adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Economy

Why This Contentious Transition Is So Perilous for the Economy – The New York Times

Published

 on


The worst economic crises of the last century both played out during “transition” — the period between the presidential election and the inauguration. That’s not a coincidence.

The most important transitions — ones that involve major changes of direction for the government — leave months of uncertainty over policy in the interim. Things that were already going wrong often spiral. Chaos loves a vacuum.

Unfortunately, the Covid crisis and the transition of 2020 have the clear potential to spin out of control in the same way.

The country’s major transition crises had certain elements in common: a pre-existing problem, an incumbent administration that had been criticized for its policy in dealing with it, and a presidential election ushering in a challenger calling for a sharp break from the predecessor’s approach.

The transition then left the public (and businesses and investors, too) trying to grapple with a paralyzing dilemma: “What happens while we wait for something completely different?” The answer was that the problem metastasized.

It happened in 1932. The Great Depression had worsened, and the economy and the financial system teetered on the edge of ruin. Franklin D. Roosevelt’s election promised a strong break from the policies of Herbert C. Hoover. Yet for months, while the country waited for the inauguration, Hoover remained in charge.

Hoover maintained that the Depression had only gotten worse because of people’s fear of what the incoming President was proposing to do. He attempted to convince Roosevelt to commit to continuing policies like fiscal austerity and the gold standard. But Roosevelt wanted nothing to do with him. During the standoff, the economy cratered and the financial system fell apart.

Another major crisis occurred in 2008, when President Obama won the election promising a starkly different approach from the Bush administration’s. I was part of that transition, and in December our economic team briefed Mr. Obama about the quickly fading economy. He said, jokingly: “Is it too late to ask for a recount?”

Unlike in 1932, 2008 was an amicable and cooperative transition. Officials in the outgoing Bush administration did not undermine the incoming administration. To the contrary, they took the transfer of power seriously and did what they could to help.

Even in that circumstance, though, there were still significant disagreements in how to respond to the crisis: how the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) rescue money should be spent, what conditions should be put on banks that received the money, how auto companies should be treated, and much more. People knew a change was coming but not what would happen in the interim, and they worried that no one was really in charge. The crisis escalated.

I’ve focused on economic crises, but the issue is even bigger than that. Some of the biggest political crises in the country also happened in transition. In 1860, Abraham Lincoln won the election, promising a sharp break from Democrats and the incumbent, President James Buchanan. Lincoln’s election brought tensions to a boil. States talked openly of seceding.

President Buchanan, a lame duck, announced that he did not believe the federal government had the authority to stop states from leaving. Within weeks, South Carolina voted to secede, followed by six other states, all before the inauguration. Soon after Lincoln took office, the Civil War began.

Which brings us to 2020. Even before the election, the coronavirus had surged and was raging through much of the country. The United States has had more than 140,000 cases in a day, rising numbers of hospitalizations and has even witnessed multiple super-spreader events in the White House that infected the president, his chief of staff, cabinet members and senior advisers.

Economists have emphasized from the beginning that controlling the spread of the virus is crucial to fixing the economy. The CARES Act, the rescue package passed in March, provided temporary relief in the hope that the virus would rapidly diminish. But as that money has run out, a wide gulf has opened between the approach of the outgoing Trump administration (which has variously argued for doing less and minimized the seriousness of the problem) and the incoming Biden administration, whose first action after the election was to appoint a board of medical advisers and push an aggressive agenda to get the coronavirus under control.

And so the nation is, once more, counting down the months before a new administration changes the country’s direction, wondering what policy the federal government will pursue in the interim, and watching a pre-existing problem that may easily spiral out of control while we wait.

The good news is that there is a strong possibility that we could have an effective vaccine widely available sometime next year.

The bad news is that the outgoing administration has actively fought against the changeover — withholding transition funds, forbidding the sharing of information with the Biden folks and contesting the election results. As the weeks pass, tens of thousands of people may lose their lives and millions of businesses may disappear unnecessarily.

Certainly we will hope for the best — that this third wave of infections in the United States subsides quickly, that the economy continues to recover, people temporarily laid off can come back to their jobs, and a massive number of small businesses do not go broke.

But history teaches that problems brewing during major transitions of power can explode. So, as if enough hadn’t happened already in 2020, the Biden administration and the broader American public, had best prepare for the worst, just in case.

Austan Goolsbee, a professor of economics at the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business, has advised President Barack Obama and President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. Follow him on Twitter: @austan_goolsbee

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Canada’s unemployment rate holds steady at 6.5% in October, economy adds 15,000 jobs

Published

 on

 

OTTAWA – Canada’s unemployment rate held steady at 6.5 per cent last month as hiring remained weak across the economy.

Statistics Canada’s labour force survey on Friday said employment rose by a modest 15,000 jobs in October.

Business, building and support services saw the largest gain in employment.

Meanwhile, finance, insurance, real estate, rental and leasing experienced the largest decline.

Many economists see weakness in the job market continuing in the short term, before the Bank of Canada’s interest rate cuts spark a rebound in economic growth next year.

Despite ongoing softness in the labour market, however, strong wage growth has raged on in Canada. Average hourly wages in October grew 4.9 per cent from a year ago, reaching $35.76.

Friday’s report also shed some light on the financial health of households.

According to the agency, 28.8 per cent of Canadians aged 15 or older were living in a household that had difficulty meeting financial needs – like food and housing – in the previous four weeks.

That was down from 33.1 per cent in October 2023 and 35.5 per cent in October 2022, but still above the 20.4 per cent figure recorded in October 2020.

People living in a rented home were more likely to report difficulty meeting financial needs, with nearly four in 10 reporting that was the case.

That compares with just under a quarter of those living in an owned home by a household member.

Immigrants were also more likely to report facing financial strain last month, with about four out of 10 immigrants who landed in the last year doing so.

That compares with about three in 10 more established immigrants and one in four of people born in Canada.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 8, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Health-care spending expected to outpace economy and reach $372 billion in 2024: CIHI

Published

 on

 

The Canadian Institute for Health Information says health-care spending in Canada is projected to reach a new high in 2024.

The annual report released Thursday says total health spending is expected to hit $372 billion, or $9,054 per Canadian.

CIHI’s national analysis predicts expenditures will rise by 5.7 per cent in 2024, compared to 4.5 per cent in 2023 and 1.7 per cent in 2022.

This year’s health spending is estimated to represent 12.4 per cent of Canada’s gross domestic product. Excluding two years of the pandemic, it would be the highest ratio in the country’s history.

While it’s not unusual for health expenditures to outpace economic growth, the report says this could be the case for the next several years due to Canada’s growing population and its aging demographic.

Canada’s per capita spending on health care in 2022 was among the highest in the world, but still less than countries such as the United States and Sweden.

The report notes that the Canadian dental and pharmacare plans could push health-care spending even further as more people who previously couldn’t afford these services start using them.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 7, 2024.

Canadian Press health coverage receives support through a partnership with the Canadian Medical Association. CP is solely responsible for this content.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Trump’s victory sparks concerns over ripple effect on Canadian economy

Published

 on

 

As Canadians wake up to news that Donald Trump will return to the White House, the president-elect’s protectionist stance is casting a spotlight on what effect his second term will have on Canada-U.S. economic ties.

Some Canadian business leaders have expressed worry over Trump’s promise to introduce a universal 10 per cent tariff on all American imports.

A Canadian Chamber of Commerce report released last month suggested those tariffs would shrink the Canadian economy, resulting in around $30 billion per year in economic costs.

More than 77 per cent of Canadian exports go to the U.S.

Canada’s manufacturing sector faces the biggest risk should Trump push forward on imposing broad tariffs, said Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters president and CEO Dennis Darby. He said the sector is the “most trade-exposed” within Canada.

“It’s in the U.S.’s best interest, it’s in our best interest, but most importantly for consumers across North America, that we’re able to trade goods, materials, ingredients, as we have under the trade agreements,” Darby said in an interview.

“It’s a more complex or complicated outcome than it would have been with the Democrats, but we’ve had to deal with this before and we’re going to do our best to deal with it again.”

American economists have also warned Trump’s plan could cause inflation and possibly a recession, which could have ripple effects in Canada.

It’s consumers who will ultimately feel the burden of any inflationary effect caused by broad tariffs, said Darby.

“A tariff tends to raise costs, and it ultimately raises prices, so that’s something that we have to be prepared for,” he said.

“It could tilt production mandates. A tariff makes goods more expensive, but on the same token, it also will make inputs for the U.S. more expensive.”

A report last month by TD economist Marc Ercolao said research shows a full-scale implementation of Trump’s tariff plan could lead to a near-five per cent reduction in Canadian export volumes to the U.S. by early-2027, relative to current baseline forecasts.

Retaliation by Canada would also increase costs for domestic producers, and push import volumes lower in the process.

“Slowing import activity mitigates some of the negative net trade impact on total GDP enough to avoid a technical recession, but still produces a period of extended stagnation through 2025 and 2026,” Ercolao said.

Since the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement came into effect in 2020, trade between Canada and the U.S. has surged by 46 per cent, according to the Toronto Region Board of Trade.

With that deal is up for review in 2026, Canadian Chamber of Commerce president and CEO Candace Laing said the Canadian government “must collaborate effectively with the Trump administration to preserve and strengthen our bilateral economic partnership.”

“With an impressive $3.6 billion in daily trade, Canada and the United States are each other’s closest international partners. The secure and efficient flow of goods and people across our border … remains essential for the economies of both countries,” she said in a statement.

“By resisting tariffs and trade barriers that will only raise prices and hurt consumers in both countries, Canada and the United States can strengthen resilient cross-border supply chains that enhance our shared economic security.”

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 6, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending