The Unassuming Economist

From a post by Conversable Economist:

“Part of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the CARES Act) signed into law by President Trump on March 27, 2020, was a national moratorium on evictions. However, the moratorium was scheduled to end on July 24, 2020–although it effectively required an additional 30 days beyond that date before landlords could file notices to vacate. Congress did not vote to extend the moratorium. However, the Centers for Disease Control then announced a national eviction moratorium to start on September 4, 2020. The US Supreme Court held in August 2021 that the CDC lacked the power to make this policy decision without the passage of a law through Congress and signed by the president. Of course, the Supreme Court decision was not about whether the eviction moratoriums were good policy or had beneficial effects. Here, I set aside the legal questions and focus on what we know about the outcomes.

It’s worth saying at the start that data on rental evictions is not nationally centralized, and is not up-to-the-minute. Every study has its own sample. However, certain patterns do seem to emerge across studies. Jasmine Rangel, Jacob Haas, Emily Lemmerman, Joe Fish, and Peter Hepburn at The Eviction Lab at Princeton University provide evidence on overall eviction patterns in “Preliminary Analysis: 11 months of the CDC Moratorium” (August 21, 2021). Their project collects data from 31 cities and six full states, representing about one-fourth of all the renters in the country. Here’s their estimate based on the sites they trask of how the total number of evictions would have evolved starting in January 2020, compared to what actually happened. Evictions fall by about half starting in March 2020 , and the gap between expected and actual evictions continues to expand after the CDC moratorium is enacted in September 2020.”

Continue reading here.

State capacity refers to the government’s ability to do its job effectively: to raise taxes, maintain order,
and provide public goods. A series of calamities during the 21st century—the Iraq War, Hurricane Katrina,
the financial crisis, and most recently the COVID-19 pandemic- all indicate the erosion of state capacity. A recent report by the Niskanen Centre (2021) discusses the same.

“The decline in state capacity since the 1960s can be traced to two distinctive but mutually reinforcing intellectual movements. One occurred on the political right while the other is associated mainly with the left. Both represent dysfunctional responses to America’s longstanding (and well-founded) fears of centralized power. On the right, healthy suspicion of rapid government expansion has given way to a toxic contempt for government and public service per se. On the left, efforts to expand “citizen voice” in government as a check on abusive power have produced a sclerotic “vetocracy” that makes effective governance all but impossible.”

Bold policy changes on many fronts are needed to bring back dynamism and inclusive prosperity.

Click here to read the full report.

“Virtual live-stream only! Thursday, December 2nd, 2021, 12:30 pm – 2 pm ET: Neil R. Ericsson (Federal Reserve Board) will present “Evaluating the Federal Reserve’s Tealbook Forecasts”Co-authors: Maia Crook, Emilio J. Fiallos, J E. Seymour, Charlotte Singer, Ben Smith, François de Soyres.
Abstract: This paper examines publicly available Federal Reserve Board Tealbook forecasts of GDP growth for the United States and several foreign countries, focusing on potential time-varying biases and evaluating the Tealbook forecasts relative to other forecasts. Tealbook forecasts perform relatively well at short horizons, but with significant heterogeneity across countries. Also, while standard Mincer-Zarnowitz tests typically fail to detect biases in the Tealbook forecasts, recently developed indicator saturation techniques that employ machine learning are able to detect economically sizable and highly significant time-varying biases. Estimated biases differ not only over time, but by country and across the forecast horizon. These biases point to directions for forecast improvement. Chong and Hendry’s (1986) forecast-encompassing tests of the Tealbook forecasts relative to JP Morgan’s forecasts reveal distinct value added by each institution’s forecasts. For most countries and forecast horizons examined, each institution’s forecast can be improved by utilizing information from the other institution’s forecast.”

For more details read here.

While it has been postulated for long that wealth and aggregate income in the economy go hand in hand, developments in the last several decades point to a different phenomenon as the wealth to GDP ratio has been rising rapidly, reaching 6.1 times the GDP currently.

In a recent column for the Conversable Economist, Timothy Taylor writes on the issue, drawing insights from a 2021 McKinsey Global Institute report.

“…At the level of the global economy, the historical link between the growth of wealth, or net worth, and the value of economic flows such as GDP no longer holds. Economic growth has been sluggish over the past two decades in advanced economies, but net worth, which long tracked GDP growth, has soared in relation to it. This divergence has emerged as asset prices rose sharply—and are now almost 50 percent higher than the long-run average relative to income. The increase was not a result of 21st-century trends such as the increasing digitization of the economy. Rather, in an economy increasingly propelled by intangible assets, a glut of savings has struggled to find investments offering sufficient economic returns and lasting value to investors. These (ex-ante) savings have instead found their way into a traditional asset class, real estate, or into corporate share buybacks, driving up asset prices.”

Source: McKinsey Global Institute. (2021). The rise and rise of the global balance sheet: How productively are we using our wealth?

Real estate, rather than an ongoing investment boom in the 10 countries under study, is attributed to this rapid rise in global wealth. Furthermore, the study offers possible explanations for the consequences that such a trend might bring with it in the future- some happy and some not so happy ones.

Read on to know more. Click here.

Through cross-country evidence, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has shown that economic inequality has risen in most OECD countries in the last thirty years or so while social mobility has stagnated or worsened. In its most recent report, the OECD turns its gaze to the question of how people perceive inequality and social mobility.

When it comes to questions on the perception of inequality, it has been shown in the report that there is overwhelming concern regarding income distribution and the lack of equal opportunities in the average world citizen. However, far from being an umbrella statement, there are instead a multitude of layers shaping people’s understanding of the phenomenon and factors affecting it.

In this report, emphasis is laid on providing an explanation to several such factors such as whether people care about inequality, how connected is their perception of inequality to the actually prevailing reality, how supportive is the general public for increased governmental action to bridge income gaps and how far are the people ready to go to hold governments accountable for failing to do so. It then moves on to providing interesting policy insights about the reform process and some hitherto ignored policies that have worked well.

Click here to read the full report.