growth

The work of Carmen Reinhart and Ken Rogoff (RR) on public sector debt ratios, and their relationship with GDP growth, has been extraordinarily influential in academic and policy circles since 2010. Before this week, their statistical analysis, based on a 200-year database which they had painstakingly assembled covering dozens of countries, had appeared to establish an important stylised fact: that debt ratios above 90 per cent were associated with much lower rates of GDP growth than debt ratios under 90 per cent. The sudden drop in growth at a debt ratio similar to that reached in many developed economies acted as a wake up call to governments and encouraged the adoption of austerity programmes.

This week, a paper by Thomas Herndon, Michael Ash and Robert Pollin (HAP) argued that the RR stylised fact was based on simple statistical errors, including a spreadsheet error which RR have now acknowledged. Their critique of the original RR stylised fact promises to establish an alternative conventional wisdom, which is that high public debt ratios are never damaging for GDP growth. But the truth is more complicated than that, and far less certain. Read more >>

The transfer of power in China from the outgoing regime led by Hu Jintao to the incoming leadership of Xi Jinping has occurred without a hitch. This is a mark of increased political maturity in China.

In fact, the handover has been described by Citigroup economists as the first complete and orderly transition of power in the 91-year history of the Chinese Communist party.

During President Hu’s decade, China’s real GDP per capita rose at 9.9 per cent per annum. China accounted for 24 per cent of the entire growth in the global economy, and Chinese annual consumption of many basic commodities now stands at about half of the world total. Perhaps the most important question in the world economy today is whether China’s economic miracle can continue in the decade of Xi Jinping. The IMF forecasts shown in the graph above suggest that the miracle will persist, but many western economists disagree. Read more >>

©J. McHugh

The UK coalition government has reached almost exactly the halfway point in its electoral term. Quite soon, it will be too late for it to change its economic approach in time for the results to be seen before it goes to the polls on May 7 2015. Whether the prime minister recognises it or not, he is therefore facing a major strategic choice. Should the government change tack, while there is still time?

The strategy chosen by chancellor George Osborne in 2010 was based on a more rapid tightening in budgetary policy than was adopted in most other developed economies. The chancellor knew that the Bank of England would aggressively ease monetary policy in support of his plan, and hoped that this would result in a sharp depreciation of the real exchange rate, though he did not say this in public.

 Read more >>

The annual meetings of the IMF and the World Bank take place in Tokyo this week, and as always they provide a good opportunity to take stock of the condition of the global economy, and of economic policy.

There is much less of a crisis atmosphere surrounding this week’s meetings than there was a year ago, largely because the actions of the ECB have succeeded in calming the eurozone storm for the time being.

However, there have been significant downgrades to growth prospects in China and India in the past year, and growth in the major developed economies has been extremely unsatisfactory. Read more >>

Risk assets rose slightly last week, and global equities are still trading within about 2 per cent of their highs for the year. The resilience of equities was slightly surprising in a week which saw both a disappointing set of US GDP data and a Fed policy statement which was on the hawkish side of expectations. Goldman Sachs’ economists commented that the US economy and financial markets are “moving into a tougher environment”, in which the economy is slowing and the Fed is shifting its policy reaction function in a less stimulative direction.

One reason why risk assets have remained firm recently, is that earnings in the latest company reporting season have once again been beating expectations in the US and the eurozone. According to Jan Loeys at JP Morgan, US corporate earnings per share for 2012 Q1 have come in 8 per cent higher than analysts’ expectations, while the drop in eurozone earnings has been 4 per cent less than feared. Clearly, corporate financial strength has been helping investment sentiment, but that would not persist for very long if the Fed really did change its tune on monetary policy. Read more >>