Economic Reporting Review
By Dean Baker
March 1, 2004

You can sign up to receive ERR every week by signing up for service at http://www.cepr.net/pages/Sign_up_for_page.htm or by sending an email request with your email address in the body to cepr(--at--)cepr(--dot--)net with the subject "subscribe ERR". You can find the latest ERR at http://www.cepr.net/pages/Economic_Reporting_Review_Page.htm. All ERR prior to August 2000 can be found at http://www.fair.org/err.

Links to New York Times articles require membership. To sign up for this free service, go to http://www.nytimes.com/auth/login.

 

 

OUTSTANDING STORIES OF THE WEEK

 

 

Bush Assertion on Tax Cuts Is at Odds With IRS Data

Jonathan WeismanThe Health of Grocers, Workers

Michael Barbaro and Neil Irwin

Washington Post, February 24, 2004, Page A4

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A488-2004Feb23.html

 

            This article reports on IRS data that show, contrary to claims by President Bush, that the vast majority of small business owners are not in the top tax brackets. While the President has repeatedly stated that his tax cuts have been motivated by a desire to help small businesses, data from the IRS show that less than 4 percent of small business owners have incomes in excess of $200,000 a year.

 

 

Waste Cleanup May Have Human Price

Blaine Harden

Washington Post, February 26, 2004, Page A1

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7073-2004Feb25.html

 

            This article reports on the evidence that private contractors cut corners in an effort to save money in their cleanup of a nuclear facility in Hanford, Washington. The article also reports that they subsequently sought to conceal evidence of the resulting health risks. Many of the workers at the facility have since developed serious health problems.

 

 

Greenspan and Social Security

 

To Trim Deficit, Greenspan Urges Social Security and Medicare Cuts

Edmund L. Andrews

New York Times, February 26, 2004, Page A1

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/26/business/26FED.html?ex=1393131600&en=d1c20ae0b94db6c3&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND

 

Fed Chief Urges Cut In Social Security

Nell Henderson

Washington Post, February 26, 2004, Page A1

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7099-2004Feb25.html

 

            These articles report on Alan Greenspan’s testimony before Congress in which he urged that Social Security and Medicare benefits be cut as a way to keep deficits under control. It would have been helpful to readers to note that Mr. Greenspan had publicly endorsed President Bush’s tax cuts in 2001, because he said that the budget surpluses at the time were too large. In Congressional testimony given in January of 2001, Greenspan told Congress that the projected path of surpluses would cause the country to quickly pay off the entire national debt, and then the government would begin to own private assets. He told Congress that a tax cut would be an effective way to lower the size of the surpluses, so that it would longer to pay off the national debt.

 

            It also is would be helpful to mention that Mr. Greenspan chaired a commission in 1982 that designed the last set of Social Security tax increases. These tax increases were intended to build up a large surplus, which would then be drawn down to pay for the retirement of the baby boom generation. If Congress follows Greenspan’s current recommendations for cutting Social Security, the large surplus built up by the Social Security trust fund (more than $1.7 trillion presently) will not be used for Social Security. Instead, the money collected through Social Security taxes will be used to pay for farm subsidies, defense, and other categories of general government spending.

 

            The Times article reports that there is a “widespread view that the only solution [to the funding problems for Medicare and Social Security] is to either cut benefits or raise taxes by huge amounts.” It is worth noting that if U.S. health care costs, adjusted for demographic change, only grew in step with per capita GDP growth, then paying for Medicare over the next forty years would present no greater problem than it did over the last forty years. In the case of Social Security, the trustees' report shows that the tax increases needed to fund the program over the next seventy five years are approximately the same size as tax increases that were put in place in the decade of the fifties, the decade of the sixties, the decade of the seventies, and the decade of the eighties. Anyone who believes that the tax increases needed to maintain full scheduled Social Security benefits are “huge” must also believe that the tax increases put in place in each of those four decades are huge as well.  

 

 

Trade

 

Economist’s Challenge Puzzles Free-Trade Believers

Paul Blustein

Washington Post, February 26, 2004, Page E1

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7312-2004Feb25.html

 

            This lengthy article discusses recent statements and publications by conservative economist Paul Craig Roberts, in which he questioned the merits of free trade. The article asserts “few tenets, after all, are so widely shared among economics Ph.Ds as the belief in the positive impact of free trade.”

 

            This is not true. Most economists support many forms of protectionism, most obviously patents and copyrights. As a group, economists have also been untroubled by forms of protection that have been intended to protect powerful special interests. For example, very few economists objected to the restrictions that Congress placed on the number of foreign medical residents allowed to enter the country in 1997, a measure that costs consumers tens of billions each year in higher medical expenses. As a rule, economists tend to object mainly to forms of protectionism that have the effect of benefiting blue-collar workers.

 

 

Greenspan Calls for Better-Educated Workforce

Nell Henderson

Washington Post, February 21, 2004, Page E1

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59064-2004Feb20.html

 

Staring Into the Mouth of the Trade Deficit

Elizabeth Becker

New York Times, February 21, 2004, Page B1

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/21/business/21trade.html?ex=1392786000&en=4f331c628df1df91&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND

 

Campaign Focus: Old Jobs, Not a New Economy

David E. Sanger

New York Times, February 22, 2004, Section 4, Page 3

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/22/weekinreview/22sang.html?ex=1392786000&en=f8ff6f7b545ef659&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND

 

These articles discuss the impact of trade on the U.S. economy. Some key issues in this discussion are either omitted or represented inaccurately. For example, the articles by Becker and Sanger, both of which are ostensibly overviews of the impact of trade on the U.S. economy, never mention the contribution of trade to wage inequality over the last quarter century. Virtually all economists agree that trade has played a role in increasing inequality during this period. This fact should have been included in these articles. 

 

The article by Becker implies that issue being debated is whether there should be trade. There is no one taking part in national political debates who opposes trade; the issue is the terms under which trade will take place. It also includes without comment a bizarre and inaccurate statement from the president of the Washington Council on International Trade, that “if the global economy doesn’t grow, then America’s economy can’t grow.” The statement is bizarre because the global economy will almost always grow, unless there is a cataclysmic war or financial crisis. It is also inaccurate, because there is no economic theory or empirical evidence that would suggest that the U.S. economy could not grow if the global economy did not grow.

 

The article by Sanger comments, with regard to the current trade debate, that “it is almost as if the 1990’s never happened, and that the forces of globalization have been suspended.” The article does not identify any events in the nineties that suggest that concerns about trade displacing jobs and lowering wages are misplaced. Nor does it give any meaning to the comment about the “forces of globalization being suspended.” No one in the trade debate is opposed to globalization; rather the debate is over the rules being applied. For example, the Clinton and Bush administration have pushed hard to limit the free flow of ideas and instead insisted on stringent patent and copyright protection. Workers have been more concerned about protecting their jobs and wages, and care less about restricting the flow of ideas.

 

Both the articles by Sanger and Henderson report warnings from Federal Reserve Board chairman Alan Greenspan about the risks of protectionism. Mr. Greenspan’s comments implied that protectionism would be new, as opposed to an ongoing part of the economy. Many highly paid professionals, such as doctors, have demanded and obtained protection against foreign competition (see “Test Tied to Slip in Foreign Applicants for Medical Residences,” New York Times, September 4, 2002, page A19; and “Professional Protectionists: The Gains From Free Trade in Highly Paid Professional Services,” [http://www.cepr.net/professional_protectionists.htm]). 

 

 

Kerry and Edwards Try Different Strategies for Showdown

Adam Nagourney

New York Times, February 22, 2004, Page A14

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/22/politics/campaign/22CAMP.html?ex=1392786000&en=963959a6437b030a&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND

 

            This article reports on the contest between Senators John Kerry and John Edwards for the Democratic presidential nomination. At one point the article reports that Kerry challenged Edwards to “distinguish himself on free trade.” The term “free” has no obvious meaning in this context. Edwards has claimed that he holds a different position on trade. Given the nature of current trade debates, it would be more accurate to simply use the term “trade” in this context.

 

 

Economic Forecasts

 

White House Forecasts Often Miss The Mark

Dana Milbank

Washington Post, February 24, 2004, Page A1

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A538-2004Feb23.html

 

            This article reports on the fact that the Bush Administration’s forecasts for the budget and the economy have repeatedly been proven to be overly optimistic. When discussing the budget projections, it quotes a Bush Administration official who (referring to the sharp falloff in tax revenue) asserted, “nobody saw this happening.” It then adds, “Democrats agree that in 2001, there was no concrete evidence that there was an unusual decline in tax receipts.”

 

            Actually, the falloff in tax revenue was predicted by some economists and should have apparent to any careful observer of financial markets and the economy (see CEPR 2001 Budget Byte [http://www.cepr.net/Bytes/cbo_budget_byte010131.htm] or “Double Bubble: The Implications of the Over-Valuation of the Stock Market and the Dollar [http://www.cepr.net/columns/baker/double_bubble.htm]). This article includes no mention of the stock market bubble, which was the major cause of the extraordinary increase in tax revenues in the late nineties, or the crash that followed.

 

 

The Recession

 

Kerry Labels Bush a ‘Contradiction’

Dan Balz and Paul Farhi

Washington Post, February 25, 2004, Page E7

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3443-2004Feb24.html

 

            This article reports on a campaign speech by Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry. At one point it refers to the recession “that began at the end of the Clinton Administration.” The National Bureau of Economic Research, which officially dates recessions, puts the beginning of the most recent recession in March of 2001, two months into the Bush Administration. While the conditions for the recession were certainly put in place during the Clinton years, the recession did not officially begin until after President Bush took office.

 

 

The Housing Bubble

 

Greenspan Says Personal Debt Is Mitigated by Housing Value

Associated Press

New York Times, February 24, 2004, Page C11

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/24/business/24fed.html?ex=1393045200&en=dfef8a7dce7f996d&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND

 

            This article reports on a speech in which Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan reportedly told his audience that current levels of household debt should not be a concern, because households own more than $14 trillion in real estate. It is worth noting that there has been an extraordinary run-up in real estate prices in the last eight years, with the rise in home prices exceeded the overall rate of inflation by more than 35 percentage points. The United States has never before experienced such a run-up in home prices. In the past, home prices have generally kept pace with the overall the rate of inflation. The recent run-up in home prices, which coincided with the stock bubble, is very similar to the pattern in Japan in the eighties, which also experienced simultaneous bubbles in its real estate and stock markets (see [http://www.cepr.net/publications/Harvard_Housing_Bubble.htm]).

 

            The possibility that home prices are being driven by a speculative bubble should provide serious grounds for concern. The ratio of equity to value is at a record low 53.5 percent. This compares to ratios of close to 67 percent in the seventies and eighties. With much of the baby boom cohort nearing retirement, it would be expected that the ratio of equity to value would be unusually high at present, as many families should be near paying off their mortgages. Also, the bubble should raise the ratio of equity to value, since any appreciation in home prices translates directly into higher equity. If the housing bubble were to burst, and the appreciation of home prices in excess of the overall rate of inflation were eliminated, the ratio of equity to value would be less than 40 percent.

 

            It is worth noting that Mr. Greenspan never clearly identified the stock bubble in his public remarks prior to its collapse. Even as the market was reaching record price to earnings ratios in 1999 and 2000, Mr. Greenspan was telling investors that such prices might be justified if the recent acceleration in productivity growth were to continue.

 

 

Oil Prices

 

Oil Prices Back At 2003 Levels

Peter Behr

Washington Post, February 21, 2004, Page E1

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59281-2004Feb20.html

 

Inflation Is Mild, Despite Energy Costs

Associated Press

New York Times, February 21, 2004, Page B2

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/21/business/21econ.html?ex=1392786000&en=e2390a97707818aa&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND

 

            Both of these articles discuss the recent rise in oil prices. It is worth noting that this rise in oil prices is not likely to be reversed, at least in its entirety, because part of it is attributable to the fall in the dollar. Over the last two years, the dollar has fallen by approximately 10 percent against a trade-weighted basket of currencies. This means that if oil stayed at approximately the same price against most other goods, it will have risen by 10 percent measured in dollars.

 

            This is actually an important fact that deserves more attention than it has received. This rise in oil prices, in a context of extremely slow nominal wage growth, will lead to a drop in real wages. The 0.5 percent rise in consumer prices in January was considerably faster than the 0.2 percent increase in the average hourly wage reported for the month.

 

 

Canadian Drug Imports

 

Bush Chooses the F.D.A’s Chief to Run Medicare and Medicaid

Robert Pear

New York Times, February 21, 2004, Page A30

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/21/politics/21MEDI.html?ex=1392699600&en=efb8a287560e7136&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND

 

Several States Investigate Importing Canadian Drugs

Bernard Simon

New York Times, February 21, 2004, Page B3

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/21/business/21pharma.html?ex=1392786000&en=84a06771cfd18171&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND

 

            These articles both discuss issues related to national policy on prescription drugs. At one point, the article by Pear refers to President Bush’s “free-market policies.” It is not clear that President Bush has any commitment to free-market policies. He has been willing to increase many forms of government intervention in order to help his political allies (see “In Bush’s Policies, Business Wins,” by Thomas B. Edsall, Washington Post, February 8, 2004, Page A5 [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21990-2004Feb7.html]).

 

            The article by Simon refers to Canadian price controls on prescription drugs. While Canada does impose price controls, this only applies to drugs on which it grants patent monopolies. The United States imposes patent monopolies, but then lets drug companies charge whatever price they like. The U.S. policy leads to far larger market distortions than the Canadian policy.

 

 

Foreign Aid

 

New System Begins Rerouting U.S. Aid For Poor Countries

Christopher Marquis

New York Times, February 22, 2004, Page A1

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/22/international/22AID.html?ex=1392786000&en=04f90bd924afc222&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND

 

            This article discusses the Bush administration’s plans to alter the criteria for awarding foreign aid. It would have been useful if the article had described the foreign aid requests as a share of the total budget. The $15 billion in aid being requested for 2005 is equal to approximately 0.6 percent of the projected budget. It is equal to approximately 0.12 percent of projected GDP. The United States ranks near the bottom of the industrialized world in the portion of its GDP that it devotes to foreign aid. Many European countries provide an amount of aid that exceeds 0.4 percent of GDP.

 

 

More ERRs

 

CEPR Home Page