Per last week’s post, the May jobless numbers were favorable, but mainly because our Covid-19 progress was so good. How are we doing otherwise, and where might we be going?
Before the month started, the National Bureau of Economic
Research released a working paper, “The Donut Effect of Covid-19 on Cities,”
by Arjun Ramani and Nicholas Bloom. It’s
12 printed pages and academic, but comes down to two ideas. First, many people are leaving the centers of
large cities but not small ones, but, second, they are staying in the same metropolitan
areas.
Moving on to June 1st, we learned “How the World
Ran Out of Everything,” from Peter S. Goodman and Niraj Chokshi in The New
York Times. The authors accurately blame
“Just In Time” inventory management, in which suppliers must provide parts or
raw materials quickly when their customers need them. That achieves its purpose of cutting carrying
costs when everything moves smoothly, but in times such as the past year-plus, with
a widespread set of pandemic-related problems as well as a ship blocking the
Suez Canal, it has not. From a customer’s
standpoint I have long been grouchy about that system, as some places practiced
it so aggressively that I might find what I wanted unavailable simply because
another customer had just been there. Two
lessons for all participating in Just In Time:
Things do not always work smoothly, and business you lose from not
having product may disappear forever.
Could it be that “U.S. labor market worse than it appears,
Fed paper suggests” (Reuters, June 1st)? Yes, this article’s indication that
statistics “suggesting labor market slack should be given more weight than
those pointing to tightness,” seems right, as latent demand, as shown by the AJSN,
is still pushing 20 million new positions, and we have the real possibility
that applicants will return quicker than their opportunities. On the other side, “Americans Don’t Want to
Return to Lousy Low Wage Jobs,” as put by Daniel Alpert in The New York
Times also on June 1st. That
is the case now, but over the next few months the issues of Covid-19 safety, extra-high
unemployment benefits (with “all extra federal supplements” over by September 6th),
and child-care availability will be resolved, and the bulk of laborers will
have no choice, even if wages return to their 2019 levels. It could well happen, also, that we get “a
contraction in household incomes this autumn.”
In the meantime, “Companies struggling to hire workers,
coping with rising prices, Fed says” (Megan Henney, Fox Business, June 2nd). That is also a temporary situation, and what
is happening by about August should tell the true ongoing story. There were some good scattered remarks in the
June 4th Lauren Bauer et al. Brookings Up Front blog post “Examining
the uneven and hard-to-predict labor market recovery,” such as April’s 266,000
jobs gain hiding 6.6 million going “from being employed to unemployed or out of
the labor force,” applications filed by startups “likely to employ people” rising
from 2019’s 110,000 average to 150,000 even since July, and that some employees
may be taking time off “after a very difficult year,” but we know we are
recovering, with only the pace unknown.
In the June 4th Times, Giovanni Russonello
told us “Was the Jobs Report Good? It’s
in the Eye of the Beholder.” It was an
interview with frequent business reporter Ben Casselman, who said that “the
report was exactly good enough to allow everyone to hold on to their existing
beliefs, and for us all to get to do it again a month from now,” and “that
things are getting better… just not as quickly as anyone would like.” Casselman pointed out that between the mid-May
data collection time and the article date, 12 million Americans have been fully
vaccinated, and noted that inflation should not be a large concern since it was
“tame” even with pre-pandemic 3.5% joblessness.
Then, in the same publication on the same date, we had former chief Department
of Labor economist Betsey Stevenson’s “The Jobs Report Takeaway: A Huge Reallocation of People and Work Is
Underway.” Her observations include “the
unemployed aren’t leaving work, they are changing work, and change takes time”
with “a giant mixer” between those looking and those hiring, and, like it or
not, it will be a while to achieve movement of “workers into the jobs in which
they can be most productive.” We don’t
know the extent or permanence of these coronavirus-caused shifts, but we know
there will be some.
On June 6th, also in the New York Times, Heidi
Shierholz worked to get us together with “Republicans, Don’t Ignore the
Evidence on ‘Labor Shortages.’” She
wrote that “the main problem in the U.S. labor market remains one of labor
demand, not of labor supply,” that we are still 7.6 million positions down from
February 2020, and that higher pay is a sign of “a healthy labor market.” All true, but we don’t yet know ongoing significances. Then, in the June 8th Times,
we had advice from Glenn Hubbard on “How to Keep the Economy Booming – And Meet
the Demand for Workers,” including that “policy should support returning to
work and matching workers to jobs by supporting re-employment and training for
new skills, not just boosting demand.” Indeed,
it is clear to me that, now, all unemployment benefit recipients should be
required, as pre-pandemic, to apply for jobs.
Just how strong will the economy be late this summer? The title of Neil Irwin’s “Hot Vax Summer Is
Looking Lukewarm,” in the June 4th New York Times, came out
more pessimistic than the author may have intended – “lukewarm” is quite a bit
cooler than “warm” – but by now it seems likely that we will not be completely
back that soon. With the share of
Americans becoming fully vaccinated creeping along, to only 43% having that
status as of yesterday, we are not going to have an easy “reopening spurred on
by vaccination.” As well, “at the job
creation rate of the last three months, it would take 14 months to return to
February 2020 employment levels.” So let’s
expect our July and August prosperity to be warm, like the weather, but hardly
a heat wave. And that is where we stand.
No comments:
Post a Comment