Economic Reporting Review
By Dean Baker
August 26, 2002
OUTSTANDING STORIES OF THE WEEK
Data Show Growing Trend Toward Permanent Layoffs
Louis Uchitelle
New York Times, August 22, 2002, page C9
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/22/business/22ECON.html
This article reports on new data from the Labor Department, which shows that the percentage
of workers who have been permanently laid off from their jobs is growing.
Brazil
Bankers to Meet in U.S. on Brazilian Loan Deals
John M. Berry
Washington Post, August 19, 2002, Page A9
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33836-2002Aug18.html
Brazilian Bank Officials Plan to Talk Next Week
John M. Berry
Washington Post, August 20, 2002, Page E1
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37673-2002Aug19.html
These articles discuss negotiations over Brazil's debts to foreign banks. Both articles make
references to the efforts of Brazil's current president, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, to get the
leading presidential candidates to commit themselves to a financial austerity plan that Cardoso
negotiated with the I.M.F. The article includes several references to Cardoso's commitment to "budget stringency."
It is worth noting that the ratio of Brazil's government debt to GDP rose from 29.2 percent in
1994, when Cardoso took office, to close to 60 percent of GDP at present. By comparison, the
debt increased from 33.3 percent to 51.9 percent of GDP during Ronald Reagan's presidency
in the United States. Cardoso managed to run up this debt even while selling off tens of billions of
dollars worth of government assets, the proceeds from which could have been used to reduce
debt. It would have been appropriate to mention Mr. Cardoso's track record on fiscal
matters in the discussion of his lectures to his prospective successors about the need for fiscal austerity.
The Budget
Forum Inspires Plan for Tax Cuts
Mike Allen
Washington Post, August 18, 2002, Page A8
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31135-2002Aug17.html
This article discusses the possibility that President Bush may propose a new set of tax cuts. At
one point, it presents the charges of Democrats that Bush's tax cuts were responsible for the
switch from surpluses to deficits. It then reports Republican claims that the recession and
war-related costs were the main cause.
It would have been helpful to readers to report what actually caused the shift to deficits.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the main reason for the shift from surpluses to
deficits is a falloff in tax revenue due to the recession and the collapse of the stock
market. Higher than projected spending accounted for $60 billion of a $333 billion shift towards deficits
in the 2002 fiscal year; all but $27 billion of this additional spending was defense-related. Tax
cuts added $32 billion to the deficit, as compared to the baseline projections made in January of
2001. The rest was attributable to lower than expected tax revenue.
The article also reports a claim by President Bush that the failure to cut domestic spending to
pay for the Vietnam War led to "growing deficits" in the seventies. Actually, the size of the debt
fell sharply relative to GDP (the only meaningful measure) in the seventies. At the end of the
sixties, the ratio of the gross debt to GDP was 38.5 percent. By the end of the seventies, it had
fallen to 33.1 percent, its lowest level in the post-war period. The ratio of debt to GDP soared
in the eighties to 53.1 percent at the end of 1989.
Bush Tax Cuts
Bush Considers New Measures In a Bid to Boost the Economy
Richard W. Stevenson
New York Times, August 17, 2002, Page A8
http://query.nytimes.com/search/abstract?res=F00E1FFD39590C748DDDA10894DA404482
This article examines a set of tax cut proposals that president Bush is reportedly considering. At
one point, the article refers to a proposal to "eliminate the double taxation of dividends." While
proponents of cutting tax rates on dividends like to use this expression, it is not necessarily
accurate. Many corporations take advantage of loopholes in the tax code to eliminate much, if
not all, of their tax liability. So it is often not accurate to say that this income has been taxed at
the corporate level, as this article asserts.
Second, when the tax rates for various types of income were established, Congress was fully
aware that corporate income was subject to taxation. The notion that there is "double taxation"
implies that the individual tax rates on dividend income was somehow a mistake, as opposed to
a rate that was set based on the rate of taxation of corporate income in place at the time.
It is also worth noting that a cut in the tax rate on dividend income will be of no benefit
whatsoever to the vast majority of stock holders, who hold their stock through 401(k) type
accounts. The full value of these accounts is taxed as normal income at the point when a
worker begins to draw on them after age 60.
Trade
Why Isn't Fast Track ... Faster?
Edmund L. Andrews
New York Times, August 18, 2002, Section 3, page 1
http://query.nytimes.com/search/abstract?res=F70F14F93E590C7B8DDDA10894DA404482
This article discusses the obstacles to new trade agreements. The article repeatedly refers to the
trade agreements being negotiated as "free-trade agreements." This is inaccurate, since some of
the most economically important provisions that are likely to be included in these agreements will
restrict trade by increasing patent and copyright protection. It would be more accurate to simply
refer to them as "trade" or even "commercial" agreements, since many of the provisions deal with
issues other than trade, such as rules governing foreign investment.
At one point the article asserts that "most economists believe that the United States would be a
net beneficiary from broad reductions in trade barriers, if only because American restrictions
are, on average, lower than those elsewhere." According to standard trade theory, the
larger a country's barriers, the more it stands to gain by reducing its barriers. While most economists
undoubtedly do believe that the United States stands to gain from reductions in trade barriers,
the fact that its barriers are already low is not a reason that they would cite.
The article cites U.S. barriers to sugar imports as an example of a policy that has angered
developing nations. According to the article, the U.S. has restricted sugar imports to about 10
percent of the U.S. market. As a result, the price of sugar in the United States is about
17 cents a pound compared to a world price of about 5 cents a pound.
If the numbers in the article are accurate, then it is likely that developing nations as a whole will
be hurt if the U.S. eliminates its barriers to sugar imports. The article reports that current imports
to the U.S. are limited to 1.1 million tons a year. At 17 cents a pound, this sugar will sell for
$340 per ton. If sugar costs 4 cents a pound to produce on average (20 percent below the
world market price), then sugar producers are earning $286 million on their exports to the
United States ($260 per ton). If the U.S. eliminated all barriers to sugar imports, so that it
bought sugar at the world price of 5 cents, sugar imports would have to exceed 70 percent of
the U.S. market in order for developing nations to make as much profit selling sugar at
the world price, as they currently do from selling 1.1 million tons at the quota protected price. While some
countries with small sugar quotas may gain from the elimination of quota barriers, these numbers
indicate that developing nations as a whole are likely to get less profit from sugar exports if U.S.
import quotas are eliminated.
Aid to Africa
Bush to Propose $4 Billion in Aid to Africa
Glenn Kessler
Washington Post, August 22, 2002, Page A14
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46994-2002Aug21.html
This article reports on a proposal by President Bush to allocate $4 billion over several years to
promote health and economic development in Africa. The headline of this article is misleading,
since much of the money involved in the proposal will be re-allocated from other
programs. While the article makes this point very clearly, the headline implies that the proposal involves
new money for Africa.
The Trade Deficit
More Exports Reduce Deficit
Washington Post, August 21, 2002, Page E2
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42488-2002Aug20.html
This article reports on the Commerce Department's release of trade data for June. This is
reported in a three-sentence item in the "Business in Brief" section. The trade and broader
current account deficits are at least as important to future living standards as the
budget deficit. Presently, the nation is running a current account deficit of more than $450 billion a year. While
much smaller budget deficits have regularly received front page attention, the current
account deficit has been virtually ignored, as is the case here.
Copyrights
A New Tactic in the Download War
David Segal
Washington Post, August 21, 2002, Page A1
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42239-2002Aug20.html
Music Debate Heads to the Hill
Teresa Wiltz
Washington Post, August 21, 2002, Page A8
Record Labels Try to Force Internet Servers to Block Music Site
Amy Harmon
New York Times, August 17, 2002, Page B4
http://query.nytimes.com/search/abstract?res=FA0E11FD39590C748DDDA10894DA404482
These articles discuss efforts by the recording industry to prevent the distribution of unauthorized
versions of copyrighted material. The Times article reports on efforts by the industry to get a
court order that would force Internet service providers to block users' access to
copyrighted material on sites posted in foreign countries. The article repeatedly refers to this material as
"pirated." This is inaccurate; if a country does not have laws honoring U.S. copyrights, then this
material is not "pirated" (which implies illegality). It would be more accurate to describe this
material as "unauthorized."
None of these articles provide any economic analysis of the costs of the protection being sought
by the recording industry. This would be comparable to reporting on the steel tariffs without any
reference to their economic impact, although the losses to the economy would be much smaller in the case of steel.
German Unemployment and the ECB
Seeking Votes, German Leader Endorses Plan To Aid Jobless
Steven Erlanger
New York Times, August 18, 2002, Page A5
http://query.nytimes.com/search/abstract?res=F70D15FE38590C7B8DDDA10894DA404482
This article discusses a new set of proposals by German Chancellor Gerhard
Schroder, which are intended to reduce unemployment in Germany. While the article discusses various plans to
reduce unemployment, it never mentions the monetary policy of the European Central Bank
(ECB). While the Federal Reserve Board has lowered interest rates aggressively in response to
the economic slowdown in the United States, and recently indicated its willingness to lower
rates further, the ECB has edged interest rates in Europe only slightly. Its current short-term rate is
3.25 percent, compared to 1.75 percent in the United States.
Numerous economists, including even the I.M.F., have criticized the refusal of the ECB to lower
interest rates. They have argued that this has slowed the economy in Europe, as well as the rest
of the world, and kept unemployment unnecessarily high.
The Recession
George W.'s Worst Fear: A W-Shaped Recession
Edmund L. Andrews
New York Times, August 22, 2002, Page A14
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/22/politics/22TALK.html
This article examines the possibility that the economy will slip back into a recession, and the
resulting political fallout. At one point, it reports that most forecasters do not consider a double
dip recession likely. It is worth noting that most forecasters also didn't anticipate the first dip of
the recession.
Growth in Developing Nations
Small-Picture Approach to a Big Problem: Poverty
Daniel Altman
New York Times, August 20, 2002, Page C2
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/20/business/20DEVE.html
This informative article reports on a new trend within development economics to examine micro
level patterns of behavior, such as the ways in which knowledge of farming methods are
communicated among farmers. At one point the article contrasts this micro-level approach
with the macro-level policy advice from the I.M.F. and World Bank on government budgets and
monetary policy. While the article notes that these macro policies appear to have failed in much
of the developing world, it lists several countries where they have supposedly succeeded. This
list includes Mexico.
According to data from the World Bank, Mexico's per capita GDP grew by just 11 percent
from 1980 to 2000, the period in which it was closely following advice from the I.M.F. and
World Bank. By contrast, it grew 113 percent in the twenty years from 1960 to 1980. Given
this record, Mexico should probably not be included in the list of success stories.
The Stock Market
President Moves to Spur Investors
Mike Allen and Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post, August 17, 2002, Page A1
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28067-2002Aug16.html
This article discusses the possibility that President Bush may propose tax breaks that are
intended to boost the stock market. The article describes the measures as helping "small
investors," but there are very few small investors who would stand to benefit from the measures
discussed in the article.
For example, one of the measures would raise the amount of stock market losses (net of gains)
that can be written off on taxes from $3,000 to $6,000. The vast majority of small investors
have most of their money in 401(k) type accounts, where losses and gains do not affect tax
liability until after workers have begun to cash them in after reaching age 60. (Even then, the full
value of the account would be taxable, so the larger loss allowance would be of no benefit
whatsoever.) A second proposal would raise the limit that workers can put into IRAs each year
from close to $11,000 to $20,000. Very few workers can afford to put even $11,000 into an
IRA; therefore only relatively wealthy employees would gain from the increase in this
limit.
The article seems to accept that the public as a whole would benefit if measures like these
succeeded in propping up the stock market. This is inaccurate. The stock market is
redistributive, transferring wealth from people who own little or no stock to those who own large
amounts of stock. A seriously over-valued stock market, as the nation experienced in the late
nineties, badly distorts investment decisions. As a result of the nineties stock bubble, hundreds of
billions of dollars were wasted on telecom and internet projects that had no economic rationale.
Had it not been for this bubble, the money might have been invested productively. For this
reason, proposals intended to prop up the stock market should be viewed as special interest
measures, comparable to protective tariffs for steel or farm subsidies.