Oil is a commodity like any other – its price is affected by demand and supply. Back in 2003, with the impending war in Ira and strikes in Venezuela, oil prices increased and continued to do so as further supply concerns developed in Saudi Arabia, Russia and Nigeria. This upward trend continued until 2008, when with the growing banking turmoil and demand for oil falling, the price began to decline. However, the crisis in Libya is only making matters worse. Its credit-rating has been downgraded with the potential for it to be lowered further and concerns are deepening about the country’s crude exports. As Libya is the world’s 12th largest exporter of oil, these supply concerns have started to push up oil prices once more.
With inflation rates already high and political turmoil pushing oil prices up further, consumers and firms are feeling the squeeze. These changes have also been reflected on stock markets across the world. Analyst, Michael Hewson at CMC Markets said:
‘Given the fact that we have seen massive gains in stock markets over the last few months, investors have been nervous about a possible correction for some time… The tensions in the Middle East with Libya imploding and concerns that the unrest could spread to Saudi Arabia could provide a catalyst for (this) correction.’
The disruption in the Middle East has caused companies such as Eni of Italy and Repsol YPF of Spain to shut down production, leading to output losses of some 22% of Libya’s production. As supply contracts from this region, prices will inevitably rise. However, the Saudi oil Minister has said that he is ready to boost production to offset any decline, but that at present there is no oil crisis. So, what can we expect to happen to oil prices in the coming months? It will all depend on changes in demand and supply.
Articles
Libyan crisis threatens to spark oil crisis Financial Times, Javier Blas and David Blair (22/2/11)
Libya protests: oil prices rise as unrest continues BBC News (22/2/11)
Oil producers, users sign charter as prices spike Associated Press (21/2/11)
Oil shock fears as Libya erupts Telegraph, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard (22/2/11)
Arab protests pose energy threat BBC News, Damian Kahya (22/2/11)
All eyes on Bahrain as Gulf tremors frighten oil markets Telegraph, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard (22/2/11)
Saudi Arabia seeks to calm market with words not oil Reuters (22/2/11)
Saudi Arabia says oil market needs no intervention Associated Press (21/2/11)
Peace in Bahrain is key to stopping oil prices from surging Live Oil Prices (22/2/11)
Data
Commodity Prices Index Mundi
Crude Oil Price Chart WTI
Questions
- What are the key factors that influence the supply of oil? How will each factor affect the supply curve?
- What are the key factors that influence the demand for oil? How will each factor affect the demand curve?
- Putting your answers to questions 1 and 2 together and using your knowledge of recent events in the oil market, explain the changes in oil prices.
- How are oil prices affected by OPEC?
- How have rising oil prices affected the stock market? What’s the explanation for this relationship?
- How might higher prices affect the economic recovery? Think about the impact on consumers and firms.
Ahead of Lord Davies’s report on Boardroom equality, he will be somewhat alarmed by the survey results carried out by the Institute of Leadership and Management, which found that 73% of women felt that they still face barriers to top-level promotion. Quotas are a suggestion to break down this barrier. As Sheelagh Whittaker, a non-executive directive of Standard Life said:
‘I am a big supporter of quotas. I believe that we will only have true equality when we have as many incompetent women in positions of power as incompetent men.’
However, others say that quotas are not the answer, as they don’t actually change the fundamentals. Forcing compliance for equality in the workplace is not the same as equality in the workplace. There are a number of other reasons behind fewer women in top level positions, including less confidence and ambition, a more risk-averse attitude to promotion, as well as more women than men aspiring to run their own company, rather than seek promotion within a firm. So does discrimination still remain in the workplace or are there other explanations for the fact that only 12% of FTSE 100 directors are women?
Women still face a glass ceiling Guardian, Graham Dnowdwon (21/2/11)
Female managers say classing ceiling intact – survey BBC News (21/2/11)
The ‘glass ceiling’ is all in the mind: women lack confidence and ambition at work says new survey Daily Mail, Steve Doughty (21/2/11)
Women hit glass ceiling while report rejects boardroom quotas Independent, David Prosser (21/2/11)
Poll: Glass ceiling still a barrier The Press Association (21/2/11)
Men not to blame for the glass ceiling The Australian, Jack Grimston (21/2/11)
Questions
- How are equilibrium wages determined in perfect and imperfect markets?
- Is it efficient for a firm to pay men more than women or to hire/promote more men than women?
- Illustrate the concept of discrimination against women in the labour market. Think about the effect on the MRP curve and hence on equilibrium quantity and wage. How does this affect the MRP curve for men?
- What are the other causes of less women being FTSE 100 directors besides ‘the glass ceiling’?
- To what extent would a quota be effective in achieving gender equality in the workplace?
- Are there any other policies that could be used to tackle discrimination of any kind? What are the pros and cons of each?
One of the key areas discussed in the election was welfare and in particular what to do about those who remain long term dependent on welfare. How can the UK government encourage people back to work? A key issue is the poverty trap: some people are simply better off living on benefits than they are getting a job. Here, we’re talking about the marginal-tax-plus-lost-benefit rate. When you start earning, you get taxed, pay national insurance contributions and lose some of your benefits. All this leads to a situation where work doesn’t pay.
In a paper ‘Escaping the Poverty Trap’ by Lawrence Kay, he considered how much better off people are moving from different benefits into work, taking into account the high costs of actually finding a job and then starting work. He found that after 16 hours of work, someone on Job-seekers’ allowance would be £15.07 poorer and someone on Employment and Support Allowance would be £39.35 worse off. In many cases, people were facing a marginal effective tax rate in excess of 100%. Given this, it’s hardly surprising that Lawrence Kay found that ‘Long term welfare claims have been Britain’s blight for many years’.
However, the Coalition has plans to change this and make sure that those in work are paid more and are better off than those on benefits. By making working life a more attractive option, this should encourage those for whom work doesn’t pay to enter the labour force. This will obviously benefit them, increase the potential output of the economy (hence growth) and improve net taxes, as tax revenue rises and benefits expenditure falls. While this may not lead to tax cuts for those in work (as benefits spending falls), it may mean that more tax revenue is devoted to areas such as health and education or that the government can close the budget deficit.
The ‘universal credit’ aims to simplify the current system and make work pay, by re-introducing a culture of work in households. There is also a plan to place sanctions on those turning down work and place a cap on benefits to any single family. There was also be tax changes aimed at helping those moving into work keep more of their money, thereby removing, or at least reducing, the poverty trap. However, some families will lose out – as the IFS noted, any reform ‘creates winners and losers’. However, the reforms are a step in the right direction. As David Cameron said:
“I think that will, over time, solve the whole poverty trap issue that has bedeviled governments of all colours.”
The Labour party does back some of the changes, but questions whether there is enough help for people finding work. Another issue that must be considered is while it is undoubtedly a good plan to encourage more people to move into work and off benefits, which jobs will they move into? With unemployment still high, now is not exactly the best time to be looking for a job. However, whatever the state of the economy, providing incentives for people to move from benefits into work is definitely a good plan, but of course the methods used will be under constant scrutiny.
Articles
Iain Duncan Smith sets out Welfare Reform Bill plans BBC News (17/2/11)
Bill ditches housing benefit cut The Press Association (17/2/11)
Life on benefits is no longer an option Mail Online, James Chapman (17/2/11)
Universal Credit welfare switch ‘to hit 1.4m homes’ BBC News (12/1/11)
Nick Clegg blocks housing benefit cut for jobless Guardian, Patrick Wintour (17/2/11)
It’s time to end this addiction to benefits Telegraph (17/2/11)
Report
Escaping the Poverty Trap Policy Exchange, Lawrence Kay 2010
Questions
- What is the poverty trap? Which factors make it worse?
- Why does the poverty trap act as a labour supply disincentive for those on benefits?
- If taxes of those in work have to be increased, what happens to their incentive to work more hours? Think about the income and substitution effects of a real wage change.
- Why is it that working may not pay?
- How does the Universal Credit aim to alleviate the poverty trap? Who are likely to be the winners and losers from the government’s proposed welfare reforms?
- What is a marginal-tax-plus-lost-benefit rate? How do you calculate it?
- Are there any other policies that could also reduce the poverty trap? How effective are they likely to be?
Every quarter, the Bank of England publishes its Inflation Report. This analyses developments in the macroeconomy and gives forecasts for inflation and GDP growth over the following 12 quarters. It is on the forecast for inflation in 8 quarters’ time that the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee primarily bases its interest rate decision.
According to the February 2011 Inflation Report forecast, CPI inflation is expected to be at or slightly below its 2% target in two year’s time, but there is considerable uncertainty about this, as shown in the fan diagram in Chart 3 of the Overview. What is more, inflation is likely to rise considerably before it falls back. As the Report states:
CPI inflation is likely to pick up to between 4% and 5% in the near term and to remain well above the 2% target over the next year or so, reflecting in part the recent increase in VAT. The near-term profile is markedly higher than in November, largely reflecting further rises in commodity and import prices since then. Further ahead, inflation is likely to fall back, as those effects diminish and downward pressure from spare capacity persists. But both the timing and extent of that decline in inflation are uncertain.
It is interesting to look back at the Inflation Reports of a year ago and two years ago to see what was being forecast then and to compare them with what has actually happened. It’s not too difficult to explain why the forecasts have turned out to be wrong. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Unfortunately, foresight is less wonderful.
Articles
BoE forecasts pave way to rate rise, but King cautious Reuters, Matt Falloon and Fiona Shaikh (16/2/11)
Inflation report: what the economists say Guardian (16/2/11)
Inflation will rise sharply, says Mervyn King BBC News (16/2/11)
The unrepentant governor BBC News blogs: Stephanomics, Stephanie Flanders (16/2/11)
Inflation: Mervyn and me BBC News blogs: Idle Scrawl, Paul Mason (16/2/11)
What would Milton do? The Economist, Buttonwood (16/2/11)
Why inflation hawks are still grounded Fortune, Colin Barr (16/2/11)
Podcast and Webcast
Bank of England Press conference: Podcast (16/2/11)
Bank of England Press conference: Webcast (16/2/11)
Inflation Report
Inflation Report, portal page for latest report and sections, Bank of England
Inflation Report, February 2011: full report, Bank of England
Data
Forecasts for the UK economy: a comparison of independent forecasts, HM Treasury
Prospects for the UK economy, National Institute of Economic and Social Research press release (1/2/11)
Output, Prices and Jobs, The Economist (10/2/11)
Questions
- Examine the forecasts for UK inflation and GDP for 2010 made in the February 2009 and February 2010 Bank of England Inflation Reports. How accurate were they?
- Explain the difference between the forecasts and the outturn.
- Why is it particularly difficult to forecast inflation and GDP growth at the present time for two years hence?
- What are the advantages of the Bank of England using a forward-looking rule as opposed to basing interest rate decisions solely on current circumstances?
- Explain whether or not it is desirable for interest rates to be adjusted in response to external shocks, such as commodity price increases?
- What do you understand by the term ‘core’ inflation? Is this the same thing as demand-pull inflation?
- How is the Bank of England’s policy on interest rates likely to affect expectations? What expectations are particularly important here?
- Explain whether or not it is desirable for interest rates to be adjusted in response to external shocks, such as commodity price increases?
In a statement to the House of Commons on 9 February 2011, the Chancellor announced that banks would extend their new lending to SMEs (Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises) from £179 billion in 2010 to £190 billion in 2011. An important question is the extent to which this initiative, which forms part of a series of initiatives in conjunction with the banking sector known as Project Merlin, will impact on economic activity.
Let’s begin by thinking about the role that credit plays in an economy. Firstly, it serves a short-term role by enabling individuals and firms to ‘bridge the gap’ between their income and their spending. Secondly, it can, depending on the size and terms of the credit, help to fund longer-term investments. In the case of firms, for instance, it can help to fund capital projects such as an expansion of premises or the installation of new equipment or production processes.
The extension of credit is the main source of growth in the money supply. If the credit which is extended by financial institutions is spent it increases economic activity. The size of the increase in economic activity will depend on how many times the credit is passed on from one firm or individual to the next. In other words, it depends on the velocity of circulation of money – often referred to simply as V. If the initial credit funds a series of purchases and the recipients of these monies, i.e. those from whom the purchases are made, then use their increased deposits to fund purchases themselves, the expansion could be sizeable.
There is every indication that the additional credit for SMEs will be welcome and it seems reasonable to assume that this will positively impact on spending. But, by how much is not entirely clear. This is what fascinates me about macroeconomics, but, perhaps understandably, may well frustrate others! Once the payments for the purchases made using the newly available credit become new deposits, how will these recipients respond? Will other credit-constrained firms use this liquidity to engage in purchases themselves? But, what if these recipients use the monies to increase or rebuild their own financial wealth? In this last scenario – a pessimistic scenario – the velocity of circulation will increase relatively little and economic activity little too.
The corporate sector, of course, does not exist in isolation of other sectors of the economy and, in particular, of the household sector. As some of the income from the expanded credit flows to them in the form of factor payments (i.e. wages and profits) – though by how much is itself debtable – how will they respond? Again will credit-constrained households look to spend? Alternatively, will they hold on to these liquid balances perhaps using them as buffer-stock savings? This is not an unrealistic possibility given the leverage of households and the need to rebuild wealth, especially so in times of incredible economic uncertainty? But, who knows!
So while Merlin may have waved his wand, the full extent of its impact, though probably positive, is far from clear. Time will tell. Isn’t macroeconomics wonderful!
HM Treasury Press Release
Government welcomes banks’ statement on lending by 15% more to SMEs, and on pay and support for regional growth, HM Treasury, 9 February 2011
Statement to the House of Commons by the Chancellor
Statement on banking by the Chancellor of the Exchequer 9 February 2011
Articles
Banks sign lending and bonus deal BBC News (9/2/11)
Banks agree Project Merlin lending and bonus deal BBC News (9/2/11)
Osborne’s plans arrive too late for the economy Independent, Sean O’Grady (11/2/11)
Project Merlin ‘could weaken UK banks’ Telegraph, Harry Wilson (11/2/11)
Nothing wizard about Project Merlin Guardian UK, Nils Pratley (7/2/11)
Softball: Britain’s banks make peace with the government – for now The Economist (10/2/11)
Smaller firms insist banks must change their attitude The Herald (11/2/11)
Questions
- Detail the various roles that financial institutions play in a modern-day economy.
- Do the activities of banks carry with them any risks? How might such risks be reduced?
- What is meant by the velocity of circulation or the velocity of money?
- What factors do you think could affect the velocity of money?
- How does credit creation affect the growth of the money supply?
- What do you understand by individuals or firms being credit-constrained?
- What factors are likely to affect how credit-constrained an individual household is?
- What do you think might be meant by buffer-stock saving? What might affect the size of the buffer-stock held by a household?