If you're feeling whiplash from the
economic data coming out of Washington this week, you're not alone.
Fourth quarter economic growth came in much lower than expected and
productivity experienced an outright decline. Yet today's
Employment Situation report from the Labor Department points
sharply in the opposite direction. Positive details ran deep, as
the headline numbers reflect: the unemployment rate dropped to 4.7
percent and payroll jobs surged ahead by nearly 200,000. This comes
on top of major upward revisions to the last 2 months' figures. It
now appears that the 4th quarter slowdown in growth was a one-time
setback from Hurricane Katrina and that the economy has moved
beyond it.
Policy Implications
The strong employment data at the start
of 2006 likely will have three implications for policy.
First, the Federal Reserve is likely to continue to increase
interest rates in the months ahead, building on the final rate
increase of former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan this week. Second,
rising labor costs are pushing up inflation and will have broad
effects, on everything from medical policy to union negotiations.
Third, an interesting change in the tone of economic policy debates
may be coming. Conservatives will continue to cite the strong
economy as vindication of the President's tax cuts, while liberals
may finally be forced to change their pessimistic tune. Look for
liberals to start arguing that the primary cause of the good
times is the massive increase in federal spending since
2001, not the tax cuts.
Highlights
- The unemployment rate dropped sharply to
4.7 percent, its lowest rate in years.
- The unemployment rate for African
Americans dropped to 8.9 percent, a decline of nearly 2 points in 2
months.
- The Labor Department released its annual
revisions to payroll data this month. The revised data displays a
pattern of slower payroll job growth in the first half of 2005,
followed by much stronger growth over the past 5 months than
previously reported. Some economists might interpret this
fast-paced job growth as nascent overheating of the
economy.
A Closer look at Women and
Work
By the numbers, fewer women and
teenagers want to work these days, compared to the peak years
before 9/11, and this is a mystery to many economists. The
"dropout puzzle" argument, as Paul Krugman called it in a July 2005
column, implies that unemployment would be 1 to 3 percentage points
higher if these so-called "dropouts" were counted as part of
the labor force. Set aside the crude assumption that dropouts would
all be unemployed if they actually wanted to work. The real lesson
of lower participation rates is philosophical, not
economic.
Able workers who choose not to work are
one consequence of a free society. Armchair social planners might
like to imagine a world in which they could force mothers of young
children back to the factory floor for the greater good, force
early retirees off the golf course, or force young women out of
community colleges and into the office, but surely this is a better
world because individuals can decide for themselves whether to
work.
Krugman and his friends say that
the dropouts are discouraged, but the dropouts don't describe
themselves that way. We know this because the Department of Labor
asks non-workers why they aren't working. One of the reasons is
discouragement. Yet there are fewer discouraged workers today than
there were in the mid 1990s, and the discouragement rate has
declined sharply over the last three years. Today Kathleen Utgoff,
commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, announced that "The
number of discouraged workers fell over the year to 396,000," down
from 515,000 one year ago.
Still, pessimists argue that we're
seeing an aftershock of the 2001 recession, which was artificially
mild because of monetary and fiscal policy but which lingers
beneath the surface of the economy. We cannot rule out that theory,
although it seems unlikely that survey respondents are lying about
their discouragement more than in any previous year. A second
theory is that the drop may be secular; as evidence, the drop in
teens' participation is three times larger than during any other
recession on record. The 9/11 attacks may be a cause.
A third theory, recently suggested by
Diana Furchtgott-Roth, former Chief Economist of the Labor
Department, begins with this observation: female participation
rates peaked in 1999 and declined from that point forward, long
before the recession and long before the war on
terrorism.
A
recent article in the Pioneer Press, one of Minnesota's
top newspapers, tells the human side of this story and supports
Furchtgott-Roth's theory. Minnesota is a closely watched because it
had the highest labor participation rates of any state for many
years. Jodi Eiesland, a consultant profiled in the article, shifted
to part-time work after her first son was born and then exited the
workforce after her second. In our prosperous economy, many women
face this choice and many are choosing to care for their families.
That some should use these choices as evidence of economic softness
is particularly ironic.
Tim
Kane, Ph.D., is the Bradley Research Fellow in Labor
Policy in the Center for Data Analysis at The Heritage
Foundation.