The skirmishes in the macro wars are getting dirtier. More recently, the debate on inflation has pitted #TeamTransitory and its detractors—I’ve seen the other side described as #TeamPermanent and #TeamSustained—in a mud-slinging and, often emotionally charged, spat. I suspect that #TeamTransitory will win, eventually—whatever that means—though I also think this side of the debate has most to answer for in terms of the deteriorating debate. The rules seem to change as the consensus-beating inflation prints roll in. As I as explained here, it is unreasonable to term all versions of the world in which inflation is not making a new high on a monthly basis, as a transitory. More importantly, however, the checkmate-like rebuttal to anyone arguing that rates could and should go higher that they must be in favour of higher unemployment is particularly odd to me. The question we need to ask it seems is whether there are conditions under which policy tightening—both fiscal and monetary—to rein in demand are optimal or desirable, in an economic sense, even if it means, presumably, unemployment going up. The answer is; yes.
Read MoreDepending on the wording, a search on Google Scholar for papers and research on the link between macroeconomics and demographics yields anywhere between 20,000 and 100,000 results. This is an unhelpful start for someone looking to explore and understand the field. This essay aims to rectify this issue by tracing the origins of the life cycle hypothesis (LCH)—ground zero for linking macroeconomics and demographics—through a close inspection of the 1950s literature that gave birth to the theory. It is motivated by the idea that anyone who wishes to explore this topic needs to have a firm grasp of the original material. A lot can be said for getting the basics right, and this essay is an ode to that idea.
Read MoreThe sharp fall in oil prices was the most interesting market news last week. It sends a signal that investors are waking up the fact that the brittle OPEC output deal always was going to be challenged by U.S. producers restarting their drills as prices rose. I am no expert, but this does not come as a surprise to me. OPEC is an unstable alliance, and U.S. producers are governed by one thing and one thing only, price. Whatever detente exists in the global oil market, I am pretty sure that it is a fragile one. A significant leg lower in oil could be significant for a number of reasons. It could herald the speedy end of the "reflation trade," which would suit me well. But if it morphs into something more dramatic, we're back to the story of stress in energy high yield debt, default risks, and perhaps liquidity/fund closure risk in the broader corporate bond market. I am not sure that would suit the portfolio one bit.
Read More