Posted on 02/02/2006 11:41:48 AM PST by Moonman62
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The efficiency of American workers rose in 2005 at the slowest pace since the recession year of 2001 while a key gauge of wage pressures rose at the fastest pace in five years, the government reported Thursday.
The Labor Department said productivity rose by 2.7 percent last year while labor costs rose by 2.4 percent, the biggest jump since a 4.2 percent increase in 2000. For just the final three months of the year, productivity actually fell by 0.6 percent, the first decline since early 2001, and labor costs rose by 2.4 percent.
The combination of slowing productivity -- the amount of output per hour of work -- and rising labor costs was certain to attract attention at the Federal Reserve, which is worried that rising wage demands could trigger inflation problems down the road.
"The glory days of surging productivity that kept labor costs down look to be behind us," said Joel Naroff, chief economist at Naroff Economic Advisors. "The expected slowdown in productivity has arrived and that is putting pressure on costs and the Fed."
Separately, the nations' chain retail stores reported strong results in January as milder-than-normal weather lured consumers out to the malls to spend the gift cards they received in December.
Winners included Wal-Mart Stores Inc., wholesale club operators such as Cost Wholesale Corp. and teen retailers including Bebe Stores Inc. Analysts said merchants were benefiting from a mild January in the Northeast and Midwest and continued improvements in the labor market.
In other economic news, the government said the number of Americans filing for unemployment benefits dropped to 273,000 last week, a decline of 11,000 from the previous week.
Claims have been below 300,000 for four out of the past five weeks, an improvement that pushed the four-week moving average for claims down to 283,500 last week, the lowest level in 5 1/2 years.
Analysts said the improvement in jobless claims so far this year could be signaling a significant strengthening in the labor market, meaning fewer layoffs and more job creation by U.S. companies.
Economists believe that the economy created around 250,000 jobs in January, which would be a sharp pick-up from the 108,000 jobs created in December.
Analysts are expecting the January unemployment rate will be unchanged from December's low 4.9 percent. The government will release the January unemployment report on Friday.
The Federal Reserve boosted interest rates for a 14th time on Tuesday and many economists are looking for at least one more rate hike on March 28 as the central bank tries to make sure that tighter labor markets do not trigger rising wage pressures that could push inflation higher.
The Fed's concerns were likely to be increased by the report on the productivity of nonfarm workers. However, analysts cautioned that even with the slowdown in productivity growth for all of 2005, it was still slightly above the average for the past 50 years, and was more than double the weak growth rates turned in during the 1970s and 1980s.
Since the mid-1990s productivity has accelerated as the economy benefited from the growing use of high-tech tools such as computers and the Internet.
Productivity growth rose even faster following the 2001 recession as U.S companies laid off workers and succeeded in getting more output from smaller work forces. Productivity of nonfarm businesses rose by 4 percent in 2001, 3.8 percent in 2003 and 3.4 percent in 2004.
The 2.7 percent gain in 2005 was the smallest since a 2.5 percent rise in 2001, the year the country was in recession.
Productivity is considered the key factor determining American living standards. Rising productivity allows companies to pay their workers more without having to increase the cost of production, which would boost inflation.
Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan was one of the first economists to recognize that productivity was accelerating in the mid-1990s and used that knowledge to convince his colleagues at the Fed that the unemployment rate could fall to lower levels without generating higher inflation.
Economists said the big issue confronting Ben Bernanke, who took over as Fed chairman on Wednesday, will be whether productivity will now stabilize at the 2.7 percent rate of growth turned in during 2005 or whether it will fall further in the coming year.
Nothing to see here. "No Big Deal," anyway. The U.S. is outsourcing manufacturing to China, India, Mexico, Honduras, and yada, yada, yada. But this is really old news. Time to move on. The only problem I see is that we allow foreign countries to dump goods in the U.S., but other nations slap our imports with heavy duties. What was Bush saying in his SOL about 'free trade?' Trade is not free when it flow only one way.
bump
Then please show us that we're not manufacturing and exporting more now than at any other time in our history.
Do you have any feelings about insourcing and the capital account surplus? Do either of them do us any good? Or, are you just here to contribute your usual fact-free nonsense?
I'm not going to waste my time trying to educate you further. One suggestion is go back to school and work on your MBA.
If that's the place you're relying on for your information, it's no wonder you're as misinformed as they are.
One suggestion is go back to school and work on your MBA.
I learned long before grad school that any discussion about liabilities is meaningless without understanding assets. You seem fixated on only one side of the equation, which has been pointed out to you numerous times as being the source for your unmitigated doom. Net worth is simply assets minus liabilities. When you do this you'll find that our household net worth is $51 trillion - an all time record.
Maybe you can explain, in your own words, why a trade deficit is bad and why a capital account surplus is bad. Japan and Germany run massive trade surpluses. Would you rather have Japans long recent history of deflation/recession or Germany's low GDP and 12% unemployment?
One small example: Just look at Haiwaii. People who bought a median priced homes in September for $ 600,000 just lost $ 150,000 in December. That is how much their home fell in value in three months. Real estate value is only one half of the equation. What happens when the mortgage company demands the buyer pay the difference because the home has lost value?
Another example: A good friend of mine has a beautiful six bedroom house. He owns it outright. He paid $ 50,000 cash for it 35 years ago. It was valued by his realtor at $ 1.5 million. So he has listed the house for sale. But my friend understands that his home is overvalued by at least $ 800,000. His house is for sale, but no one has even looked at the house for 60 days.
By your way of thinking, my friend's net worth is $ 1.5 million (excluding all his other assets). But he knows that his true net worth is closer to $ 700,000.
Of course, if you are correct, my friend is due for an $ 800,000 windfall. The answer you leap at repeatedly tells you to borrow even money. There are so many things to buy, and so little time to do it. "More, more, more," is the American way.
Well said ex-texan. Let's get even more of a rumble going with all those that are outsource crazy. Everytime I hear let's outsource this, or that, I have only one comment. Can we outsource all the cogresscritters and senators to India for $20,000, instead of what they get compensated for here in America?
Do you suppose that anyone here wants to talk about how outsourcing has been a key element to domestic productivity growth?
Nah...
What assets? Real estate? Since real estate makes up just 21% of our total household net worth, just how vulnerable is the average American when he has 57% equity in his home? The rapid appreciation in the real estate market is not a nationwide phenomenon. So, if a few markets experience a worst case correction of 20%, just how much impact is this going to have on the total real estate market and our net worth, of which only 21% comes from homeowner equity? This country has not experienced a year over year decline in the aggregate value of real estate since the 40's.
So, now you say the stock market is also overvalued. And you know this how? I am amazed by how many people here believe they know more than the markets. If this were really the case, you wouldn't be posting on FR, you'd be enjoying the scenery from your yacht along the Italian Riviera. ROFL!
What happens when the mortgage company demands the buyer pay the difference because the home has lost value?
If I'm paying my mortgage on a timely basis why would my mortgage company demand anything from me? Do you think the banks will make money on foreclosures? Is foreclosure something the banks want to do?
It was valued by his realtor at $ 1.5 million
Are you certain that the Fed values real estate the same was as this realtor?
The answer you leap at repeatedly tells you to borrow even money
The reason consumer debt is increasing is because of low interest rates and the increase in home ownership. The issue is not so much the level of debt but whether sufficient capital formation is taking place in a market-based way to maintain growth. It is. The fact that our household net worth continues to grow rapidly, in spite of this increase in debt is all you need to know.
As for the Federal debt; since 2001, the federal debt has increased by $2 trillion while our household net worth went up by $10.4 trillion. Our wealth is growing five times faster than our external debt. Our household assets are $65 trillion, which is more than twice what it was just 25 years ago, and is more than 10 times what it was in 1945. We've created more wealth in the past 25 years than the 200 years prior. Our per-capita assets are $89,800 which is the most of any country in the world and makes us the world's best savers.
You can preach and believe all the doom you choose but you can't back it up with any facts from reliable sources. To say that all assets are overvalued in a market economy is just silly. Remember, you predicted a nationwide meltdown in real estate values in this country by March of this year. We keep getting closer to that fateful month yet we see new home construction remaining strong in most areas of the country. I won't even bother to remind you what you predicted about bird flu.
You mean the same productivity that has allowed us to compete effectively against countries that pay their workers much less? The same productivity that increases our standard of living for every generation?
Not a chance. What would they have to bitch about then?
As for the meltdown, it has already begun. Properties have stalled and fallen 15% in many California cities. Foreclosures hit a 12 year high in Boston last month. Hawaii just fell about 30% in December. Speculators are pumping and dumping condos all over the U.S. Wait, watch, listen.
Greenspan is responsible for pumping excess capital into real estate. Read the report below. There is a link to a recent comment by Fed Board Member Susan Bies about 'exotic mortgages.' http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1570352/posts
Regarding the over valued stock market -- buy Google if actually you believe your argument. Why is that stock valued at $ 396 per share? What does Google make? What are its mortar and brick assets? Everything is a lot hot air today. Even Google.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.