Category Archives: Economy

Why unwinding QE is not a threat to the bull market.

Brian Wesbury has a new Monday Morning Outlook out that is worth considering.

On March 9, 2018, the bull market in U.S. stocks will celebrate its ninth anniversary. And, what we find most amazing is how few people truly understand it. To this day, in spite of massive increases in corporate earnings, many still think the market is one big “sugar high” – a bubble built on a sea of Quantitative Easing and government spending.

While passing mention is given to earnings (because they are impossible to ignore), conventional wisdom has clung to the mistaken story that QE, TARP, and government spending saved the economy from the abyss back in 2008-09.

A review of the facts shows the narrative that “Wall Street” – meaning capitalism and free markets – failed and government came to the rescue is simply not true.

Wall Street was not the driving force behind subprime mortgages. In his fabulous book, Hidden in Plain Sight, Peter Wallison showed that by 2008 Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and other government programs had sponsored 76% of all subprime debt – not “Wall Street.” Everyone was playing with rattlesnakes and government was telling them it was OK to do so. But, when the snakes started biting, government blamed the private sector, capitalism and free markets.

At the same time, Wall Street did not cause the market and economy to collapse; it was overly strict mark-to-market accounting. Yes, leverage in the financial system was high, but mark-to-market accounting forced banks to write down many performing assets to illiquid market prices that had zero relationship to true value. Mark-to-market destroyed capital.

QE started in September 2008, TARP in October 2008, but the market didn’t bottom until March 9, 2009, five months later. On that day in March, former U.S. Representative Barney Frank, of all people, promised to hold a hearing with the accounting board and SEC to force a change to the ill-advised accounting rule. The rule was changed and the stock market reversed course, with a return to economic growth not far behind.

Yes, the Fed did QE and, yes, the stock market went up while bond yields fell, but correlation is not causation. Stock markets fell after QE started, and rose after QE ended. Bond yields often rose during QE, fell when the Fed wasn’t buying, and have increased since the Fed tapered and ended QE.

A preponderance of QE ended up as “excess reserves” in the banking system, which means it never turned into real money growth. That’s why inflation never took off. Long-term bond yields fell, but this wasn’t because the Fed was buying. Bond yields fell because the Fed promised to hold short-term rates down for a very long time. And as long-term rates are just a series of short-term rates, long term rates were pushed lower as well.

We know this is a very short explanation of what happened, but we bring it up because there are many who are now trying to use the stock market “correction” to revisit the wrongly-held narrative that the economy is one big QE-driven bubble. Or, they use the correction to cover their past support of QE and TARP. If the unwinding of QE actually hurts, then they can argue that QE helped in the first place.

So, they argue that rising bond yields are due to the Fed now selling bonds. But the Fed began its QE-unwind strategy months ago, and sticking to its plans hasn’t changed a thing.

The key inflection point for bond yields wasn’t when the Fed announced the unwinding of QE; it was Election Day 2016, when the 10-year yield ended the day at 1.9% while assuming the status quo, which meant more years of Plow Horse growth ahead. Since then, we’ve seen a series of policy changes, including tax cuts and deregulation, which have raised expectations for economic growth and inflation. As a result, yields have moved up.

Corporate earnings are rising rapidly, too, and the S&P 500 is now trading at roughly 17.5 times 2018 expected earnings. This is not a bubble, not even close. Earnings are up because technology is booming in a more politically-friendly environment for capitalism. And while it is hard to see productivity rising in the overall macro data, it is clear that profits and margins are up because productivity is rising rapidly in the private sector.

The sad thing about the story that QE saved the economy is that it undermines faith in free markets. Those who argue that unwinding QE is hurting the economy are, in unwitting fashion, supporting the view that capitalism is fragile, prone to bubbles and mistakes, and in need of government’s guiding hand. This argument is now being made by both those who believe in big government and those who supposedly believe in free markets. No wonder investors are confused and fearful.

The good news is that QE did not lift the economy. Markets, technology and innovation did. And this realization is the key to understanding why unwinding QE is not a threat to the bull market.

 

Tagged , , ,

Clear Skies Ahead

Brian Wesbury of First Trust:

You know the old saying about every cloud having a silver lining? Well, if you listen to some of the financial press, you’d think their motto was that clear skies are just clouds in disguise.

Friday’s GDP report showed the economy grew 2.5% in 2017, an acceleration from the average rate of 2.2% from the start of the recovery in mid-2009 through the end of 2016. Notably, what we call “core” GDP – inflation-adjusted GDP growth excluding government purchases, inventories, and international trade – grew at a 4.6% annual rate in the fourth quarter and was up 3.3% in 2017.

However, some pessimistic analysts were calling attention to a drop in the personal saving rate to 2.6% in the fourth quarter, the lowest level since 2005. The pessimists’ theory is that if the personal savings rate is so low, consumers must be in over their heads again, so watch out below!

But this superficial take on the saving rate leaves out some very important points.

First, consumers don’t just get purchasing power from their income; they also get it from the value of their assets. And asset values soared in 2017 as investors (correctly) anticipated better economic policies. The market cap of the S&P 500 rose $3.7 trillion, while owner-occupied real estate looks like it increased about $1.5 trillion. That could be a problem if we thought stock market or real estate was overvalued, but our capitalized profits approach says the stock market is still undervalued and the price-to-rent ratio for residential real estate is near the long-term norm, not wildly overvalued like in 2005.

Second, the tax cut that’s taking effect is going to raise after-tax income. According to congressional budget scorekeepers, the tax cut on individuals should reduce tax payments by $189 billion in 2019, which is equal to 1.3% of last year’s after-tax income. So, consumers are going to be able to save more in the next few years, even if we don’t include the extra income that should be generated by extra economic growth.

Third, the personal saving rate doesn’t include withdrawals from 401Ks and IRAs, many of which are swollen with capital gains. So, let’s say a worker contributed $5,000 of their income into a 401K at the end of 1988 and kept that money in the S&P 500 ever since. Today they can withdraw more than $97,000 and spend it. When calculating the saving rate, the government counts every penny of that spending while not counting a penny of it as income. As the population ages and spends down wealth they’ve already made, the saving rate tells us less and less about the saving habits of today’s workers.

Sometimes good news is really just good news. Unfortunately, some analysts can’t look at clear skies without imagining clouds.

 

 

Tagged , ,

Market Shakeout

Following a virtual non-stop rally in the stock market since the beginning of 2017, we are not particularly surprised that the stock market should stop and take a breather. What many people find disconcerting about this sudden drop is it’s steepness and breadth. We have not been exposed to a decline this steep for quite a while.

Some commentators actually blame good economic news for the market drop, claiming that a robust economy has triggered renewed inflation fears, which they assert will lead the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates faster than expected.

Our view is that there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the economy, or with an increase in interest rates which has been widely anticipated. Long-time market observers have seen this movie before, it’s just been a long time since we last saw it. From what we have been reading, some large institutions are employing trading systems that trigger large sell orders at certain levels in the market, which in turn causes a cascading series of further drops.

On a fundamental level, the stock market responds to the economy, and we see no indications that anything has changed since the start of the year. Hiring is up, wages are rising, and millions of people are getting bonuses that they haven’t seen in years. Take-home pay will go up for millions more Americans beginning this month. Lower corporate tax rates should lead to higher corporate profits which should lead to higher stock prices. Still other corporations that have billions of dollars parked overseas, like Apple, are bringing a lot of that money home and are promising to invest it in the U.S. economy.

While the recent free-fall in the Dow has been spectacular, the markets have been abnormally placid for about eight years now. A healthy market sees run-ups and pull-backs, and in recent memory the pull-backs have been on the maximum order of maybe 3% total. While we certainly prefer the markets always go up, the reality of long-term market history is that to have corrections on the order of 5% – 10% in the midst of a bull market isn’t unprecedented or even that unusual. We don’t think this pull-back signals the end of the bull market run, but rather that we might be getting back to a more historical norm.

Tagged , ,

No More Plow Horse

Brian Wesbury, Chief Economist of First Trust gives his take on the economy under the Trump Administration.

We’ve called the slow, plodding economic recovery from mid-2009 through early 2017 a Plow Horse. It wasn’t a thoroughbred, but it wasn’t going to keel over and die either. Growth trudged along at a sluggish – but steady – 2.1% average annual rate.

Thanks to improved policy out of Washington, the Plow Horse has picked up its gait. Under new management, real GDP grew at a 3.1% annualized rate in the second quarter of 2017 and 3.2% in the third quarter. There were two straight quarters of 3%+ growth in 2013 and 2014, but then growth petered out. Now, it looks like Q4 clocked in at a 3.3% annual rate, which would make it the first time we’ve had three straight quarters of 3%+ growth since 2004-5.

Some say a government shutdown would make it tough to get another 3% quarter to start 2018, but we disagree. Yes, some “nonessential” government workers might pull back on their spending temporarily, but there’s no historical link between government shutdowns and economic growth.

The economy grew at a 2.8% annual rate in late 1995 and early 1996 during the two quarters that include the prolonged standoff under President Clinton. That’s essentially no different than the 2.7% pace the economy grew in the year before the shutdowns. The last time we had a prolonged standoff was in late 2013, under President Obama. The economy grew at a 4% rate that quarter, one of the fastest of his presidency.

Right now, taxes are falling, regulations are being reduced, and monetary policy remains loose. With these tailwinds, the acceleration of growth in 2017 should continue into 2018.

 

Tagged ,

Can you answer these basic money questions?

The NY Post published an article Most Americans can’t answer these 4 basic money questions.   They questioned “Millennials” and “Boomers” to see who were most knowledgeable about investing.

Here are the questions – see how well you do.

  1. Which of the following statements describes the main function of the stock market?
    A) The stock market brings people who want to buy stocks together with people who want to sell stocks.
    B) The stock market helps predict stock earnings
    C) The stock market results in an increase in the price of stocks
    D) None of the above
    E) Not sure
  2. If you had $100 in a savings account and the interest rate was 2 percent per year, after 5 years, how much do you think you would have in the account if you left the money to grow?
    A) Exactly $102
    B) Less than $102
    C) More than $102
    D) Not sure
  3. If the interest rate on your savings account was 1 percent per year and inflation was 2 percent per year, after 1 year, how much would you be able to buy with the money in this account?
    A) More than today
    B) Exactly the same as today
    C) Less than today
    D) Not sure
  4. Which provides a safer return, buying a single company’s stock or a mutual fund?
    A) Single company’s stock
    B) Mutual fund
    C) Not sure
    D) Not sure

 

 

The correct answers are

  1. A
  2. C
  3. C
  4. B

If you had trouble getting the right answers you could benefit from the guidance of a good RIA (Registered Investment Advisor).

Tagged , , ,

Revolution

Our favorite economist, Brian Wesbury of First Trust, comments on the changes taking place in the economy:

One word that could describe Donald Trump’s unexpected ascendancy to the presidency is – “revolt.” Revolt against the “establishment.” Revolt against the “status quo.”

After all, status quo bureaucracies, tax rates, institutions, regulations, and narratives promised prosperity, yet the economy was mired in slow growth and many felt it was hard to get ahead. Reliably blue states tilted red, and the pendulum swung the other way.

Since 1993, the top federal tax rate on US corporations has been 35%, one of the highest in the world. This has forced US companies to expand overseas. Both sides of the political spectrum knew it was a problem, yet nothing was ever done.

Now the rate is 21%, and full expensing of business investment for tax purposes is law. These changes will boost the incentive to invest and operate in the US, leading to more demand for labor, which means lower unemployment and faster wage growth, as well. From an economic perspective, this is a revolution.

But there’s more. We’re referring to the new limit for state and local tax deductions. That change, combined with a larger standard deduction, will launch an overdue revolution in the policy choices of high tax states as well as the geographical distribution of business activity.

California’s top marginal income tax rate is 13.3%. Under the old tax system, tax payers who itemize could deduct their state income taxes from their taxable federal income. So for the highest earners, the effective marginal rate was 8.0%, not 13.3%. [Deducting 39.6% of 13.3% saved them 5.3%. 13.3% minus 5.3% is 8.0%.]

Politicians in California could raise state income tax rates, and up to 39.6% of the cost would be carried by taxpayers in other states. The same goes for New York City residents, where the top income tax rate is roughly 12.7%.

Now taxpayers are limited to $10,000 in state and local tax deductions (with a 37% top federal tax rate). The financial pain of living in high tax states is now exposed. California and New York City – and many other high tax jurisdictions – look a lot less attractive than states like Texas, Florida, and Nevada.

This change may limit the measured income and wealth gap in the US between the rich and poor. California and New York don’t just have high taxes, they also have a high cost of living. So, if some high earners in these places leave to take lower pay in places with lower taxes and a lower cost of living, the income and wealth gap would narrow.

But incentives work on all institutions, and policymakers in high-tax states have massive pressure to cut tax rates.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is set to rule on Janus vs. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees. Based on a similar case from a few years ago, it’s likely the Court will rule that all government workers (state, local and federal) will have a choice to pay union dues, or not. We know from experience that, when given a choice, many workers stop supporting the political activities of unions. This would be another force significantly altering the balance of power.

Whether you agree with these developments or not, the U.S. hasn’t seen economic policy changes like this in a long time. The forces that support markets and entrepreneurship over government control are reasserting themselves.

 

Tagged , ,

A prediction for 2018 from Brian Wesbury of First Trust

Last December we wrote “we finally have more than just hope to believe that this year, 2017, is the year the Plow Horse Economy finally gets a spring in its step.” We expected real GDP growth to accelerate from 2.0% in 2016 to “about 2.6%” in 2017. Our optimism was, in large part, based on our belief that the incoming Trump Administration would wield a lighter regulatory touch and move toward lower tax rates.

So far, so good. Right now, we’re tracking fourth quarter real GDP growth at a 3.0% annual rate, which would mean 2.7% growth for 2017 and we expect some more acceleration in 2018.

The only question is: how much? Yes, a major corporate tax cut (which should have happened 20 years ago) is finally taking place. And, yes, the Trump Administration is cutting regulation. But, it has not reigned in government spending. As a result, we’re forecasting real GDP growth at a 3.0% rate in 2018, the fastest annual growth since 2005.

The only caveat to this forecast is that it seems as if the velocity of money is picking up. With $2 trillion of excess reserves in the banking system, the risk is highly tilted toward an upside surprise for growth, with little risk to the downside. Meanwhile, this easy monetary policy suggests inflation should pick up, as well. The consumer price index should be up about 2.5% in 2018, which would be the largest increase since 2011.

Unemployment already surprised to the downside in 2017. We forecast 4.4%; instead, it’s already dropped to 4.1% and looks poised to move even lower in the year ahead. Our best guess is that the jobless rate falls to 3.7%, which would be the lowest unemployment rate since the late 1960s.

A year ago, we expected the Fed to finally deliver multiple rate hikes in 2017. It did, and we expect that pattern will continue in 2018, with the Fed signaling three rate hikes and delivering at least that number, maybe four. Longer-term interest rates are heading up as well. Look for the 10-year Treasury yield to finish 2018 at 3.00%.

For the stock market, get ready for a continued bull market in 2018. Stocks will probably not climb as much as this year, and a correction is always possible, but we think investors would be wise to stay invested in equities throughout the year.

We use a Capitalized Profits Model (the government’s measure of profits from the GDP reports divided by interest rates) to measure fair value for stocks. Our traditional measure, using a current 10-year Treasury yield of 2.35% suggests the S&P 500 is still massively undervalued.

If we use our 2018 forecast of 3.0% for the 10-year yield, the model says fair value for the S&P 500 is 3351, which is 25% higher than Friday’s close. The model needs a 10-year yield of about 3.75% to conclude that the S&P 500 is already at fair value, with current profits.

As a result, we’re calling for the S&P 500 to finish at 3,100 next year, up almost 16% from Friday’s close. The Dow Jones Industrial Average should finish at 28,500.

Yes, this is optimistic, but a year ago we were forecasting the Dow would finish this year at 23,750 with the S&P 500 at 2,700. This was a much more bullish call than anyone else we’ve seen, but we stuck with the fundamentals over the relatively pessimistic calls of “conventional wisdom,” and we believe the same course is warranted for 2018. Those who have faith in free markets should continue to be richly rewarded in the year ahead.

Tagged , , ,

Don’t Fear Higher Interest Rates

Here’s some weekly commentary from Brian Wesbury of First Trust 

The Federal Reserve has a problem.  At 4.1%, the jobless rate is already well below the 4.6% it thinks unemployment would/could/should average over the long run.  We think the unemployment rate should get to 3.5% by the end of 2019 and wouldn’t be shocked if it got that low in 2018, either.

Add in extra economic growth from tax cuts and the Fed will be worried that it is “behind the curve.”  As a result, we think the Fed will raise rates three times next year, on top of this year’s three rate hikes, counting the almost certain hike this month.  And a fourth rate hike in 2018 is still certainly on the table.  By contrast, the futures market is only pricing in one or two rate hikes next year – exactly as it did for 2017.  In other words, the futures markets are likely to be wrong for the second year in a row.

And as short-term interest rates head higher, we expect long-term interest rates to head up as well.  So, get ready, because the bears will seize on this rising rate environment as one more reason for the bull market in stocks to end.

They’ll be wrong again.  The bull market, and the US economy, have further to run.  Rising rates won’t kill the recovery or bull market anytime in the near future.

Higher interest rates reflect a higher after-tax return to capital, a natural result of cutting taxes on corporate investment via a lower tax rate on corporate profits as well as shifting to full expensing of equipment and away from depreciation for tax purposes.

Lower taxes on capital means business will more aggressively pursue investment opportunities, helping boost economic growth and the demand for labor – leading to more jobs and higher wages.  Stronger growth means higher rates.

For a recent example of why higher rates don’t mean the end of the bull market in stocks look no further than 2013.  Economic growth accelerated that year, with real GDP growing 2.7% versus 1.3% the year before.  Meanwhile, the yield on the 10-year Treasury Note jumped to 3.04% from 1.78%.  And during that year the S&P 500 jumped 29.6%, the best calendar year performance since 1997.

This was not a fluke.  The 10-year yield rose in 2003 and 2006, by 44 and 32 basis points, respectively.  How did the S&P 500 do those years: up 26.4% in 2003, up 13.8% in 2006.

Sure, in theory, if interest rates climb to reflect the risk of rising inflation, without any corresponding increase in real GDP growth, then higher interest rates would not be a good sign for equities.  That’d be like the late 1960s through the early 1980s.  But with Congress and the president likely to soon agree to major pro-growth changes in the tax code on top of an ongoing shift toward deregulation, we think the growth trend is positive, not negative.

It’s also true that interest on the national debt will rise as well.  But federal interest costs relative to both GDP and tax revenue are still hovering near the lowest levels of the past fifty years.  As we’ve argued, sensible debt financing that locks in today’s low rates would be prudent. However, it will take many years for higher interest rates to lift the cost of borrowing needed to finance the government back to the levels we saw for much of the 1980s and 1990s.  And as we all remember the 80s and 90s were not bad for stocks.

Bottom line: interest rates across the yield curve are headed higher.  But, for stocks, it’s just another wall of worry not a signal that the bull market is anywhere near an end.

 

Tagged , , ,

Consuming doesn’t produce wealth, production does.

Our favorite economist, Brian Wesbury of First Trust just published and article discussing the Christmas shopping season and “Consumer Fundamentals.”  We changed his headline because there is something fundamentally more important in his comments, and it’s this:  consuming doesn’t make people wealthy, producing does.  No one ever got rich by sitting around consuming; people producing stuff is what makes communities, nations and cultures rich.

Now on to Brian’s commentary on the economy:

Now that Black Friday has come and gone and Cyber Monday is upon us, you’re going to hear a blizzard of numbers and reports about the US consumer. So far, these numbers show blowout on-line sales and a mild decline in foot traffic at brick-and-mortar stores. Both are better than expected given the ongoing transformation of the retail sector.

But Black Friday isn’t all that it used to be. Sales are starting earlier in November and have become more spread out over the full Christmas shopping season, so the facts and figures we hear about sales over the past several days are not quite as important as they were in previous years. Add to that the fact that this year’s shopping season is longer than usual due to an early Thanksgiving holiday.

But all this focus on the consumer is a mistake. It’s backward thinking. We think the supply side – innovators, entrepreneurs, and workers, combined – generates the material wealth that makes consumer demand possible in the first place. The reason we produce is so we can consume. Consuming doesn’t produce wealth, production does.

Either way, we expect very good sales for November and December combined. Payrolls are up 2 million from a year ago. Meanwhile, total earnings by workers (excluding irregular bonuses/commissions as well as fringe benefits) are up 4.1%.

Some will dismiss the growth as “the rich getting richer,” but the facts say otherwise. Usual weekly earnings for full-time workers at the bottom 10% are up 4.6% versus a year ago; earnings for those at the bottom 25% are up 5.3% from a year ago. By contrast, usual weekly earnings for the median worker are up 3.9% while earnings for those at the top 25% and top 10% are up less than 2%.

Yes, that’s right, incomes are growing faster at the bottom of the income spectrum than at the top. A higher economic tide is lifting all boats and helping those with the smallest boats the most. This is not a recipe for stagnating sales.

And so the voices of pessimism have had to pivot their story lately. Just a short while ago, they were still saying the economy really wasn’t improving at all. Now some are saying it’s a consumer debt-fueled bubble.

It is true that total household debt is at a new record high. But debts relative to assets are much lower than before the Great Recession. Debts were 19.4% of household assets when Lehman Brothers went bust; now they’re 13.7%, one of the lowest levels in the past generation. Meanwhile, for the past four years the financial obligations ratio – debt payments plus the cost of car leases, rents, and other monthly payments relative to incomes – has been hovering near the lowest levels since the early 1980s.

Yes, auto and student loan delinquencies are rising. But total serious (90+ day) delinquencies, including not only autos and student loans, but also mortgages, home equity loans, and credit cards are down 61% from the peak in 2010.

The bottom line is that investors should be less worried about consumer debt today than at any time in recent decades. Some think this could change if the Fed continues to raise interest rates, while selling off its bond portfolio. But interest rates are still well below normal levels and the U.S. banking system is sitting on trillions in excess reserves.

The US economy is less leveraged and looking better in recent quarters than it has in years. And better tax and regulatory policies are on the way. The Plow Horse is picking up its pace and consumer spending is in great shape.

Tagged , , , ,

The Economy is Accelerating

Economic commentary from Brian Wesbury, Chief Economist at First Trust

The Economy is Accelerating

We’ve called it a “Plow Horse” economy, which was our metaphor invented to counter forecasters who said slow growth meant a recession was on its way. A Plow Horse is always slow, but that slowness hides underlying strength – it was never going to slip and fall. Now, the economy is accelerating.

Halfway through the fourth quarter, monthly data releases show real GDP growing at a 3%+ annual rate. If that holds, it would make for three consecutive quarters of growth at 3% or higher. Believe it or not, the last time that happened was 2004.

Last week saw retail sales, industrial production, and housing starts all come in better than expected for October, the latter two substantially better.

And while retail sales grew “just” 0.2% in October, that came on the back of a 1.9% surge in September. Overall sales, and those excluding volatile components like autos, gas and building materials, all signal a robust consumer.

Meanwhile factory output surged 1.3% in October, tying the second highest monthly gain since 2010. Production at factories is now up 2.5% from a year ago, and accelerating. By contrast, factory production was down 0.1% in the year ending October 2016 and unchanged in the year ending October 2015. The current revival is not due to the volatile auto sector, where output of motor vehicles is down 5.9% from a year ago while the production of auto parts is down 0.3%.

The last piece of last week’s good economic news was on home building: housing starts surged after a storm-related lull in September. Single-family starts, which are more stable than multi-family starts – and add more per unit to GDP – tied the highest level since 2007. Housing completions hit the highest level since 2008.

As a result of all this data, the Atlanta Fed’s “GDP Now” model says real GDP is growing at a 3.4% annual rate in Q4. The New York Fed’s “Nowcast” says 3.8%.

Of course, if we get anything close to those numbers, some analysts will claim the fourth quarter is just a hurricane-related rebound. But the conventional wisdom has been way too bearish for years, and Q3 is likely to be revised up to a 3.4% growth rate from the original estimate of 3.0%. Put it all together, and things are looking up. It’s no longer a Plow Horse economy. In fact, after years of smothering the growth potential of amazing new technologies, the government is finally getting out of the way.

The Obama and Bush regulatory State is being dismantled piece by piece, and spending growth has slowed relative to GDP. Tax cuts are moving through Congress. These positive developments have monetary velocity – the speed at which money moves through the economy – picking up. “Animal spirits” are stirring. We don’t have a cute name for it, but growth is accelerating.

This reduction in the burden of government would be easier, and much more focused on growth, if Republicans had fixed the budget scorekeeping process when they first had the chance back in 2015, or even in the mid-1990s, after having gained control of both the House and Senate.

Instead, they took a cowardly pass. As a result, when assessing the “cost” of tax cuts, Congress still ignores the positive economic effects of tax cuts on growth. Oddly, while refusing to “score” better GDP growth, we understand the budget scorekeepers assume tax cuts lead to higher interest rates, which add to the cost of the tax cuts. In effect, the scorekeepers will use dynamic models to count the negative effects of tax cuts on the overall economy, but not the positive ones!

This kind of rigged scoring system is why the current tax proposals don’t cut tax rates on dividends or capital gains, and why some of the tax cuts are temporary. It’s also why the top tax rate on regular income for the highest earners is likely to end up near the current tax rate of 39.6%.

We were never satisfied with Plow Horse growth, but we always thought it showed the power of innovation. The power of new technology caused the economy to grow since 2009, despite the burden of big government.

Now with better policies, growth is on the rise. We haven’t fixed enough problems to get 3% real growth in every quarter, and maybe not even as the average growth rate over time. That would probably take some major changes to entitlement spending programs. But the recent improvement is hard to miss and signals that entrepreneurship is alive and well in the United States.

Tagged
%d bloggers like this: