Category: Economics: Ch 15

Posted on

Japan: An Economic Aftershock

We’ve had numerous examples in recent years of the economic turmoil that natural disasters can have and unfortunately, we have another to add to the list: the Japanese earthquake and tsunami. As Japan tries to take stock of the damage and loss of life, the economic consequences of this disaster will also need considering. The previous Kobe earthquake cost the economy an estimated 2% of GDP, but this did hit a key industrial area. The economic consequences of the 2011 earthquake were originally not thought to be as bad, but the economy will undoubtedly suffer.

The Japanese economy, like the UK, shrank in the final quarter of 2010, but was expected to return to growth. The devastation of the earthquake and tsunami is now likely to delay this economic recovery. Many car companies are based in Japan and are expected to take some of the biggest hits. Nomura analysts suggested that annual operating profits of companies such as Toyota, Nissan and Honda would be dented by between 3% and 8%. You only have to look at some of the footage of the disaster to see why this is expected. Supply chains will undoubtedly be disrupted, many of whom are located in the exclusion zone and financial markets across the world have fallen, as the possibility of a nuclear disaster threatens. As Louise Armistead writes:

‘By lunchtime in Britain £32bn had been knocked off the value of the FTSE-100 dropped, which fell by more than 3pc in early trading but recovered later to close down 1.38pc at 5,695.28. Germany’s DAX plunged 3.19pc, recovering from a 4.8pc fall, and France’s CAC ended the day 3.9pc lower, while on Wall Street, the Dow Jones Industrial Index dropped 2pc shortly after opening.’

A key question will be whether Japanese reconstruction will push the economy out of its deflationary spiral or make it even worse.

GDP measures the value of output produced within the domestic economy, but it is by no means an accurate measure of a country’s standard of living. Whilst it will take into account new construction that will be required to rebuild the economy, it doesn’t take into account the initial destruction of it. As output and growth are expected to fall in the immediate aftermath, we may see a boost to growth, as reconstruction begins.

The problem of scarcity is becoming more and more apparent to many survivors, as they begin to run short of basic necessities, which has led to various rationing mechanisms being introduced. Despite the devastating conditions which survivors now find themselves in, when supplies are delivered, the efficiency of Japan is still very evident. As noted by BBC Radio 4 coverage, as soon as the supplies arrived, a line was in place to unload the van in minutes. Teams have been set up to help everyone get through the tragedy. Even in the most devastating of times, Japanese efficiency still shines through and undoubtedly this will be a massive aid in the huge re-construction projects that we will see over the coming months and even years. Analysts say that there will be short term pain, but that the investment in construction will boost the economy later in the year.

Japanese earthquake: Markets shed £1trillion amid nuclear fears Telegraph, Louise Armistead (16/3/11)
Panic over Japan triggers market turmoil Independent, Nikhil Kumar (16/3/11)
Japan quake: Economy ‘to rebound’ after short term pain BBC News (14/3/11)
Japan disaster: The cost of a crisis Guardian (16/3/11)
Global stock markets tumble in ‘perfect storm’ amid fears of nuclear disaster Mail Online, Hugo Duncan (16/3/11)
Japan’s earthquake will cause a global financial aftershock Guardian, Peter Hadfield (15/3/11)
Economists’ estimate of Japan quake impact Reuters (16/3/11)
Fukishima factor adds pressure to economic fallout from Japan’s crisis Guardian, Larry Elliott (15/3/11)

Questions

  1. What is the likely impact on Japan’s GDP?
  2. Why is the potential disruption to the supply chain important for a firm?
  3. How and why will this catastrophe affect global financial markets?
  4. What are some of the main problems of using GDP as a measurement for growth? Think about the impact on GDP of Japan’s destruction and their future re-construction.
  5. What types of production methods etc have Japan implemented to allow them to become so efficient in production?
  6. What are the arguments to suggest that this disaster might help the Japanese economy recover from its deflationary spiral? What are the arguments to suggest that it might make it worse?
  7. What are some other examples of natural disasters or human errors that have also had economic consequences?
Posted on

Happiness economics

Economics studies scarcity and the allocation of resources. Central to societies’ economic objectives is the reduction in scarcity and central to that is economic growth. Certainly, economic growth is a major objective of all governments. They know that they will be judged by their record on economic growth.

But what do we mean by economic growth? The normal measure is growth in GDP. But does GDP measure how much a society benefits? Many people argue that GDP is a poor proxy for social benefit and that a new method of establishing the level of human well-being and happiness is necessary.

And it’s not just at macro level. As we saw in a previous news article, A new felicific calculus? happiness and unhappiness are central to economists’ analysis of consumer behaviour. If we define ‘utility’ as perceived happiness, standard consumer theory assumes that rational people will seek to maximise the excess of happiness over the costs of achieving it: i.e. will seek to maximise consumer surplus.

There have been three recent developments in the measurement of happiness. ‘Understanding Society’ is a £48.9m government-funded UK study following 40,000 households and is run by the Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) at the University of Essex. It has just published its first findings (see link below).

The second development is the work by the ONS on developing new measures of national well-being and includes a questionnaire asking about the things that matter to people and which should be included in a measure or measures of national well-being.

The third development will be an addition of five new questions to the Integrated Household Survey:

• Overall, how satisfied are you with your life nowadays?
• Overall, how happy did you feel yesterday?
• Overall, how anxious did you feel yesterday?
• Overall, to what extent do you feel the things you do in your life are worthwhile?

But after all this, will we be any closer to getting a correct measure of human well-being? Will the results of such investigations help governments devise policy? Will the government be closer to measuring the costs and benefits of any policy decisions?

Articles

ONS site

Understanding Society site

Questions

  1. For what reasons might GDP be a poor measure of human well-being?
  2. How suitable is a survey of individuals for establishing the nation’s happiness?
  3. How suitable are each of the four specific questions above for measuring a person’s well-being?
  4. Why, do you think, has average life satisfaction not increased over the past 30 years despite a substantial increase in GDP per head?
  5. Give some examples of ways in which national well-being could increase for any given level of GDP. Explain why they would increase well-being.
  6. Should other countries follow Bhutan’s example and use a ‘groass national happiness index’ to drive economic and social policy?
  7. If human well-being could be accurately measured, should that be the sole driver of economic and social policy?
  8. Do people’s spending patterns give a good indication of the things that give them happiness?
Posted on

A retail slowdown

Growth in the UK for the final quarter of 2010 was originally at -0.5%. However, the latest data has revised that figure to -0.6% and not all of this was down to the snow. Analysts say that the snow effect is still believed to explain the 0.5% contraction, but the economy therefore declined by 0.1% because of other reasons and retailers have seen the effects. Primark has reported a ‘noticeable’ slowdown in demand since the beginning of 2011. With increasing VAT and rising cotton prices, clothing retailers are feeling the squeeze. The same is true of UK consumers. With an increase in VAT and high inflation, consumers’ purchasing power has simply fallen and so they are spending less. Despite this slowdown, Primark’s revenues are still significantly ahead of the same time last year.

The parent company, Associated British Foods (ABF) commented on the disappointing trading of 2011 so far, saying:

“Since the New Year, the performance in all our operations in Continental Europe has been very encouraging but there has been a noticeable slowing down of UK consumer demand.”

However, despite disappointing figures for Primark, UK retail sales did pick up in January, although analysts are warning against taking this information as a sign of recovery. As Hetal Mehta from Daiwa said:

“While we expected there to be some clawback from December’s dismal, snow-hit retail sales, today’s jump is a welcome surprise. But is still far too early to conclude that consumers are weathering the storm … and with the past week’s unemployment figures highlighting the fragility of the labour market, the housing market continuing to weaken and real earnings being hit hard by high inflation, it seems inconceivable that consumer spending will act as the driving force of the economy over the near term.”

There are many opinions about what to expect from the economy in 2011, but for any concrete information, we really have to wait for at least another month. Perhaps by Easter, we’ll have a better idea about the state of the UK. For now, there are a few articles considering the retail sector.

Primark owner warns of slowing sales in UK Guardian, Graeme Wearden (28/2/11)
Primark warns of ‘noticeable’ slowdown in UK demand BBC News (28/2/11)
Growth in UK retail sales slows sharply Wall Street Journal, Alex Brittain and Art Patnaude (24/2/11)
UK retail sales rebound: reaction Telegraph (28/2/11)
UK GDP figure revised down further BBC News (25/2/11)

Questions

  1. Why has higher VAT and cotton prices impacted retailers such as Primark?
  2. Why was Primark less affected by declining sales in the run up to Christmas?
  3. What do we mean by purchasing power?
  4. Why is it hard to draw any conclusions about the performance of the UK at the moment?
  5. What does a slowing down of retail sales mean for the UK’s recovery? Will it influence the Chancellor’s Budget?
Posted on

The same taxing question

With the UK economy borrowing 11% of GDP, it is undeniable that spending cuts are needed. Of course, the big question is should they be occurring now or delayed until the recovery is more stable. However, another question is now being asked. Should taxes be cut to help the worse off? David Cameron says that this is out of the question. While he is a ‘tax-cutting Tory’ who ‘believes in tax cuts’, any significant cuts in taxes specifically aimed at the poor would simply make matters worse, especially as the Coalition government is already helping to move thousands of families out of taxation altogether, albeit by increasing taxes on the better off.

“It’s no good saying we’re going to deal with the deficit by cutting spending, but then we’re going to make things worse again by cutting taxes. I’m afraid it doesn’t add up.”

Those in favour of cutting taxes include John Redwood, the head of the Tory’s economic affairs committee, who argues that they would help to boost the economy, by ‘encouraging the wealth creators and the private sector’. By reducing the burden on residents, disposable income will increase, helping to stimulate consumption and investment, which should in turn boost aggregate demand. This would be a much needed stimulus following the latest data which showed: a shrinking economy once again in the last quarter of 2010, consumer confidence at its lowest level in the past 20 years, the possibility of unstable markets should the government be seen to ‘twitch’ on the austerity drive and 57% in a YouGov poll saying that the cuts are ‘being imposed unfairly’. Public approval for the Coalition’s budget deficit reduction strategy has fallen from 53% in June 2010 to 38% in February 2010. Add to this rising inflation and unemployment and the last thing people want to hear is surely ‘No big tax cuts’.

However, the budget deficit must be tackled: now or later. Whenever it happens and whichever party is in power, spending must be cut and/or tax revenues must rise and everyone will have to play their part.

Cameron: ‘Tax cuts impossible right now’ Sky News (6/2/11)
David Cameron says major tax cuts not possible BBC News (6/2/11)
Cameron vows ‘No to big tax cuts’ The Press Association (6/2/11)
David Cameron: Sorry, but we can’t afford tax cuts Telegraph, Patrick Hennessy (5/2/11)
George Osborne faces Conservative pressure for tax cuts BBC News (1/2/11)
Nick Clegg’s tax cuts will cost £4.3 billion, says IFS Telegraph, James Kirkup (2/2/11)
Doubts mount over Cameron’s austerity drive Associated Press (6/2/11)
Sorry it is so complicated BBC 2, Daily Politics, Stephanie Flanders (14/6/10)

Questions

  1. What is government borrowing? Who does the government borrow from?
  2. Analyse the impact of tax cuts on the economy. Think about which groups will be affected the most and in what ways.
  3. Which components of aggregate demand will be affected by cuts in spending and rising taxes?
  4. ’Cuts in taxation would boost the economy.’ To what extent do you agree with this statement?
  5. What will be the impact of tas cuts on the government’s macroeconomic objectives, given your answer to question 3?
  6. What are the arguments (a) for cutting the budget deficit now and (b) for cutting the budget deficit later?
Posted on

The wrong kind of economics?

Business leaders and politicians pay a great deal of attention to economic forecasts. And yet these forecasts often turn out to be quite wrong. Very few economists predicted the banking crisis of 2008 and the subsequent credit crunch and recession. And the recently released 2010 Q4 growth figures for the UK economy, which showed a decline in real GDP of 0.5%, took most people by surprise.

What is more, forecasters often disagree. If, for example, you look at the forecasts made by various panel members for Consensus Forecasts, you can see the divergence between their various predictions.

So why is economic forecasting so unreliable? Is it the fault of economic models? Or are there too many unpredictable factors that can impact on economies – factors such as business and consumer confidence, or political events, or natural disasters, such as the recent floods in Australia, South Africa and Brazil? Will economic forecasting always be a very inexact science?

Articles
Davos 2011: Why do economists get it so wrong? BBC News, Tim Weber (27/1/11)
Popular Semi-Science Slate, Robert J. Shiller (24/1/11)
Fed Often Gets It Wrong In Its Forecasts on US Economy American Public Media, Justin Wolfers (26/1/11)
Don’t bet on economic forecasting CNBC, Jeff Cox (21/9/10)

Forecasts
Forecasts for the UK economy HM Treasury
Econ Stats: The Economic Statistics and Indicators Database Economy Watch (large database of worldwide annual statistics, including forecasts to 2015)
World Economic Outlook IMF (follow link in right-hand panel)
OECD Economic Outlook: Statistical Annex OECD
European Economic Forecasts European Commission, Economic and Financial Affairs DG

Questions

  1. For what reasons may economic forecasts turn out to be wrong?.
  2. To what extent is economic forecasting like weather forecasting? Which is harder and why?
  3. Wo what extent can the poor accuracy of economic forecasts be blamed on the application of the ‘wrong type of economics’?
  4. How much variation is there in the independent forecasts of the UK economy reported by the Treasury (see HM Treasury link above)?
  5. Using the HM Treasury link, compare the forecasts made of 2010 in January 2010 with those made of 2010 in January 2011. Attempt an explanation of the differences.