Getting heated

Sometimes I think we are reliving the Carter years, when an economic malaise and spiking energy costs led to a political revolt that put Ronald Reagan in the White House.

Consider the similarities — rising fuel costs and consumer prices, a crisis in Iran, shrinking international prestige, etc.

Add to this the news announced yesterday by the “state’s four natural gas utilities” that they plan to “boost rates for residential customers by as much as 22 percent, or an average of $32 a month, under plans filed … with the state Board of Public Utilities. The rates would take effect Oct. 1.”

The companies are blaming the increase “on rising international demand for natural gas, a significant drop in imports of liquefied natural gas and lower supplies in the U.S.”

Those factors have combined to double the price utilities pay for the fuel since
last August. Utilities such as Public Service Electric & Gas make no profit
on the sale of natural gas, passing the costs through to customers.

Not exactly good news for already cash-strapped for consumers. The state ratepayer counsel — the person responsible for protecting consumers in the utilities regulatory process — says she plans to take a close look at the rate requests, but does not expect there to be much that can be done.

Because the rate request is the result of higher commodity costs, approval from the BPU is likely, although regulators could grant the increase in multiple steps. Under state law, utilities make no money on the gas itself, but they are entitled to pass along their costs to customers.

“We’ll take a look at it, but because it’s commodity based, it’s unlikely we’ll be able to do anything to keep the prices down,” said Stephanie Brand, the state’s rate counsel, in a telephone interview.

“It’s a trend we’re seeing everywhere,” Brand said. “We’re getting a lot of phone calls and e-mails from consumers having trouble paying their bills. There’s not a whole lot people can do but use less,” she said.

Translation: Keeping the house colder. Isn’t that what Jimmy Carter recommended way back when?

Economic woes

No one should be surprised that we have entered recession. The U.S. economy has never been as healthy as some of the more mainstream economists have been claiming, buoyed only by a tenuous mix of questionable credit and longer working hours.

The housing bubble, for instance, created an unexpected explosion in equity — which, in turn, resulted in a record number of equity loans being taken out. In the past, these loans tended to be used for improvements to housing (boosting home value), but in recent years the money has been used for an array of consumer spending — vacations, electronics, etc.

This boosted the economy, but left many homeowners in perilous circumstances.

The recent flood of borrowing against home equity has driven consumption since the 2001 recession. This borrowing drove the savings rate into negative territory for the first time since the depression. Through the sixties, seventies, and eighties, the savings rate had averaged close to 10 percent. If the savings rate were to move back just half way to its historic level, this would imply a loss of $600 billion in annual consumption. In fact, since virtually all of the baby boom generation is in its peak saving years, the savings rate should be higher than normal.

And now that a the bubble has burst, the shrinking equity is making it even harder to turn the housing market around, with fewer and fewer homeowners having enough equity left in their houses to muster a downpayment for a new house.

Add to this the reality that workers have not been earning more but working more to make ends meet — a trend that is slowing, according to The New York Times. Workers were making ends meet by increasing their hours, but the average work week for employees is on the decline:

From March 2007 to March of this year, the average workweek reported in the private sector slipped slightly to 33.8 hours, from 33.9 hours, while overtime for manufacturing workers fell by a larger margin.

At the end of last month, more than 4.9 million people were working part time either because they could not find full-time jobs or because their companies had cut hours in the face of slack business, according to a Labor Department survey. That represented an increase of 400,000 since November.

And on Wednesday, the government reported that average earnings slipped in March after accounting for the rising costs of food and fuel — the sixth consecutive month that pay failed to keep pace with inflation.

That’s a difficult pill to swallow and one that is creating havoc in the economy.

The gradual erosion of the paycheck has become a stealth force driving the American economic downturn. Most of the attention has focused on the loss of jobs and the risk of layoffs. But the less-noticeable shrinking of hours and pay for millions of workers around the country appears to be a bigger contributor to the decline, which has already spread from housing and finance to other important areas of the economy.

While official unemployment has risen only modestly, to 5.1 percent, the reduction of wages and working hours for those still employed has become a primary cause of distress, pushing many more Americans into a downward spiral, economists say.

It is part of a larger transformation of the economy, one that is creating anger — should I say “bitterness”? — and fear among workers, weakening consumer confidence in a way that will only continue the spiral. If workers cannot afford to buy new consumer goods, then manufacturers will have to cut back, pinching payrolls leading to a further erosion of confidence.

What’s the answer? Conservatives say the cycle will right itself, which is true. But the question is how long will it take and how much pain the downward spiral will cause before this happens.

The federal government can step in — as it did during the 1930s — priming the pump by rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure, its decaying bridges and levees, improving mass transit opportunities and investing on a transformation of the energy sector from fossil fuels to renewable sources. And it can do more than offer a small tax rebate.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.

Empty economic rhetoric

I haven’t had a chance to do much on the McCain economic address — a bunch of nonsense, if you ask me, that offers little that will aid Americans as the economy spins deeper into recession and certainly nothing designed to reverse the downward spiral.

So I offer Matthew Yglesias on the topic, from his Atlantic Monthly blog:

John McCain’s big economic policy speech hasn’t really gotten the attention it deserves from progressive blogs. But recall that we’ve heard in earlier McCain addresses that he wants to continue the war in Iraq indefinitely and also that he thinks we need to boost baseline defense spending. In his economic speech, he does what Republicans do and proposes a huge raft of tax cuts. Naturally, being a straight-talker, he’s not afraid to tell people that a certain price will be paid for these defense hikes and tax cuts. As he explains, paying for his program will require “taking the savings from earmark, program review, and other budget reforms.”

Straight talk!

Or, in reality, obfuscation. Clearly the reforms per se aren’t going to save any money. McCain is proposing processes that could lead to program cuts. But he won’t, you know, actually name any programs that he think ought to be cut. Because, after all, if he told people what he was planning to cut, they might realize that they liked these programs. So better to refer to them in a vague way. But in essence, McCain is saying we should reduce funding for our transportation infrastructure. And that at a time of rising food prices, poor people should get less in the way of food assistance. And that the federal law enforcement apparatus should do more with less. That product safety inspections can be pared back. That maybe environmental and labor regulations don’t really need to be enforced. Or perhaps the national parks should fall into a state of disrepair. Who knows? McCain won’t tell us what’ll get the ax, but there’s just no way to do what he’s proposing to do on the tax-and-warmongering sides of the budget without seriously scaling back on domestic programs.

No need to add anything.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.

Bad moon on the rise

I know there are specific definitions of recession and it is possible that we have yet to meet them. Any way you slice it, the economy is in the tank and it is hitting those hardest who can least afford to be hit in the first place.

WASHINGTON – Employers slashed 63,000 jobs in February, the most in five years and the starkest sign yet that the country is heading dangerously toward recession or is in one already.

The Labor Department’s report, released Friday, also indicated that the nation’s unemployment rate dipped from 4.9 percent in January to 4.8 percent last month as hundreds of thousands of people — perhaps discouraged by their prospects — left the civilian labor force.

Job losses were widespread, with hefty cuts coming from construction, manufacturing, retailing, financial services and a variety of professional and business services. Those losses swamped gains elsewhere, including education and health care, leisure and hospitality and the government.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.

Not very stimulating?

Two notes on the House stimulus package:

1. Paul Krugman links to the work the Tax Policy Center has done on the package, which shows that the poorer 60 percent of the population stands to benefit very little from the House plan — far less than the richer 40 percent.

2. David Sirota finds the pork buried in the plan.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.