這是美國經濟學家Becker最新部落格文章
他說
去[2008]年10月7日
他為華爾街月刊寫了一篇文章叫做
「我們不是邁向大蕭條」("We're Not Headed for a Depression")
這一次我們不是蕭條
更完全不像1930年代的大蕭條
當經濟逐漸下滑時
他還有點擔心自己的預測看來有點愚蠢
跟許多著名的預測一樣
但是他很幸運地
這個世界也是一樣幸運
預言顯得基本上正確
8月9日他在部落格上宣稱
當前世界的衰退已經結束
許多經濟學者跟官方組織
也獲得相同結論
此次衰退是巨大的跟全球性的
但是它不是大蕭條──
大蕭條是指產出上的下滑(output fall )達10%以上
美國跟世界這次的產出上的下滑卻低於5%
在大蕭條期間
美國失業率攀高到25%
而且一直維持高點在整個30年代
產出滑落則超過20%
而在這次或以前的衰退
產出滑落稍稍低於4%
而失業率仍維持低於10%──
最新失業率數字是9.7%
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Productivity, Unemployment, and the End of the Recession-Becker
September 9, 2009
http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/archives/2009/09/productivity_un.html
On October 7, 2008 I wrote an op-ed piece for the Wall Street Journal ("We're Not Headed for a Depression") in which I said there would not be a depression, certainly nothing at all resembling the Great Depression of the 1930s. As the economy continued to decline after that I began to worry that my predictions were going to look foolish, and become famous as one of the many absurdly bad forecasts.
Fortunately for me, and even more so for the world, the forecast turned out to be basically correct. I recently claimed in a post on this blog on August 9th that the current world recession is over, and many economists and official organizations since then have come to the same conclusion. The recession was big and world wide, but it was far from a depression-a rule of thumb is that a contraction is a depression only if the fall in output is at least 10%. The output fall in the US and the world has been less than 5%. Indeed, this recession is hardly more severe in the US- the epicenter of the financial crisis - than a couple of previous recessions, such as the one from 1973-75 brought on by the first oil shock, and the one in 1981-83 resulting from the Fed's successful efforts to squeeze inflation out of the system.
During the Great Depression American unemployment peaked at 25% and was high during the whole of the 1930s, while output declined by more than 20%. During this present (or past) recession, output has fallen by a little over 4%, and unemployment so far has remained under 10%-the latest figure gives an unemployment rate of 9.7%. Since a world of difference exists between the two events, the prevalent fear of a major depression was never realized.
Those who are more pessimistic about this recession point out that unemployment is still rising, and may reach a much higher level than its present rate. They also rightly indicate that total unemployment and underemployment is much higher than 9.7% because some persons have only found part time jobs, while others have been so discouraged by the weak labor market that they quit looking for work, and so are not counted as unemployed.
I will take up both aspects of this pessimism in turn. To understand what has been happening to unemployment, it is crucial to recognize that employment has declined, and unemployment has risen, much more relative to output during this recession than in past recessions because labor productivity-measured by output per worker or per hour of employment- has continued to grow during the recession. Productivity grew by 0.3% during the first quarter of 2009, and by a whopping 1.8% during the second quarter. Typically, measured productivity falls during serious recessions because of excess capacity of capital and the many employed workers who are underutilized. Basic arithmetic indicates that for any given fall in output, the greater the rise in measured labor productivity, the greater the fall in employment, and the greater the increase in unemployment.
Unemployment is typically a lagging indicator in the sense that it usually begins to fall only months after output has started to increase again. Since I expect output to rise only a little in the US during the third quarter that will be over at the end of September, unemployment should continue to rise for a while, almost certainly surpassing 10% at its peak. However, if, as I expect, the growth in productivity will continue into the future at a good pace because of the many innovations and inventions coming on line, that will lead to greater, not a lesser, growth in employment. For at some point, the economics of the positive relation between productivity and employment becomes more powerful than the short-term arithmetic negative relation that occurs during recessions.
In the longer run, advances in productivity are partly produced by investments in R&D and other innovations that generate new products and new processes. Both new products and new production methods typically require investments in both physical and human capital. They also stimulate the use of more workers of various skills that utilize the greater capital stock. This is why over longer time periods, productivity advances and robust labor and capital markets in different economies are strongly positively, not negatively, related. For this reason, the continuing advances in productivity in the US and elsewhere will at first limit and then reverse the falls in employment and rises in unemployment.
It is true that the total underemployment rate during this recession would be well above the official unemployment rate of 9.7%. Some estimates put total underemployment at over 16%, which includes individuals who are reluctantly working only part-time, and also persons who have given up looking for work. However, apples have to be compared with apples, and in judging this recession relative to prior ones, the same calculations have to be made for these past recessions as well. Exactly the same type of growth in underemployment was operating in these prior recessions, and especially for the severe recession of the 1930s. Perhaps the fractions of reluctant part timers and persons who stopped looking for work are greater during the present recession than recessions than say in 1973-75, or 1981-83, but I have not seen any demonstration of this. My guess is that whatever differences exist, they are not enough to reverse the ordering of the severity of different post-war recessions.
My overall conclusion is that productivity advances will lead the world out of the recession, and after a while toward a decent rate of growth in world GDP. These advances will occur even if the financial sector is not fully recovered from its crisis. As productivity advances continue at robust levels, that will stimulate the demand for labor, and begin to reduce unemployment and produce sizable rates of growth in employment.
Posted by Gary Becker at 2:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1853
Comments
Post a comment
2009年9月9日 星期三
熱門文章
-
配息率只有2% From: kuenhsieh 發表於 2013-1-29 16:55 原本認定的好公司也可能做假 可能需要從其他方面瞭解才行 這是兩三年前的事了 超大現代被指港交所史上最大欺詐者之一 @ 20...
-
這些光復高中學生已經成為滅絕人類的預備軍 他們才不是甚麼無知 相反的 他們是相當了解 是有自覺的選擇信奉希特勒 所以會有這種荒謬的 贊成納粹希特勒的滅絕猶太民族的說法 這在歐洲是犯法的 會被抓去關的 他們算是台灣高中版的納粹預備軍吧 以下是有台僑回台巧遇其中一...
-
美國早在2005年就在第一島鏈建立水下防線 中國威脅美日同盟變成美印日聯盟包圍網 >美國在2005年從日本南方的鹿兒島,經過大隅群島、宮古島、與那國島, 在台灣東部南轉巴士海峽, 建立了 「水下音響監聽系統」(Sound Surveillance Syste...
-
有些反動的鄉愿者說 要遺忘過去(228)向前看 可是更早之前的所謂南京大屠殺為何不遺忘呢 說提起228是撕裂族群 那提那些侵略歷史不是破壞中日關係嗎 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVSzbXZkzoo&feature=yout...
-
(轉)奧運問答 —— 問:為什麼中國射擊成績特別好? 答:因為都大家習慣睜隻眼閉隻眼; 問:為什麼中國舉重成績好? 答:因為國人承受著生命不能承受之重; 問:為什麼乒乓球會成為中國體育傳統強項? 答:因為中國人面對困難都善於推和擋。 問:為什麼中國跳水...
-
韓國瑜批議員設計讓他漏氣 鄉民嗆翻:怎不怪你隨便問就倒? 簡單講 就是延續韓邁電視辯論 揭穿韓草包反民主真面目在議會質詢的延長賽 並藉由議會質詢後的錄影與電視政論節目 延續炮轟火力 韓試圖延續選舉期間的直播與韓粉網攻反擊 卻適得其反 草包形象深入人心 議會路線與...
-
internetfreedom.org Taiwan proposes China-style block on overseas Internet services that infringe copyright thenextweb.co...
-
自願成為中國的羊:無聲的入侵,中國因素在澳洲 亞里士多德在政治學中早說過 一國之內的勢力集團會不自覺與自然地 施加影響力形塑該社會的統治力 同樣地在國際關係上 強權會自覺地與不自覺地施加影響力於國際關係 形塑該強權理想中的世界秩序 包括將他們的價值觀強加到他國身上...
-
theguardian 歐盟擴大對俄制裁 點名多位官員 Measures against Moscow looking likely after shooting down of plane, though deep divisions remain among 28 ...
-
胡佳是完全否定中共政權的正當性及統治的合法性 別忘記牛頓第三定律「作用力與反作用力定律」: 每一個作用力都對應著一個相等反抗的反作用力。 也就是說,兩個物體彼此施加於對方的力總是大小相等、方向相反。 中共施政的壓迫力必然產生相等相反的反作用力「反對勢力」 看起...