The US’ presidential election is now just six months away. If history is a reliable guide, the outcome will depend significantly on the economy’s performance between now and Nov. 6, and on US voters’ perception of their economic future under the two candidates.
At the moment, the US economy is limping along with slow growth and high unemployment. Output grew by just 1.5 percent last year, and real GDP per capita is lower now than before the economic downturn began at the end of 2007. Although annual GDP growth was 3 percent in the fourth quarter of last year, more than half of that reflected inventory accumulation. Final sales to households, businesses, and foreign buyers rose at only a 1.1 percent annual rate, even slower than earlier in the year. And the preliminary estimate for annual GDP growth in the first quarter of this year was a disappointing 2.2 percent, with only a 1.6 percent rise in final sales.
The labor market has been similarly disappointing. The March unemployment rate of 8.2 percent was nearly three percentage points above what most economists would consider a desirable and sustainable long-run level rate. Although the rate was down from 9 percent a year ago, about half of the change reflected a rise in the number of people who have stopped looking for work, rather than an increase in job creation and the employment rate.
Indeed, the official unemployment rate understates the weakness of the labor market. An estimated 6 percent of all employees are working fewer hours per week than they would like, and about 2 percent of potential employees are not counted as unemployed because they have not looked for work in the past few weeks, even though they would like to work. Adding these individuals to those officially classified as unemployed implies that about 15 percent of potential labor-force participants are working less than they want.
Solid increases in payroll employment at the start of the year contributed to a general sense of confidence. However, the rate of increase in payroll employment fell in March to less than half of the rate recorded in previous months, and the number of workers claiming unemployment benefits recently jumped to a four-month high.
Even those who are working are seeing their incomes shrink. Real average weekly earnings have fallen in recent months, and are now lower than they were 18 months ago. The broader measure of real per capita after-tax personal income has also been falling, and is back to levels last seen a year ago.
Despite their declining incomes, households raised their spending early this year at a rapid pace by cutting their saving rate to just 3.7 percent. Without further declines in the saving rate from this very low level, consumer spending will not continue to grow as robustly. Recent reports of declining consumer confidence reinforce the likelihood that spending will slow in the months ahead.
Moreover, the housing market remains in bad shape. The most reliable index of comparable house prices has continued to decline month after month, and prices are now about 7 percent lower in real terms than a year ago, implying a US$1 trillion loss of household wealth. With roughly 25 percent of all homeowners with mortgages owing more than their homes are worth, the decline in house prices reflects high rates of default and foreclosure. Falling prices, together with stricter lending standards, has spurred a shift by would-be home buyers to the rental market, causing recent declines in the sales of both new and existing homes.
The weakness of America’s economy is not limited to the household sector. Industrial production has been unchanged for the past two months, and utilization of industrial capacity has declined. And the monthly purchasing surveys conducted by the Institute for Supply Management now indicate weaker activity among service firms as well.
Looking ahead, strong headwinds imply that it will be difficult to achieve better economic performance in the rest of the year. Higher energy prices are reducing real household spending on non-energy goods and services; weakness in Europe and Asia will hurt US exports; state and local governments are cutting their spending; and concerns about higher taxes next year will dampen both business investment and big-ticket consumer spending.
The economy is thus shaping up to be a serious liability for US President Barack Obama, who is likely to place the blame on the conditions that he inherited from former president George W. Bush, and on the Republican majority in the House of Representatives. However, the public is likely to place the blame on the president, and surveys indicate that a growing number of Americans believe that Mitt Romney, the almost certain Republican candidate, would do a better job than Obama at managing the economy.
The polls are very close, and voters have not yet locked in their decisions. The economy could rise more sharply than expected in the months ahead. If not, Obama will try to shift attention from the overall economy by emphasizing his plan to raise taxes on high-income individuals, and a variety of other issues, including immigration and the role of women, might influence voters.
However, the state of the economy is usually the most important determinant of who wins national elections in the US, and US economic conditions now favor Romney.
Martin Feldstein, a professor of economics at Harvard University, was chairman of former US president Ronald Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisers and is a former president of the US National Bureau for Economic Research.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past