Conspicuous Correlation: December 2007
In light of recent increases to consumer prices and declining retail sales, I’ve reworked my analysis of the possible correlation between falling home values and declining consumption of the most “discretionary” retail items.On a “nominal” basis, there appeared to be “rough correlation” between strong home value appreciation and strong retail spending preceding the housing bust and an even stronger correlation when home values started to decline.
The following charts show the initial analysis plotting the year-over-year change to an aggregate series consisting of the primary discretionary retail sales categories that I termed the “discretionary” retail sales series and the year-over-year change to the S&P/Case-Shiller Composite home price index since 1993 and since 2000.
One problem with this initial analysis is that both retail sales and the S&P/Case-Shiller Composite index are reported in “nominal” (i.e. non-inflation adjusted) terms and thus result in a somewhat skewed view especially for the retail sales data.
In fact, the year-over-year change to “nominal” discretionary retail sales has been positive for seven of the last eight months while the year-over-year change to “real” discretionary retail sales has been negative for twelve straight months (see the following chart).
Given the anecdotal accounts of homeowners drawing equity out of their homes with refi’s and HELOCs and using the proceeds to buy consumer goods, it could be interesting to attempt to “shift” the retail spending in time as the decline to home values would surely precede a pullback in consumer spending but for now I’ll leave it aligned and work on the shifting in a later post.
In past posts I attempted to build a 12 month moving Pearson’s correlation series in order to demonstrate the true correlation between the rate of change of both discretionary retail sales and home values but although the movements may be coincidental, they really share no actual binding correlation.
I may dust off the correlation chart in future posts but for now let’s just assume that both home values and discretionary retail sales are not doing very well, especially in “real” terms and the correlation is at least coincidental with the overall unhealthy state of the economy.
Labels: Bernanke, economy recession, fed rate cut, Federal Reserve, housing bubble, retail sales
Copyright © 2009
PaperEconomy Blog - www.papereconomy.com
All Rights Reserved
Disclaimer
PaperEconomy Blog - www.papereconomy.com
All Rights Reserved
Disclaimer








5 Comments:
So how did this economic horror story start? And what's the solution? Do we go libertarian in an effort to force people to be more rational, by getting rid of the safety net and eliminating moral hazard? Or do we beef up regulation so keep people from hurting themselves?
There are other solutions too. I'm just mentioning the likely Republican / Democrat approaches.
By
Dagger, at 1:47 PM
dagger,
Well I think, in the big picture, we are really just seeing the result of many years (15+ years) of almost unbroken prosperity fueling entrenched systemic optimism.
Easy money, the consumption binge and the housing bubble are to me just a manifestation of our society not remembering that our economy doesn't always grow.
Look at the investment and operational decisions of any company (particularly in consumer products and services and retail) for the last 5 years and you see mistakes made that were totally analogous to the mistakes the average consumer made when straying outside the bounds of prudent behavior and financial planning.
It's all the same problem... assumptions of stability and prosperity and not enough planning for risk.
On the topic of government response, I'm sort of on the fence.
On one hand my gut feel is if we are to really cherish and believe in the notion free markets we need to let this washout happen unfettered.
Let the market clear and try our best to sop up the aftermath.
On the other hand I believe that the lesson from the Great Depression is that the free markets are brutal and in some cases simply don't clear rationally (something akin to getting it irrationally wrong on the upside)... If things slide too far they can simply writhe around down low for many years.
So who really knows... maybe the best response is to let the markets attempt to clear.. as unfettered as Washington will allow and then when things look really bleak... step in with smart Keynesian fiscal policy to help lift the average person out of the dumper.
By
SoldAtTheTop, at 3:23 PM
SoldAtTheTop,
I agree that the last 15 (or maybe 22) years of prosperity have rewarded economic recklessness (and punished caution), and thus encouraged bubbles. And I think this prosperity has been fueled by govt and consumer debt, technological innovation, and changes in business ethics.
And I agree that we should try to keep the economy as nimble and unregulated as possible, but I think we should acknowledge that this freedom has costs in terms of destruction of the institutions and relationships that are the fabric of society. The destruction of secular morality.
These costs are almost always ignored. Except maybe by those who want to replace secular morality with something more feudal and religious.
To me it seems like debt-fueled prosperity is false prosperity, and that debt is like a sickness that encourages bubbles which in turn encourage more debt. And that govt deficit spending is probably at the heart of it. I'm not sure how govt debt affects consumer debt -- govt debt should drive up the cost of borrowing and discourage consumer borrowing -- but clearly that has not happened. It's like there's some multiplier effect, where govt debt puts more cash in consumer hands which makes them feel richer so they borrow more. Which increases GDP which encourages more govt debt.
So what's the answer? Maybe the Fed should have the power to adjust the marginal tax rate every year in order to broadly balance the budget? Maybe they should be given other tools to discourage non-productive consumer debt? I don't like handing such enormous power to unelected officials, but I can't see any better solution off the top of my head.
By
Dagger, at 5:38 PM
Hi,
Today I have visited your blog and found some quality information. I think you have maintained a great blog. That's why we would like to exchange links with your blog.
My blogs are : http://financemedia.wordpress.com/
http://moneyadvice.wordpress.com/
Please send me your link info.
Waiting for your reply.
With Best Regards,
charls
By
Charls King, at 7:26 PM
dagger,
I'm no expert in philosophy but I have to concur in so much as it appears to me (somewhat sadly I should add) that the average American is living a lie.
We have taken financial engineering, lightly regulated markets and conspicuous consumption and pushed them to the extreme.
Individuals are ultimately responsible for their actions but by supplying the booze (easy debt) and the bad ideas (live beyond means/get rich quick/trade up ideals/conspicuous resilient consumption) our system has encouraged recklessness.
Look at the competitive movement to "luxury" seen in the past decade... everyone appears to expect granite counter-tops, stainless steel appliances and big flat screen TVs.
Every city has seen a boom in condo construction but not just run of the mill units... luxury lifestyle lofts with all the best high end treatments.
If you can truly afford these things... more power to you but for the average American it's just debt leveraged excess...
There has been so much said of the 50s-early 60s era "keeping up with the Joneses" mentality but I think our current cohort of competitive conspicuous consumers has to be off the charts comparatively.
I think, unfortunately the real answer is a total washout.
A not so gentle reminder that our prosperity is earned not mandated or engineered.
That we are all responsible for our actions and that a healthy respect for utility and living within our means is the true virtue.
By
SoldAtTheTop, at 1:41 AM
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home