EconoMonitor

Deflation risk down but not out

While this week brought some pretty frightening numbers on industrial production and manufacturing surveys, I viewed Friday’s CPI release from the Bureau of Labor Statistics as slightly encouraging.

The BLS reported Friday that the seasonally adjusted consumer price index rose by 0.3% between December and January, implying a 3.4% annual inflation rate. For those of us who had been worried about deflation, that offers some reassurance that things may not be quite as desperate as we feared.

cpi_all_sa_feb_09.gif

Some reassurance, I say, but not a whole lot. The January number still leaves the headline CPI down 2.2% from October, implying an annual deflation rate over the last three months of -8.7%. The year-over-year percent change in the seasonally unadjusted CPI has continued to drop, with the January 2008 to January 2009 change barely positive.

cpi_all_nsa_feb_09.gif

If we leave out food and energy, the January increase (+0.2% monthly) is enough to erase the deflationary signals for October and December.

cpi_core_sa_feb_09.gif

Even so, the year-over-year core inflation rate continues to decline through the latest reading:

cpi_core_nsa_feb_09.gif

The gap between nominal Treasury securities and those whose coupon and principal are indexed to the headline CPI had vanished or even turned negative in November and December, perhaps reflecting significant deflationary concerns. That gap has since widened, suggesting bond-holders see deflation as less likely today than they did a few months ago.

exp_inf_feb_09.gif

Here’s why I think this is worth watching. There’s been some interesting discussion as to how we would objectively measure whether the stimulus plan will be beneficial. The core motivation for policy stimulus is the perceived need to increase aggregate nominal spending. Some have claimed that with the nominal T-bill rate near zero, monetary policy is no longer capable of providing such a stimulus. I disagree with that assessment, though I can understand that it is a very legitimate position to take. But if we do get back up to a year-over-year 3% inflation rate, I would think that an objective observer would want to agree at that point that we’ve achieved all we can hope for with the tool of demand stimulus. I continue to recommend that the Federal Reserve think of achieving that 3% inflation rate as their primary policy objective at the moment.

We’re not there yet.


Originally published at Econbrowser and reproduced here with the author’s permission.

Comments are closed.

Most Read | Featured | Popular

Blogger Spotlight

Ed Dolan Ed Dolan's Econ Blog

Edwin G. Dolan is an economist and educator with a Ph.D. from Yale University. Early in his career, he was a member of the economics faculty at Dartmouth College, the University of Chicago, and George Mason University. From 1990 to 2001, he taught in Moscow, Russia, where he and his wife founded the American Institute of Business and Economics (AIBEc), an independent, not-for-profit MBA program. Since 2001, he has taught at several universities in Europe, including Central European University in Budapest, the University of Economics in Prague, and the Stockholm School of Economics in Riga, where he has an ongoing annual visiting appointment. During breaks in his teaching career, he worked in Washington, D.C. as an economist for the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice and as a regulatory analyst for the Interstate Commerce Commission, and later served a stint in Almaty as an adviser to the National Bank of Kazakhstan. When not lecturing abroad, he makes his home in San Juan Islands, Washington.

Economics Blog Aggregator

Our favorite economics blogs aggregated.