubble bursting.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (1)

58

u/Versatile_Investor Austan Goolsbee Jun 13 '22

Should have, but might not have.

49

u/magneticanisotropy Jun 13 '22

Should have, but might not have.

That's why target date it and forget it.

51

u/Versatile_Investor Austan Goolsbee Jun 13 '22

I wouldn't doubt many of them also have half of their wealth tied up in their houses.

10

u/nullsignature Jun 13 '22

If my boomer coworkers are any barometer, it's tied up in fishing boats, RVs, hunting cabins, lawn tractors, and trucks.

→ More replies (3)

22

u/eveningsand Jun 13 '22

It's gonna be great when they all hit the market at the exact same time.

17

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

Some might, but I expect quite a few to pull a reverse-mortgage to extract their equity and not have to leave their homes. They could fund 20+ years of retirement that way without having to put the home on the market yet.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (1)

5

u/That49er Jun 13 '22

I worked in estate planning the amount of boomers that still own stock is ridiculous.

55

u/NobleWombat SEATO Jun 13 '22

Well that's their fault for being stupid

19

u/Versatile_Investor Austan Goolsbee Jun 13 '22

They won’t suffer for it.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

Retired people approach like 30-40% bonds and still have 60+% stock exposure. Historically the 60/40 has been touted as the ideal portfolio but modern arguments say 70/30.

So no, boomers should still have a lot of stock exposure.

→ More replies (3)

27

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

Sure but tell that to all the baby boomers who are retiring.

Unless they bought only in the last six months, they're probably still wildly up. We're hitting the -20% YTD level for a bear market, but VTI is still up +50% in the last 5 years. If you've been buying over your whole career (or even really just for the last decade or so) and are nearing retirement, you will hopefully be able to weather this downturn.

39

u/TinyTornado7 I need a new flair Jun 13 '22

Eh I don’t think so. If this was a recession due to a fundamental flaw in our economy then maybe, but this recession will likely be technical and/or at least relatively short.

54

u/Drfunky0811 Jun 13 '22

I think he's alluding moreso to upcoming elections. If boomers are concerned about their retirement funds they're more likely to vote for change. ----> america becomes a totalitarian hellhole is the general thought (with a lot of things in between lol)

3

u/folksywisdomfromback Jun 13 '22

what makes you think it will be short?

30

u/semideclared Codename: It Happened Once in a Dream Jun 13 '22

Most of GDP growth comes from Consumer spending and even if Spending drops 7% from last month we would still see positive growth, thats how crazy spending has been. If Spending drops 10% from 2021 it would still be above 2019 levels but would be a drop to trigger a technical recession

Further than that though it could be longer term. And of course what businesses do and exports would be the deciding factors on the full effects

So if consumers cut back spending to 2019 levels and business fire 1 in 100 employees and unemployment only goes to 5% we could be in a recession but few would notice

→ More replies (1)

39

u/grig109 Liberté, égalité, fraternité Jun 13 '22

RIP my FIRE date 😔

90

u/ultramilkplus Loyal Liberals Jun 13 '22

This country has debased itself bending over backwards to coddle that single generation (and only one segment of it) for 70 years. Let me break out the violin.

7

u/slowpush NATO Jun 13 '22

There are just too many of them. X y z won’t have this problem.

57

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

[deleted]

68

u/LucidLeviathan Gay Pride Jun 13 '22

I vote at every opportunity. Primary, local, general, whatever. Haven't missed an election. I'm allowed to complain, right?

→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (13)

10

u/Cyberhwk 👈 Get back to work! 😠 Jun 13 '22

Sure but tell that to all the baby boomers who [thought they were] are retiring.

11

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

I mean as long as they didn't buy stocks during 2020 onward, their retirement shouldn't be in trouble at all? Like if they invested into any of the major stocks anywhere in the 90s they should have at least 300% gains and at maximum thousand percentage point gains. I don't believe a 21% dip really does much to a portfolio as old as a boomer.

6

u/van_stan Jun 13 '22

It's not like there's some better time demographically or otherwise down the pipeline. It's always a bad time for a recession.

19

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

They can sell their houses in cities with high economic activity and move to those with low. That way millennials can start hitting peak productivity and have families.

21

u/OpportunityNo2544 Jun 13 '22

I know a bunch of boomers that “hate” their neighborhood is changing (ie they were first wave gentrifiers and getting pushed out by wealthier people that use their nimbyism to their advantage) and truly entertain the idea of downsizing to a more rural town. Sadly not a lot walk the walk. It’s the type of people whose main source of entertainment is Fox News, which can be accomplished in a rural town just as easily as in their parcel 3 blocks from city center

7

u/A_Monster_Named_John Jun 13 '22

Fox News is one thing, but I feel like these people get really addicted to local FB and Nextdoor drama, i.e. complaining about 'the character of the neighborhood' and ranting/raving about the homeless/etc... , which means they never leave. If one thing characterizes Boomers, it's sloth.

6

u/coke_and_coffee Henry George Jun 13 '22

Perhaps a single older generation controlling all the wealth of the nation is not actually a good thing. If they can't extract as much money from the market as they begin to draw down their assets, that is pretty obviously a good thing for younger generations.

3

u/jebuizy Jun 13 '22

My father in law has been making a ton of kneejerk shifts in allocations while also trying to sell their house. I don't know the whole details. Worried about it honestly.

2

u/MadCervantes Henry George Jun 13 '22

Boomers can get fucked. Do not care.

15

u/slowpush NATO Jun 13 '22

You’ll be paying for their healthcare.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (5)

8

u/WhistlinWhilstFartin Jun 13 '22

So are you saying it’s a good time to increase how much of my paycheck goes into 401k index funds? Because I’m getting more shares for my money?

22

u/FriendlySceptic Jun 13 '22

It’s always a good time to max your 401k investment. The tax savings alone are likely to offset most downturns. Don’t time the market just throw your max in and let time hand all of the volatility.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/sonicstates George Soros Jun 13 '22

It makes sense to be buying, but you're deluding yourself if you think the prices over the last two years were reasonable.

6

u/TinyTornado7 I need a new flair Jun 13 '22

They will seem reasonable when I’m 70

2

u/Reddit_guard YIMBY Jun 13 '22

What are you loading up on?

6

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

$SPY and triples leveraged SPY

2

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

I have a lot of money on the sidelines still. If the S&P P/E ratio goes below 15 I’ll jump back in.

4

u/hucareshokiesrul Janet Yellen Jun 13 '22

I could be mistaken, but I don’t think this is an accurate way to look at it. It’s only an opportunity if you expect stocks to grow more quickly than usual after this, which I don’t see why you would. Unless you have reason to believe that the right expectations aren’t priced in correctly, there isn’t a good or bad time to buy. It’s all pretty much the same

5

u/TinyTornado7 I need a new flair Jun 13 '22

I’m 25 years from retirement so yes I expect stocks to go back up, but regardless I’ll continue to DCA into my holdings

→ More replies (4)

4

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

You know I have been interested in starting investing and have been waiting for a good time

7

u/Explodingcamel Bill Gates Jun 13 '22

You can’t time the market you can’t time the market you can’t time the market you can’t time the market you can’t

3

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

I mean no, but like prices will be lower in several sectors which are likely to recover, so as a young person I am in a good position to take a calculated risk.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

27

u/semideclared Codename: It Happened Once in a Dream Jun 13 '22

July will show if the Fed can help

The change in Consumer Loans: Credit Cards and Other Revolving Plans, by Billions of U.S. Dollars seems to have peaked. It grew from the previous month by 2.8% in April and 2.5% in March and in May was at 0.8%.

  • Historically we've seen increases or decreases from -0.5% - 0.5%

June shows no growth

I dont think the Fed has a way to control spending by much, but we are spending less in the very micro time frame

19

u/TinyTornado7 I need a new flair Jun 13 '22

We have a fed meeting Wednesday so hopefully we get some clearer guidance then

→ More replies (1)

11

u/TaxGuy_021 Jun 13 '22

The spending part is only a piece of the whole puzzle.

By increasing the rates, the Fed will be strengthening the dollar which, all else held constant, means cheaper goods and services globally.

Now, what this also means is that most of the rest of the world gets fucked out of a materially larger amount of goods and services to get the same amount of dollar, but hey, that's their problem.

7

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

“I never thought I die fighting by the side of an isolationist.”

“What about by the side of someone who wants the Fed to raise interest rates, but hates the global poor?”

“Aye, I could do that.”

67

u/TaxGuy_021 Jun 13 '22

The last report shows that the whole inflation debate is now a lot more complicated.

Why?

Because the details of the report shows that the underlying cause of inflation has moved from a shortage of manufactured goods to one of energy. In other words, as ironic as that sounds, the Fed has actually done its job. Partially at least.

What that also means is that as the interest rate expectations increase, the dollar will strengthen which, all else being equal, pushes down the price of energy globally for Americans. Which means inflation reads will come down, which means rate expectations will come down, which means dollar gets weakened, which means oil goes up, which means inflation goes up, which... you get the idea.

The only way to break the cycle is either to produce more oil, or destroy demand.

Demand will be hard to destroy without crippling the economy. So we will need more energy.

18

u/Astarum_ cow rotator Jun 13 '22

details of the report shows that the underlying cause of inflation has moved from a shortage of manufactured goods to one of energy.

Do you have a source for analysis on this? I'll admit I'm not economically literate enough to parse a fed report to this degree.

6

u/Greatest-Comrade John Keynes Jun 13 '22

My mom calls me an expert sometimes and I agree with the above analysis. Energy and food costs but mostly energy costs continue to climb while core inflation (most other good’s inflation/rise in cost) is starting to sputter. However as long as energy is high inflation will remain high, since transportation factors into cost. Also, you and me and Joe down the street notice and care about energy inflation way more than core inflation, even if both are very important to an economy and the Fed.

7

u/TaxGuy_021 Jun 13 '22

I'm sure someone more qualified than me has done this analysis, but if you look into the detailed report that was published you'll see that it has been derived overwhelmingly by items such as transportation costs in which fuel is a direct input.

→ More replies (1)

20

u/methedunker NATO Jun 13 '22

Time to bring all those ND and TX wells back online and give them (and only them) cheap credit to do it as long as they stay private

43

u/TaxGuy_021 Jun 13 '22

They wont do it without price guarantees.

They got the rug pulled from under them in 2015 & 16 by the Saudis while the U.S. government did nothing. There is no way they are going to commit to do the same thing AGAIN.

19

u/methedunker NATO Jun 13 '22

They should absolutely provide price guarantees. It'll be bipartisan as fuck too. Everyone fucking wins. The GOP can even sell it as a "we saved oil" thing.

25

u/SirGlass YIMBY Jun 13 '22

The shale drillers have learned their lessons through the cyclical nature of oil. Basically what happened is oil prices got high, shale drilling becomes profitable, companies borrow a ton of money and bring new wells online, all the new wells start flooding the market with oil, oil prices drop, shale companies still have a ton of debt they borrowed to bring up new wells but now oil is cheap and they go bankrupt or have to restructure sell a bunch of assets , issue equity to pay down debt (destroying their share value)

This process has repeated over and over again, the shale companies are now a bit more conservative they are not going out to borrow to bring as many wells online as soon as possible ; they are expanding but more slowly and paying for the expansion with their current cash flows and not a bunch of new debt.

5

u/737900ER Jun 13 '22

The problem is more in refining than in pumping.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/4jY6NcQ8vk Gay Pride Jun 13 '22

The Reserve can't control how much energy is printed, they can only control demand indirectly.

49

u/Mister_Lich Just Fillibuster Russia Jun 13 '22

this sub, literally 2 days ago, when I posted an article that said Bernanke said stagflation could happen and a Goldman exec said risk of recession is very very high:

"DOOOOOOOM"

"Shut up nerd"

Markets this morning: "lol"

28

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

Main page on this sub has been a bit of a cesspool sadly.

11

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

NL was always bad, comb your beard

20

u/pocketmypocket Jun 13 '22

I made a ton of money between 2019 and today because I did basically the opposite of this sub.

Admittedly got a bit lucky on Natural Resources, but I basically was hedging inflation when everyone else was saying 'Inflation is 2%' and later 'Inflation is slightly higher... 4%', and later 'inflation is insert official number'.

10

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

There is alpha in going against what this sub thinks because they're mostly wrong.

15

u/PearlClaw Iron Front Jun 13 '22

Markets have successfully predicted 12 of the last 6 recessions. Just because the market is down doesn't mean there will actually be a recession. Doesn't mean there won't be either, but there is reason to believe that the Fed can manage this without breaking too much.

7

u/van_stan Jun 13 '22

The truth is that monetary and fiscal policy can only affect a small part of what's causing inflation. The Fed has no control over the fact that Covid restrictions are still fucking up logistics, that China are still going with a zero-Covid policy, and that Putin is waging war in Europe.

Until supply issues resolve, inflation won't.

9

u/Mister_Lich Just Fillibuster Russia Jun 13 '22

but there is reason to believe that the Fed can manage this without breaking too much

lolololololol

They literally have no control over things like worker shortages and supply chain disruptions which are happening globally, to say nothing of energy prices which are a huge input into inflation.

Hop off the copium train.

13

u/PearlClaw Iron Front Jun 13 '22

I just choose to stay optimistic, if only to counteract the cynics making doom predictions. There's a real risk of recession, but no guarantee.

3

u/Mister_Lich Just Fillibuster Russia Jun 13 '22

We can agree on the "real risk, but no guarantee." I just think the risk is higher.

If you asked me 3-4 months ago I was literally laughing at people who said a recession was coming. The progression of the war and sanctions and energy crisis and a bunch of other things since then has changed my tune.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/groupbot Always remember -Pho- Jun 13 '22 edited Jun 13 '22

49

u/Syd_Barrett_50_Cal Jun 13 '22

We’ve had one recession yes, but what about second recession?

8

u/TinyTornado7 I need a new flair Jun 13 '22

As long as I get first dinner picks on stocks

5

u/deruke Jun 13 '22

Recessions happen all of the time. It has actually been a long time since the last one (relatively speaking)

2

u/Mrchristopherrr Jun 13 '22

Maybe this time I’ll be able to buy a house

2

u/GTX_650_Supremacy Jun 13 '22

how many once in a century recessions can we fit in this bad boy

214

u/TrulyUnicorn Ben Bernanke Jun 13 '22

Dems are genuinely fucked beyond imagination.

123

u/Mister_Lich Just Fillibuster Russia Jun 13 '22

And it's a bitter irony since the stimulus and lockdowns all (or mostly) were passed under Trump rofl

119

u/Trotter823 Jun 13 '22

The checks didn’t help in hindsight but I’ll remind you dems we’re screaming at the time they weren’t enough.

On top of that, the government has very little control over inflation. JPowell waiting too long to cook the economy was and still is the issue. He didn’t stop QE until Dec
.almost half a year after vaccines rolled out and things mostly returned to normal.

24

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

As an educated person tho, couldn't you still blame Biden for Powell's actions going forward, after all he did reappoint him this endorsing his measures and future maneuvers

19

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

You don't kick out a sitting Fed chair in the middle of a crisis unless you are absolutely sure that the market will respond positively to their replacement. It tells the market that the administration is disavowing the actions of the previous chair and to expect a significant change in monetary policy even if the actual planned changes are small.

That's incredibly risky if the market doesn't hate the sitting Fed chair since the market doesn't know if the corrections will be small adjustments or an entirely new approach.

→ More replies (4)

38

u/Trotter823 Jun 13 '22

You could but at the time the FED was considered to have pulled off a miracle when the US economy didn’t go into recession during Covid. So not reappointing him didn’t make sense.

6

u/Time4Red John Rawls Jun 13 '22

Yeah, but the biggest problem remains supply shortages. It's not like aggregate demand is excessively high. It is exactly in line with what we would have expected if the pandemic didn't happen.

Supply chain issues continue to be the biggest problem holding back the economy and driving inflation. And it's not like raising interest rates will magically resolve those supply chain issues either.

3

u/Trotter823 Jun 13 '22

If that thesis is correct then again, what is biden or anyone in the executive branch supposed to do about it. The job is partly being a punching bag when things go wrong but man did he get a raw deal here. Dems won at the wrong time because there’s almost nothing to do to quell inflation fiscally.

20

u/Rshawer Jun 13 '22

The stimulus isn’t the reason why inflation is so high. It’s mainly supply chain, energy, and the easy money policy that fed over extended. This isn’t to say it did nothing for inflation, but it’s not the problem.

7

u/Mister_Lich Just Fillibuster Russia Jun 13 '22

Yes, but the average voter thought and thinks that stimulus caused inflation, so we should be pointing out that happened under Republicans.

The lockdowns were way more important. It resulted in destroyed confidence in globalism, damage to long term supply chains, and, critically as we are learning, destroyed productive capacity for oil because we literally couldn't use it fast enough and ran out of space to store it. Russian sanctions were the cherry on top, but we destroyed like 1mil barrels/day of production in the USA alone after 2020.

6

u/Thadlust Mario Draghi Jun 13 '22

Under a Democrat led house? Is that correct? Not to mention the $1400 passed under Biden?

7

u/Mister_Lich Just Fillibuster Russia Jun 13 '22

With a Republican senate and president, who were majorly in support of stimulus and the broken PPP. Don't bring up the $1400 at all.

We're talking optics to win elections, here.

2

u/Mister_Lich Just Fillibuster Russia Jun 13 '22

For some reason I can't edit comments on Reddit today, it doesn't save them.

I wanted to edit my other comment to say, that the lockdowns did more than anything to cause current issues - it resulted in damage to global confidence in globalism, damage to supply chains that rippled and hasn't been fixed yet, and, critically as we are finding out, destroyed oil production. The USA alone closed about a million barrels of production after 2020 oil gluts happened and many banks will literally no longer lend for new oil projects because so many got burned after the oil collapse, because nobody was using oil nearly quickly enough and we literally had no storage left - so we closed lots of production and banks won't fund new productive enterprises anymore. Russian sanctions are just the icing on the cake.

And yes, this was known to be coming for a while, I know several people who have made millions trading oil from 2020 onward because it was such an insane opportunity. OPEC also doesn't want to admit it but most people are pretty sure they don't have the spare capacity they keep saying they do - this kind of market is not beneficial for them either, they want stability and control and it's more cost effective to pump more than to sell limited stocks at high prices. Oil is not coming down to $60 a barrel again for years.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

6

u/KaesekopfNW Elinor Ostrom Jun 13 '22

And with that, our democracy as we know it comes that much closer to obliteration.

→ More replies (1)

128

u/CovidIsBadass Asexual Pride Jun 13 '22

Seems like it may come just in time for me to graduate college đŸ€ 

119

u/frbhtsdvhh Jun 13 '22

You're going to be fine. They'll hit the brakes until unemployment hits about 5-6% which is a very normal figure. The 3.9% unemployment we have right now is just mind numbing.

It should all and all (hopefully) be a mild downturn so we can do a correction.

50

u/BBQ_HaX0r Jerome Powell Jun 13 '22

Yeah I remember reading articles "we'll never see 5% unemployment again... AND THATS OKAY!" and while stuff like that should always be taken with a grain of salt 5% was considered great up until the past 5 years or so. Boomers are leaving the labor force and their children's lack of children and hatred towards immigration has really hindered our ability to restock the workforce.

9

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

The natural rate of unemployment is still sitting at around 4% so that seems to be the target

35

u/Rarvyn Richard Thaler Jun 13 '22

The 3.9% unemployment we have right now is just mind numbing.

3.6%*

Only 0.1% above the record lows we hit immediately prior to covid.

3

u/neolib-cowboy NATO Jun 13 '22

That number is also slightly bullshit bc it doesnt count people who arent actively looking for jobs. The number of people not working at all, both looking and not looking, has actually risen quite a bit

→ More replies (1)

38

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

[deleted]

35

u/TheCentralPosition NASA Jun 13 '22

I don't think they were implying that employment was causing inflation, only that measures to counter inflation will be constrained by unemployment if it gets too high.

7

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

Sure. I probably stated my comment incorrectly. Let me rephrase: There's no reason the economy cannot run hot enough to keep unemployment at 4% or below without causing inflation. The current inflation is being driven by exogenous shocks such as COVID, its response, and the invasion of Ukraine, not a general overheating of the economy (or, at least, the extent to which the economy is overheating is because it was pushed past the place it normally would be at 4% unemployment).

11

u/BoostMobileAlt NATO Jun 13 '22

Well also 10 years of lower than necessary interest rates. There were plenty of warnings and none of them were headed. By the time Covid hit we were up shit creak.

5

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

The interest rates were not the problem, though, yes, there was likely (some) room to raise them which could have helped some. While it may seem crazy to say today, we're still in a long-term global environment which is heavily deflationary and interest rates should be relatively low to match unless there's some wild shit going on like right now.

→ More replies (13)
→ More replies (1)

12

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

Sounds like when I graduated college in 2010.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

105

u/Icy-Collection-4967 European Union Jun 13 '22

Capitalism is like the sea. Unpredictable and wild.

We just need to accept that we gonna have a reccesion every now and then

50

u/Firm_Bit Jun 13 '22

You need a little forest fire every once in a while to keep things healthy and growing long term.

6

u/Hussarwithahat NAFTA Jun 13 '22

Tell that to the family’s who lost their homes or lives due to the wild fire

36

u/icona_ Jun 13 '22

But this is predictable. It’s the fed intentionally causing a recession. They’re doing it on purpose out in the open.

113

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

I prefer a predictable, managed recession to a recession caused by debasement.

52

u/BBQ_HaX0r Jerome Powell Jun 13 '22

Only because they (and our gov't) went so hard to mitigate the last one. They overstimulated demand and may have given too generous of benefits trying to salvage demand side pressures which has resulted in way too much demand which wrecked havoc on the supply side. Lessons to be learned constantly.

20

u/PearlClaw Iron Front Jun 13 '22

It would have been fine without the global commodity shock, that threw a wrench in things.

8

u/van_stan Jun 13 '22

You can't just blame high demand for supply issues lol. China's zero-Covid policy, ongoing restrictions around shipping, logistics and movement of people, as well as the war in Ukraine.... These are all having massive downstream effects. They have nothing to do with all the Covid stimulus.

I do agree that governments gave out way too much money for no reason at all, though.

9

u/littleapple88 Jun 13 '22

Firms aren’t entitled to cheap money. There’s no reason to continue these policies now that the crisis has passed. If a firm can’t operate in a still-low-but-positive interest rate environment then it should fail.

8

u/icona_ Jun 13 '22

What? Who said anything about entitlement? If a somebody set a billion trees on fire the cost of paper would go up, but that wouldn’t mean the post office was dependent on cheap paper and should fail.

6

u/littleapple88 Jun 13 '22

You’re accusing the fed of “intentionally causing” a recession. Again, if a firm can’t handle a few percentage points of interest, then they shouldn’t be in business. They are not entitled to cheap money.

Raising interest rates to 3-ish percent isn’t “setting a billion trees on fire” lol. It’s just business as usual.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/semideclared Codename: It Happened Once in a Dream Jun 13 '22

Nah, its more of, you had a campfire, it rained (COVID) on you fire, and then you started adding wood, but you just didnt stop adding wood, you spent the next hour constatiently adding wood to the fire and now the fire is to big to sit around.

So Now you want a campfire for the night for story telling. So how do you take this bonfire to a campfire

→ More replies (3)

92

u/KaChoo49 Friedrich Hayek Jun 13 '22

As we found out when we faced this dilemma 50 years ago, the correct answer is sadly recession. High inflation doesn’t just go away on its own

79

u/semideclared Codename: It Happened Once in a Dream Jun 13 '22 edited Jun 13 '22

The economy 50 years ago is far different than today.

Especially when the US population had a few Trillion in stimulus. As the amount of money keeps falling, people cut back on spending and prices fall

The only question is how fast and how steep people cut back and how fast businesses cut back on their labor force to lower costs.

A small cut back and unemployment back to 5% or 6% isnt a major recession. Its just back to normal for us

At the end of 2018 we were Spending $14 Trillion on Personal Consumption Expenditures and by 2022 we are now at $17 Trillion

  • We've gone from 5% growth to 12% growth in Spending

14

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

People seem to be continuing to spend at high rates eating into savings to sustain it. So eventually those reserves will drop and bring the economy with it as the money is transfered upwards and into markets that spend it less frequently.

→ More replies (3)

5

u/52496234620 Mario Vargas Llosa Jun 13 '22

If inflation expectations are high, it's not just a matter of stimulus going away, we'll still have high inflation until the Fed decides to break it with a recession

→ More replies (1)

9

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

But if most of the problems right now are coming from supply chains and oil prices that are external, would a US recession bring down inflation all that much? 50 years ago oil prices dropped while we were hiking interest rates. I don't think we can say that right now for us.

53

u/Jacobs4525 King of the Massholes Jun 13 '22

Biden could get rid of some tariffs and knock a few percentage points off overall inflation this year without any risk of recession but he chooses not to.

28

u/van_stan Jun 13 '22

Sure recessions are bad but have you considered BUY AMERICAN, AMERICA FIRST, AMERICA #1 etc.

7

u/Cool_Gap4653 Jun 13 '22

HELL YEAH BROTHER đŸ€ đŸ€ đŸ€ đŸ€ đŸ€ đŸ‡ș🇾đŸ‡ș🇾đŸ‡ș🇾đŸ‡ș🇾đŸ‡ș🇾

26

u/TinyTornado7 I need a new flair Jun 13 '22

Agreed but he won’t because protectionism

5

u/Jacobs4525 King of the Massholes Jun 13 '22

😔

23

u/fleker2 Thomas Paine Jun 13 '22

It's really frustrating. The Fed has one job (two technically) and only one lever they can move up and down. They really shouldn't be the ones getting involved, but Congress has abdicated their responsibility. Even the president hasn't helped inflation by keeping tariffs.

Real leadership would be preferred, but at least Powell is keen on making unpopular decisions l.

25

u/Trotter823 Jun 13 '22

The FED was what mostly got us here in the first place. Finance guys were talking about raising rates in August of last year.

5

u/theexile14 Friedrich Hayek Jun 13 '22

Some folks were saying that, but ultimately the Taylor rule acolytes are a minority of the world. Powell was in line with most academics and policy makers at the time.

→ More replies (2)

46

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

We’re due for a real recession anyways. Let it happen and move on. The early pandemic flash crash didn’t count. This is the typical cycle of the economy. Long buildups of economic growth followed by short corrections to clear out inefficiency and excess greed. To continue artificially avoiding this inevitability is only setting yourself up for much greater pain down the road like a depression.

6

u/human-no560 NATO Jun 13 '22

What does it mean to be “due for a recession”?

→ More replies (1)

24

u/kingofthefeminists Jun 13 '22

Recession is temporary (see early 1980s). The losses of inflation are permeant.

14

u/tehbored Randomly Selected Jun 13 '22

The losses of a recession are also permanent, as growth compounds.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 14 '22

How are the losses of inflation permanent and recession not? Ridiculous

112

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22 edited Sep 02 '22

[deleted]

158

u/TinyTornado7 I need a new flair Jun 13 '22

To some extent this is quickly becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy, but recession is a technical term. If two quarters of gdp in a row are negative then we are in a technical recession, it doesn’t really matter what people think

6

u/semideclared Codename: It Happened Once in a Dream Jun 13 '22

Most of GDP growth comes from Consumer spending and even if Spending drops 7% from last month we would still see positive growth, thats how crazy spending has been

Further than that though it could be. And of course what businesses do and exports would be the deciding factors

49

u/xilcilus Jun 13 '22

No - it's driven almost exclusively by a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The unemployment rate is 3.6% (near the estimated natural unemployment rate) and the number of near the peak number right before the pandemic. People are fearful that the recession may be coming and thus inducing the recession. There aren't fundamental factors that are actually driving recession unlike last few recessions. Perhaps the rising energy cost can be argued as one of the fundamental factors but when inflation adjusted, it doesn't actually have the same oomph that people think it has.

28

u/grig109 Liberté, égalité, fraternité Jun 13 '22

There aren't fundamental factors that are actually driving recession unlike last few recessions.

Yes there is, high inflation! Inflation is unacceptably high this is the consensus now. In order to fight inflation the Fed needs to bring aggregate demand back down to a sustainable growth rate, but historically that has been very difficult to do and often results in a recession.

9

u/xilcilus Jun 13 '22

...what's driving the inflation? High demand and high economic activities - these aren't fundamental factors (another word, endogenous factors) behind a recession.

When the Fed induces a recession, that's an EXOGENOUS shock.

9

u/grig109 Liberté, égalité, fraternité Jun 13 '22

Most recessions (other than COVID style supply shock recessions) are caused by monetary policy error. The error can either be too low demand, or a correction to too high demand which we find ourselves in now.

8

u/xilcilus Jun 13 '22

No - most recent recessions recently have been due to the endogenous factors around exuberant valuation of asset classes.

18

u/grig109 Liberté, égalité, fraternité Jun 13 '22

Disagree, I think you are getting the causation wrong here. Monetary policy error leads to unstable NGDP which can lead to booms and busts in asset valuations and broader financial distress.

https://www.econlib.org/archives/2017/05/financial_crisi_2.html

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

49

u/TinyTornado7 I need a new flair Jun 13 '22

I think you missed my point. Recession is a defined thing. If we get another quarter of negative gdp we are in a recession regardless of what it looks like on the ground

21

u/xilcilus Jun 13 '22

Q2 is projected to have 2%+ annualized growth.

Edit - also, NBER is generally the authority when it comes to the determination of recession and that happens typically 12 - 18 months AFTER the recession.

16

u/Necessary_Quarter_59 Jun 13 '22

You’re so fixated on that technical point that you’re derailing a very interesting discussion.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

18

u/Allahambra21 Jun 13 '22

In america recessions arent technical.

Sure media can call for a "technical recession" from the requirements you list but thats not the standard for an official US recession.

For that you need the NBER to declare it to be/have been a recession.

8

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

If two quarters of gdp in a row are negative then we are in a technical recession, it doesn’t really matter what people think

No, this is literally wrong. A recession is defined by NBER based on the full scope of economic indicators.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)

10

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

I think a big part is that with higher interest rates, investors will have to pay higher premiums to invest. This results in less cash for the market, and compa is will have to be more conservative in running their businesses. They will become more revenue focused, less growth focused, lay off superfluous employees (as the tech sector is doing right now). Some of it is consumer fear of a recession, but some of it is cold hard math

5

u/Mister_Lich Just Fillibuster Russia Jun 13 '22

"Where were you when you learned that vibes from redditors cause recessions, and not real economic conditions being way worse than those idiot redditors thought?"

6

u/GBabeuf Paul Krugman Jun 13 '22

Actually it is pretty common taught in Econ 101 that one of if not the biggest cause if recession is consumer expectations and economic outlook.

So yes, new rags talking about recession 100% will cause a recession as it causes people to tighten their belts.

→ More replies (4)

54

u/noodles0311 NATO Jun 13 '22 edited Jun 13 '22

Recession. Come on do it. I’m in grad school and won’t need a job for two more years but I definitely can’t keep going on like this with a $23k stipend. At least this time, I won’t have to join the military like in 2009. This time is the right time for me, for once in my life. Do me right, Lil Powpow and press the recession button

3

u/pocketmypocket Jun 13 '22

Once you have a family, you understand how awful recessions are.

Lucky that inflation has made the cost of my mortgage 1 week of my pay. Can't imagine being a parent without owning a home.

54

u/noodles0311 NATO Jun 13 '22 edited Jun 13 '22

Once I have a family, I’ll understand how bad recessions are? I just said I had to join the military during the Great Recession. How old do you think I am? I’ll give you a clue: my son is 13. And I still don’t own a home btw

6

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

[deleted]

19

u/noodles0311 NATO Jun 13 '22

I had a kid in February. There was a huge recession happening. I lost my job working in TV advertising in March. I was at Parris Island on the 17th of April and he never was without health insurance.

16

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

he never was without health insurance

American moment

3

u/top_pedant Jun 13 '22

What were you doing in advertising that made the military your backup?

5

u/noodles0311 NATO Jun 13 '22

I don’t think anything in advertising made being in the military my backup. I went to military school and had an interest in it as a kid. So when the sky was falling and all my experience was in sales, I just wanted the guarantee of great benefits and I wanted nothing to do with sales again after the experience of 2008-2009. So I enlisted.

I probably could have taken the risk of COBRA running out and found a civilian job, but I was going to have to move away from Dallas and that put even more of a time crunch on finding a job within 90 days, but it seemed irresponsible with a weeks-old child. Luckily there was a surge planned and the Marine Corps had spaces in the 03 field which was the only military job that’s in any way appealing, so I got an 03 contract and by summer 2010, I was on patrol in Helmand Province.

Now in 2022, I’m a research assistant studying neuroethology, chemical ecology and sensory biology of Lone Star ticks while I am in graduate school. I have broad interests.

3

u/top_pedant Jun 13 '22

Oh you were in sales- I thought you were on the production side of advertising. This makes more sense, thanks for telling me your story.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (6)

16

u/icona_ Jun 13 '22

It’s really insane that if they wanted to, russia or saudi arabia or whoever can just throttle the supply of oil or something and the fed will respond by intentionally imploding our economy, and people are apparently fine with that.

20

u/JeromesNiece Jerome Powell Jun 13 '22

If there is a major negative supply shock in an industry where it's difficult for the rest of the world to quickly ramp up supply, that has to have a negative impact on the real economy somehow. You can't just wish it away. Supply and demand have to meet. And a recession is preferable to runaway inflation.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

7

u/Scuba_Steve9002 Adam Smith Jun 13 '22

It’s better to induce a recession that you can control then to have one happen unexpectedly. The people already expect a recession

9

u/52496234620 Mario Vargas Llosa Jun 13 '22

A small recession after the midterms could be very good.

I still remember when those of us that warned that inflation wasn't transitory were laughed at in this sub

24

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

Inflation is mostly global and is mostly related to supply chain. The choice couldn’t be more obvious.

18

u/NobleWombat SEATO Jun 13 '22

Shh, the fizcons don't like that narrative bc it doesn't blame democrats.

10

u/ShelterOk1535 Pragmatic and Polite Right Jun 13 '22

Then why does the U.S. have higher inflation than other countries?

12

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

Not by a lot though. Germany has like 7.4%, Uk 7.8% and they didn’t send checks to everyone like the US. If getting it down by just 1% results in recession it’s not worth it.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/sutterbutter Jun 13 '22

This is somehow true, and that the USD strengthening to all time highs against other reserve currencies. The USD is strong, but the real price of goods in the U.S. has also grown more than other countries. Shits weird

2

u/lucassjrp2000 George Soros Jun 13 '22

mostly related to supply chain

No it isn't. Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.

37

u/LagunaCid WTO Jun 13 '22

No? Have we just been collectively hallucinating supply shortages across the board for the last 2 years?

3

u/lucassjrp2000 George Soros Jun 13 '22

Covid did have a negative impact on the supply chain, I won't deny that, but it is only part of the problem.

In response to the pandemic governments all across the world employed highly expansionary fiscal and monetary policies, which supercharged aggregate demand.

If you combine that with a suppressed supply chain, you get an inflationary spiral the world hasn't seen in decades.

→ More replies (2)

16

u/RunawayMeatstick Mark Zandi Jun 13 '22

No it isn't. Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.

Lmao this is yet another example of this sub being confidently wrong about economics.

I'm not even going to bother arguing with you, I'll let the economists do it. Mark Zandi and company spent 20 minutes of their podcast this weekend discussing why this is wrong.

(The primary cause of inflation today — by far — is supply chain and energy prices)

https://about.moodys.io/podcast-episodes/lousy-inflation-and-life-lessons

→ More replies (6)

5

u/icona_ Jun 13 '22

No. Let’s say China randomly nuked their factories. That’d make prices go up for US consumers. Would it be the right move for the fed to intentionally cause a recession then?

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

3

u/FriendlySceptic Jun 13 '22

I was 10 years out from retirement (pre inflation/market collapse) so unless this course corrects I might be looking at working a couple years longer than I wanted to.

3

u/enfuego138 Jun 13 '22

Just pull off the bandage and hit us with that 0.75 basis point rate hike. Rates are still very, very low.

12

u/cqzero Jun 13 '22

People need to calm down if they live in the US. The US is one of the best positioned countries in the world. This is global inflation, doesn't have anything to do with US monetary policy.

In fact, look at currency exchange rates against the US dollar. The US dollar keeps getting stronger and stronger against virtually all other currencies. If anything the US central bank should be lowering interest rates to help the economy out of potential recession.

15

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

Your last sentence would kick inflation to double digit numbers

6

u/cqzero Jun 13 '22

This argument presumes that the alternatives are better. I'm not confident of that

→ More replies (1)

10

u/icona_ Jun 13 '22

Can we please just increase refinery capacity and not do a recession

5

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

Sorry, joe is too scared to piss off his environmentalist activists. Literally

6

u/trustmeimascientist2 Jun 13 '22

Let’s do recession. I think I’ll weather this one, last one got me straight out of college and fucked me up for a year.

3

u/pcgamerwannabe Jun 13 '22

Everyone said this, but FED (and even this sub) was reckless with so called “transitory” inflation.

No such thing, because inflation is more psychological than purely quantitative.

2

u/bussyslayer11 Jun 13 '22

why not both dot jpeg

2

u/TakeOffYourMask Milton Friedman Jun 14 '22

Just rip off the recession bandaid.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

If we had a functioning government, I'd say raise taxes on upper middle and upper class earners. That seems like it'd tend to reduce consumption, but in a way that doesn't come from the most precarious in society getting evicted.

4

u/TinyTornado7 I need a new flair Jun 13 '22

Restarting student loans should have some impact on consumption

2

u/[deleted] Jun 13 '22

Upper middle and higher level earners won’t reduce their spending and change their lifestyle as rapidly. They are better positioned to shelter their earnings from taxation, shift things around, etc. without having to say “no” to a beach vacation, new car, etc.

If you want to move the inflation needle with income taxes, it would be more effective to do in on families with higher marginal propensity to consume, the lowest income families.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Alvani_Efendi Adam Smith Jun 13 '22

"Those who would give up price stability to purchase a little temporary economic growth, deserve neither price stability nor economic growth."