Hello Fed, Inflation Expectations Are Unglued, No Longer Well Anchored

Inflation Expectations data from New York Fed, chart by Mish

Today the New York Fed released Survey of Consumer Expectations for March. I created the above chart from a data download.

Well Anchored?

The Fed keeps repeating its line inflation expectations are well anchored. Let’s tune in to the March 2022 FOMC Minutes for examples.

  • A few participants commented that both survey- and market-based measures of short-term inflation expectations were at historically high levels. Several other participants noted that longer-term measures of inflation expectations from households, professional forecasters, and market participants still appeared to remain well anchored, which—together with appropriate monetary policy and an eventual easing of supply constraints—would support a return of inflation over time to levels consistent with the Committee’s longer-run goal.
  •  Recent COVID-related lockdowns in China that had the potential to further disrupt supply chains; and the possibility that longer-run inflation expectations might become unanchored.
  • Participants judged that the firming of monetary policy, alongside an eventual waning of supply–demand imbalances, would help to keep longer-term inflation expectations anchored and bring inflation down over time to levels consistent with the Committee’s 2 percent longer-run goal while sustaining a strong labor market.
  • A few participants judged that, at the current juncture, a significant risk facing the Committee was that elevated inflation and inflation expectations could become entrenched if the public began to question the Committee’s resolve to adjust the stance of policy as appropriate to achieve the Committee’s 2 percent longer-run objective for inflation. 

For starters, the New York Fed survey already shows inflation expectations are not anchored.

Even the three-year median point projection is 4.88%, well over the Fed’s target rate of 2.00%.

Inflation Expectations Are Nonsense

It’s a good thing that inflation expectations are a blatantly ridiculous concept. Even the Fed’s own research papers make that conclusion.

Please consider Why Do We Think That Inflation Expectations Matter for Inflation? (And Should We?) by the Divisions of Research & Statistics and Monetary Affairs Federal Reserve Board.

The paper also blasted belief in the Phillips Curve. Here are a few direct quotes.

  • The direct evidence for an expected inflation channel was never very strong. 
  • It is an irony of history that, when Phelps and Friedman sought to justify their proposed theoretical specifications, they were faced with the uncomfortable fact that empirical Phillips curves appeared to be remarkably stable.  
  • These techniques are similar in spirit to those employed in the 1990s to estimate new-Keynesian models; hence, they suffer from the same sorts of problems—discussed below—that attend empirical estimates of those models.
  • Friedman’s derivation of the expectations-augmented Phillips curve implies that the real product wage should be strongly countercyclical (recall that in this model firms are always assumed to be on their labor demand curves). In particular, Friedman states as a matter of fact that “. . . selling prices of products typically respond to an unanticipated rise in demand faster than prices of factors of production,” which would in turn imply the empirical prediction that the price Phillips curve is steeper than the wage Phillips curve. However, in U.S. data this prediction is completely at odds with the evidence.
  • Most standard tests of the new-Keynesian Phillips curve suffer from such severe potential misspecification issues or such profound weak identification problems as to provide no evidence one way or the other regarding the importance of expectations (much the same statement applies to empirical tests that use survey measures of expected inflation).
  • What little we know about firms’ price-setting behavior suggests that many tend to respond to cost increases only when they actually show up and are visible to their customers, rather than in a preemptive fashion. 

In Search of the Phillips Curve

Unemployment vs CPI chart from St. Louis Fed, annotations by Mish

Fed Studies Debunk the Phillips Curve

Both studies were done by Fed staffers.

Yet, Fed Chairs Janet Yellen and Jerome Powell did not believe the Fed’s own study.

in March of 2017, Janet Yellen commented the “Phillips Curve is Alive“.

A Fed Economist Concludes the Widely Believed Inflations Expectations Theory is Nonsense

On October 1, 2021, I noted A Fed Economist Concludes the Widely Believed Inflations Expectations Theory is Nonsense.

Here are some excerpts from the actual study:

The direct evidence for an expected inflation channel was never very strong. Most empirical tests concerned themselves with the proposition that there was no permanent Phillips curve tradeoff, in the sense that the coefficients on lagged inflation in an inflation equation summed to one.

In addition, most standard tests of the new-Keynesian Phillips curve suffer from such severe potential misspecification issues or such profound weak identification problems as to provide no evidence one way or the other regarding the importance of expectations (much the same statement applies to empirical tests that use survey measures of expected inflation).

What little we know about firms’ price-setting behavior suggests that many tend to respond to cost increases only when they actually show up and are visible to their customers, rather than in a preemptive fashion.

It is far, far better and much safer to have a firm anchor in nonsense than to put out on the troubled seas of thought. John Kenneth Galbraith (1958).

Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example. Mark Twain, The Tragedy of Pudd’nhead Wilson (1894)

One should not need a study to prove the obvious. And it’s obvious that inflation expectation theory is nonsensical. 

The reason has to do with the way inflation is calculated. 

What Can the Fed Do About the Price of Food, Medicine, Gasoline, or Rent?

CPI Weights from BLS chart by Mish

On March 20, I asked What Can the Fed Do About the Price of Food, Medicine, Gasoline, or Rent?

The answer is nothing or next to nothing. Rates hikes will not impact inelastic items.

What the Fed Can and Cannot Do

  • The Fed cannot directly influence the price of anything because it cannot produce either goods or services.
  • The Fed can reduce or increase demand where demand is elastic by raising or lowering the cost of money.

Elastic vs Inelastic Demand

  • Elastic items total only 19.59%.
  • Inelastic items total a whopping 80.41%.

This is why inflation Expectations theory the Fed abides by is total nonsense.

People will not rent two homes if they perceive prices will rise. Nor will people stop paying rent and wait for declines in they believe prices will fall.

The same applies to buying food, gas etc.

Stupidity Well Anchored: Absurdity of Inflation Expectations in Graphic Form

I discussed the silliness of inflations expectations theory in Stupidity Well Anchored: Absurdity of Inflation Expectations in Graphic Form

Inflation Expectations Q&A

Q: If consumers think the price of food will drop, will they stop eating out?
Q: If consumers think the price of food will drop, will they stop eating at home?
Q: If consumers think the price of natural gas will drop, will they stop heating their homes and stop cooking to wait for the event.
Q: If consumers think the price of gas will drop, will they stop driving or not fill up their car if it is running on empty?
Q: If consumers think the price of gas will rise, can they do anything about it other than fill up their tank more frequently?
Q: If consumers think the price of rent will drop, will they hold off renting until that happens?
Q: If consumers think the price of rent will rise, will they rent two apartments to take advantage?

Asset Irony

People will rush to buy stocks in a bubble if they think prices will rise. They will hold off buying stocks if they expect prices will go down.

People will buy houses to rent or fix up if they think home prices will rise. They will hold off housing speculation if they expect prices will drop.

The very things where expectations do matter are the very things the Fed ignores.

Demand destruction will occur in the small subset of elastic items plus housing and stocks.

Except as related to recreation and eating out, rate hikes will not impact food, energy, or shelter, the overwhelming majority of the CPI.

Stupidity Still Well Anchored

Here we are with Powell, Barkin and other Fed presidents putting a spotlight on expectations, having ignored the third massive stock market bubble in just over 20 years.

Meanwhile, “there can be little doubt that poor people…are the chief sufferers of inflation.”

Here’s the deal in a nutshell: The Fed actively promotes inflation while pretending to be inflation fighters. Yet, people listen to these clueless jackasses as if they know what they are doing.

It’s a good thing inflation expectations are not self-fulfilling because expectations are now unglued.

This post originated at MishTalk.Com.

Thanks for Tuning In!

Please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

14 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
2 years ago
When your objects of study are rational self optimizers, no curve-fittting works.
There’s nothing special about the “Phillips Curve.”
Whatever “curve” some wannabe-institutional-ladder-climbing-ambitious-dilletant-kid manages to “fit” to some “data,” and then “publish” in some papermill which serves no other purpose than justifying handing “degrees” to the dilettante children of mediocrities enriched by Fed theft and nothing but will, even if their “paper” should happen to have some historically descriptive value, immediately be used by rational optimizers to optimize for the now newly disseminated knowledge. Hence rendering it no longer relevant. There is simply no way that this won’t happen.
Curve fitting, these days rebranded and sold as being “data driven” (since Google is, like, cool, you know…) by the less than logically astute, approaches to social science, for the above very simple and obvious reason, can NEVER work as a mechanism to determine lasting truths. It’s as plain boneheaded as going into the ring against Tyson, after announcing, and following through on, that you have only prepared to defend against a left hook, since your “data driven” “graph” shows that has been his winning punch more often than not. And that’s, like “statistically significant.” heck, it”s even more boneheaded than that, in fact: Since while pro fighters no doubt are quick thinkers and adapters, their adaptability over the course of less than an hour’s fight, is nothing compared to the entirety of all those comprising an economy combined, who can learn from each other and iterate. for all eternity.
As a side note, empirical “studies” certainly can be used to guide intuition, provide hints, about what seems to at least have worked in some economy at some point. But before any thus shaped intuition can be determined to have any real validity, it has to be painstakingly deduced from first principles. If that cannot be done (very little can. Rational optimizers, as opposed to the inert objects the physical sciences study, are slippery subjects, hard to pin down), then whatever “conclusion” some salivating curve fitter “arrives at” regarding his “data”, is nothing but guaranteed-to-be-dead-wrong-each-and-every-time, trivially obvious guesswork.
There can NEVER exist any exception from that. The whole “Phillips Curve” tragicomedy being just one of a near infinite example. Absolutely NONE of the entire manurepile attempted passed off as “empirical” “economics” being any better at all.
RonJ
RonJ
2 years ago
Reply to  StukiMoi
“There can NEVER exist any exception from that. The whole “Phillips
Curve” tragicomedy being just one of a near infinite example. Absolutely
NONE of the entire manurepile attempted passed off as “empirical”
“economics” being any better at all.”
The Together Trial on Ivermectin gave participants half the dose the FLCCC uses to good result. The study got the result the funders wanted, not the scientific result they should have sought. The FED expectations study did not fit the desired result, so the people in charge simply ignored it. The same end result by two different means, but both, corrupt outcomes.
2% or Bust
Casual_Observer2020
Casual_Observer2020
2 years ago
You should run for a Utah representative seat in Congress. And then try to get on the banking committee. It would be must see TV if you got to ask Fed bankers questions during their testimony on policy.
Zardoz
Zardoz
2 years ago
Nigel Farage style!
amalagoli
amalagoli
2 years ago
The Fed is the most obnoxious organization around. It is in cahoots with Wall Street and does all of Wall Street’s bidding while pretending to fight inflation and unemployment under the illusion of following rigorously idiotic academic theories. It is yet another member of the crony capitalist gang which has been raping and pillaging the country while pretending to promote ‘free’ market capitalism. Here ‘free’ means complete lack of accountability for the most irresponsible financial decisions. By maintaining an ever lasting policy of easy money they have enriched their corporate overlords thanks to insane share buybacks and leveraged misallocation of capital. It seems easy to label them as ‘incompetent’ when ‘corrupt’ is the more appropriate definition. Not all inflations are monetary in nature. Friedmann was totally wrong. Now we see the consequences. This inflation is the result of decades of corporate mal-investments (where are the domestic chip plants?).
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
2 years ago
Reply to  amalagoli
It seems easy to label them as ‘incompetent’ when ‘corrupt’ is the more appropriate definition.
Competent people have no need to go to their grave having held their nose fro their own stench their whole life. Being competent, they have other options.
Ensuring The Fed, along with all their direct beneficiaries, over time ends up filled by nothing but less and less competent clowns. Who have no other abilities for satisfying their way-above-their-meager-braingrade ambitions, than resorting to ever more rapacious corruption.
Resulting in corruption and incompetence always going hand in hand. Einstein simply wouldn’t go along with insisting 2+2=5 his entire life, just because some dimbulb offered to pay him to do so. Because Einstein didn’t have to sink to that to get by. Powell OTOH, like the rest of the Fed’s coquetry of undifferentiated mediocrity, does.
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
2 years ago
1. fed has only one mandate. to keep her owners in high cotton. her owners are the bankers who birthed her a century plus ago.
2. economics is a very soft science. humans are not calculating machines who make rational choices. human primates are driven by fear and greed and many more emotions. and a little rationality tossed into the mix. many men make a dreadful mistake trying to equate economics as a hard science. but i enjoy the mistakes, as it makes trading for a living much easier. fear and greed.
Maximus_Minimus
Maximus_Minimus
2 years ago
Reply to  vanderlyn
Long time ago, statements to the opposite were the first clue for me that these ivory tower economists are nothing but a bunch of imbeciles.
JeffD
JeffD
2 years ago
Reply to  vanderlyn
Greed is just a manifestation of fear.
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
2 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
yes. hard wired into our brains for millions of years of evolution. fear of starvation or death by predators, of our own species or others……………manifested greed to fatten up. great point sir.
Maximus_Minimus
Maximus_Minimus
2 years ago
Reply to  vanderlyn
Also a long time ago, I used to listen to lectures of Robert Shiller at Yale, on my first iPod.
They’re probably still online, but I wouldn’t care if they paid me.
Shiller noted, they just introduced a novelty, behavioral economics: economics based on human behaviour.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
2 years ago
The real joke here is the Fed is incapable of meaningful inflation forecasts beyond tomorrow, yet others can forecast global climate change out 30-40 years, and then spend trillions of $$$ to ‘prevent’ it.
JeffD
JeffD
2 years ago
“eventual easing of supply constraints”
I loved this line from the minutes. Since “increasing inflation expectations” are the source of supply constraints, it shows a fundamental misunderstanding of inflation by the sitting FOMC members.
Dean_70
Dean_70
2 years ago
Reply to  JeffD
The eventual supply constraints may be reduced by an eventual economic collapse. Signs of recession are increasing rapidly.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.