ReportWire

Tag: sciences

  • What NASA knows about soft landings that the Federal Reserve doesn’t

    What NASA knows about soft landings that the Federal Reserve doesn’t

    [ad_1]

    The Federal Reserve still has a chance to meet both of its main goals — strong economic growth and stable prices — but time is running out to achieve a soft landing.

    The problem is that Fed officials are fixated on raising interest rates
    FF00,
    +0.00%

    several more times, including another supersize increase at their meeting Tuesday and Wednesday. They don’t seem to notice that inflation is already retreating significantly, while growth is dangerously close to stalling out.

    They have a blind spot because they are looking at the past.

    Greg Robb: Another jumbo Fed rate hike is expected this week — and then life gets difficult for Chairman Powell

    Fed officials ought to reach out to another government agency that has had remarkable success in achieving soft landings: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

    NASA’s scientists know something the Fed has forgotten: It takes a long time to send and receive messages from space, so they need to account for those delays when sending instructions to their spacecraft so they can land safely on Mars, or orbit Saturn or the moons of Jupiter.

    Compounding errors

    It’s the same way with the economy. The signals that the Fed receives from the economy are often delayed, sometimes by months. Unfortunately, one of the main signals the Fed is relying upon right now to decide how much to raise interest rates is delayed by a year or more.

    I’m talking about inflation in the price of putting a roof over our heads. Shelter prices are now the leading contributor to increases in the consumer price index (CPI) and the personal consumption expenditure (PCE) price index. But because of the way the CPI for shelter is constructed — for very good reasons — the inflation reported today reflects conditions as they were 12 to 18 months ago.

    The error is compounded because shelter prices are by far the largest component of the CPI, at more than 30%.

    The Fed is disappointed that inflation hasn’t declined more since it began raising interest rates in March, but how could it when the signals about shelter prices were sent last summer and fall, long before the housing market began to cool in response to higher interest rates
    TMUBMUSD10Y,
    4.049%

    and the reductions in the Fed’s holdings of mortgage-backed securities?

    According to real-time data, shelter prices are no longer rising at a near-10% annual rate as the CPI and PCE price index claim. Growth in rents and house prices has slowed since the first rate hikes in March. House prices are actually falling in most regions of the country, and private-sector measures of rents show that landlords are now dropping rents in many cities.

    Just like a radio signal from Jupiter, it takes time for that message to be received by the CPI. It will be received and incorporated into the CPI eventually, but by then it may be too late for the Fed to react. The Fed might crash the spacecraft because it mistakenly believes the messages it gets are in real time.

    Growth is slowing

    The Fed’s blind spot puts the economy in peril. Recent data show that growth is naturally slowing from the breakneck pace following the pandemic shutdowns but also from the Fed’s relentless squeeze on financial conditions.

    It’s very hard to argue that the economy is still overheating. Domestic demand has stalled out since the spring. Final sales to domestic purchasers — which covers consumer spending and business investment — has grown at a 0.3% annual pace over the past two quarters.

    Real disposable incomes are growing at less than 1% annualized. Household wealth has fallen off a cliff, with the stock market
    SPX,
    -0.41%

    DJIA,
    -0.24%

    in a bear market and home equity beginning to fall. Wage growth is beginning to slow. Supply chains are improving.

    And the CPI excluding shelter has gone from rising at a 14% annual pace in the spring when the tightening began, to falling at a 1% annual pace over the past three months. Rate hikes are working!

    This benign picture on inflation may not persist. Inflation is still worrisome, particularly for essentials such as food, health care, new vehicles and utilities.

    But the Fed should adopt a more balanced view of the economy, no matter what the signals from the past say. No one wants a hard landing.

    Just ask NASA.

    More reported analysis from Rex Nutting

    Everybody is looking at the CPI through the wrong lens. Inflation fell to the Fed’s target in the past three months, according to the best measure.

    The Federal Reserve risks driving the economy into a ditch because it’s not looking at where inflation is heading

    Americans are feeling poorer for good reason: Household wealth was shredded by inflation and soaring interest rates

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Stock market bulls have a new story to sell you. Don’t believe them — they’re just in the ‘bargaining’ stage of grief

    Stock market bulls have a new story to sell you. Don’t believe them — they’re just in the ‘bargaining’ stage of grief

    [ad_1]

    Might the bear market’s losses at its recent low have gotten so bad that it was actually good news?

    Some eager stock bulls I monitor are advancing this convoluted rationale. The outline of their argument is that when things get bad enough, good times must be just around the corner.

    But their argument tells us more about market sentiment than its prospects.

    At the market’s recent closing low, the S&P 500
    SPX,
    +1.19%

    had dropped to 25% below its early-January high. According to one version of this “so-bad-it’s-good” argument, the stock market in the past was a good buy whenever bear markets fell to that threshold. Following those prior occasions, they contend, the market was almost always higher in a year’s time.

    This is not an argument you’d normally expect to see if the recent low represented the final low of the bear market. On the contrary, it fits squarely within the third of the five-stage progression of bear market grief, about which I have written before: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.

    With their argument, the bulls are trying to convince themselves that they can survive the bear market, rationalizing that the market will be higher in a year’s time. As Swiss-American psychiatrist Elisabeth Kübler-Ross put it when creating this five-stage scheme, the key feature of the bargaining stage is that it is a defense against feeling pain. It is far different than the depression and eventual acceptance that typically come later in a bear market.

    Though not all bear markets progress through these five stages, most do, as I’ve written before. Odds are that we have two more stages to go through. That suggests that the market’s rally over the past couple of weeks does not represent the beginning of a major new bull market.

    Numbers don’t add up

    Further support for this bearish assessment comes from the discovery that the bulls’ argument is not supported historically. Only in relatively recent decades was the market reliably higher in a year’s time following occasions in which a bear market had reached the 25% pain threshold. It’s not a good sign that the bulls are basing their optimism on such a flimsy foundation.

    Consider what I found upon analyzing the 21 bear markets since 1900 in the Ned Davis Research calendar in which the Dow Jones Industrial Average
    DJIA,
    +1.34%

    fell at least 25%. I measured the market’s one-year return subsequent to the day on which each of these 21 bear markets first fell to that loss threshold. In seven of the 21 cases, or 33%, the market was lower in a year’s time.

    That’s the identical percentage that applies to all days in the stock market over the past century, regardless of whether those days came during bull or bear markets. So, based on the magnitude of the bear market’s losses to date, there’s no reason to believe that the market’s odds of rising are any higher now than at any other time.

    This doesn’t mean that there aren’t good arguments for why the market might rise. But the 25%-loss concept isn’t one of them.

    Mark Hulbert is a regular contributor to MarketWatch. His Hulbert Ratings tracks investment newsletters that pay a flat fee to be audited. He can be reached at mark@hulbertratings.com.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • WSJ News Exclusive | Bio-Rad Laboratories in Talks to Combine With Qiagen

    WSJ News Exclusive | Bio-Rad Laboratories in Talks to Combine With Qiagen

    [ad_1]

    Bio-Rad Laboratories is in talks to combine with fellow life-sciences company Qiagen NV in a deal that would be worth more than $10 billion, according to people familiar with the matter.

    The talks have been going on for a while but any agreement isn’t likely for another few weeks or more—and there may not be one.

    [ad_2]

    Source link