Wikinvest Wire

The Week's Economic Reports

Saturday, March 17, 2007

Following is a summary of last week's economic reports. Rising prices, tepid retail sales, faltering regional manufacturing, and fading consumer confidence are not what many economists and market observers were wanting to hear last week, but that's what they got. Aside from what appears to be a one-off boost in industrial production, there is little positive news in the most recent batch of economic reports. As for stocks and bonds, the S&P 500 Index fell 1.1 percent to 1,387, now down 2.2 percent on the year, while the yield of the 10-year U.S. Treasury note dropped 5 basis points to 4.54 percent.


Retail Sales: Rising gasoline prices made the February retail sales figures better than they would have otherwise been, but retail spending came in below expectations nonetheless. Overall sales rose only 0.1 percent in February following no change in January. If automobile sales are excluded, sales fell 0.1 percent in February after an increase of 0.3 percent in January. Inclement weather in much of the country likely depressed retail activity in the most recent reporting period.

Amid rising prices at the pump, gasoline station sales rose 1.2 percent in February and if these sales are excluded from the February data, overall retail sales were flat. On a year-over-year basis, overall retail activity was up 3.2 percent. If automobile purchases are excluded, the annual gain was 3.1 percent. Retail sales have unquestionably been trending lower over the last year, however, the American consumer has been resilient. With recently sagging consumer confidence, this may be about to change.

Import/Export Prices: Both import and export prices rose more than expected in February, a continuing sign that inflation has not yet been brought under control after oil prices plunged in the second half of 2006. The cost of petroleum products rose 2.0 percent in February contributing to the sharp increase in import prices, up 0.7 percent in February after rising 0.3 percent in January.

Producer Prices: Producer prices rose sharply in February, up 1.3 percent after a decline of 0.6 percent in January. The core rate, excluding food and energy, climbed 0.4 percent for the month after an increase of 0.2 percent in January. On a year-over-year basis, overall producer prices have risen 2.6 percent and core producer prices have gone up 1.8 percent.

After falling 4.6 percent in January as a result of falling prices for crude oil, the energy component of the overall index rose 3.5 percent led by rising prices for heating oil (up 6.0 percent), gasoline (up 5.1 percent), and natural gas (up 4.1 percent). Though the producer price data is much more volatile than the consumer equivalent, this report is a strong reminder that energy prices still play a key role in inflation statistics.

Empire State Index/Philadelphia Fed Survey: Both the New York Empire State Index and the Philadelphia Fed Survey showed weakness in regional manufacturing activity during the March reporting period. The New York survey has recently been stronger and far more volatile than the survey from Philadelphia, but for the first time since April of 2003, both readings are near the zero mark indicating little or no growth.

The Empire State Index fell from 24.4 in February to a reading of 1.9 in March, while the Philadelphia Fed Survey fell from 0.6 in February to 0.2 in March. Both measures were led down by fewer new orders, backlog decreases, and inventory contraction.

Consumer Prices: The consumer price index rose 0.4 percent in February after a 0.2 percent increase in January while core consumer prices rose 0.2 percent following a 0.3 percent gain the month prior. On a year-over-year basis, overall prices are up 2.4 percent and the core rate stands at 2.7 percent.

Energy prices rose 0.9 percent in February, led by fuel oil (up 1.7 percent) and gasoline (up 0.8 percent) with more price increases expected for the March report. Prices for food and beverages rose a hefty 0.8 percent for the month led by a 4.7 percent increase for fruits and vegetables while meats, poultry, cereals, and bakery products all rose 1.1 percent.

As shown in the chart depicting overall CPI below, after energy prices plunged last fall, there have now been three consecutive months of increases to overall consumer prices with higher energy prices expected for next month.


During the last two months core consumer prices have been rising at rates above most economists' comfort level, the year-over-year change to core inflation not receding significantly after soaring energy prices plunged in August and September.


This does not bode well for the Federal Reserve should they feel compelled to lower short-term interest rates in an effort to support falling asset prices in both the housing market and in recently stumbling equity markets. Continuing price pressures will make this decision more complex than it would otherwise be (more on this topic in the summary below).

Industrial Production/Capacity Utilization: Both industrial production and capacity utilization exceeded consensus estimates in February. Led by an increase in utilities output (up 6.7 percent), overall industrial production rose from 0.3 percent in January to 1.0 percent in February. Overall capacity utilization increased to 82.0 percent from a level of 81.4 percent during the month prior.

Consumer Sentiment: The measure of consumer confidence from the University of Michigan hit a six month low at 88.8, down from last month's reading of 91.3, and may be an indication that the mood of the American consumer is changing. Despite higher gasoline prices, inflation expectations remained at 3.0 percent, but as discussed at the blog last week in The Relevance of Inflation Expectations, there has been a good correlation between these two in recent years. Should gasoline prices remain elevated, look for a higher level of inflation expectations and a lower overall confidence level next month.

Summary: Get ready for more talk of "stagflation" after the inflation reports of last week are viewed alongside continuing weakness in manufacturing and housing. Across the board price increases with more upward pressure from energy prices in next month's inflation reports could mean that monetary policy decisions become exceedingly tricky in the months ahead.

It increasingly looks like the Fed will be faced with a choice of either trying to "save the economy" by lowering short-term interest rates or remaining "vigilant" in the face of price pressures that continue to put inflation at rates above well-publicized comfort levels.

There should be some indication as to what is on the mind of the Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke with the policy statement accompanying next week's Federal Open Market Committee meeting. In light of recent market turmoil and the latest round of inflation data, this will be one of the most widely anticipated Fed policy statements in since last summer.

The Week Ahead: The meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee will highlight next week's economic news. While no change to short-term interest rates is expected, Fed comments on mortgage lending and the housing market as they relate to economic growth will be closely scrutinized for any indication of a change in policy stance. Three important reports on housing are due including the homebuilders housing market index on Monday, housing starts on Tuesday, and existing home sales on Friday. The Conference Board's leading economic indicators will be released on Thursday.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

http://www.morganstanley.com/views/gef/index.html#anchor4577

Global
The Great Unraveling
March 16, 2007

By Stephen S. Roach | from Beijing


It didn’t have to be this way. Were it not for a serious policy blunder by America’s central bank, I suspect the US economy could have been much more successful in avoiding the perils of a multi-bubble syndrome. Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan crossed the line, in my view, by encouraging reckless behavior in the midst of each of the last two asset bubbles. In early 2000, while NASDAQ was cresting toward 5000, he was unabashed in his enthusiastic endorsement of a once-in-a-generation increase in productivity growth that he argued justified seemingly lofty valuations of equity markets. This was tantamount to a green light for market speculators and legions of individual investors at just the point when the equity bubble was nearing its end. And then only four years later, he did it again – this time directing his counsel at the players of the property bubble. In early 2004, he urged homeowners to shift from fixed to floating rate mortgages, and in early 2005, he extolled the virtues of sub-prime borrowing – the extension of credit to unworthy borrowers. Far from the heartless central banker that is supposed to “take the punchbowl away just when the party is getting good,” Alan Greenspan turned into an unabashed cheerleader for the excesses of an increasingly asset-dependent US economy. I fear history will not judge the Maestro’s legacy kindly. And now he’s reinventing himself as a forecaster. Figure that!

Greenspan or not, downside risks are building in the US economy. The sub-prime carnage is getting all the headlines these days, but in the end, I suspect it will be only a footnote in yet another post-bubble shakeout. America got into this mess by first succumbing to the siren song of an equity bubble (see my 25 April 2005 dispatch, “Original Sin”). Fearful of a Japan-like outcome, the Federal Reserve was quick to ease aggressively in order to contain the downside. The excess liquidity that was then injected into the system after the bursting of the equity bubble set the markets up for a series of other bubbles – especially residential property, emerging markets, high-yield corporate credit, and mortgages. Meanwhile, the yen carry trade added high-octane fuel to the levered play in risky assets, and the income-based saving shortfall of America’s asset-dependent economy resulted in the mother of all current account deficits. No one in their right mind ever though this mess was sustainable – barring, of course, the fringe “new paradigmers” who always seem to show up at bubble time. It was just a question of when, and under what conditions, it would end.

Anonymous said...

It looks like there is a double inflation factor with lowering interest rates, It would stimulate the economy and at the same time devalue the currency. Both the stimulation to the economy and devalued currency would lead to more inflation. But I would guess that the Fed will always pick inflation over recession.
NZ

Anonymous said...

Hi from japan!

Core CPI plateauing up to 2.5%... not good. With all the debt accumulation, dollar decline, raw materials increases, and cashing out of the credit bubble, this is clearly out of the Fed's control.

At least they have an excuse to keep interest rates high.

Or if they don't.. well, maybe I should buy more Yen while I'm here.

Anonymous said...

If the Fed cuts rates, would that lead to further unwinding of the yen carry trade and potential market disruption like we saw a few weeks ago?

bubble_watcher said...

If the Fed cuts rates, while Japan raises rates, then we could be looking at a first class debacle in stock markets around the world.

IMAGE

  © Blogger template Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP