1 / 43

FIN 30220: Macroeconomics

FIN 30220: Macroeconomics. Using Economic Data. “There are three kinds of lies; Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics” - Mark Twain. Question #1: What are you trying to measure?. Example: Poverty in the US. Great Society Programs Started. “War on poverty” declared. 1964.

davidcdavis
Download Presentation

FIN 30220: Macroeconomics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. FIN 30220: Macroeconomics Using Economic Data

  2. “There are three kinds of lies; Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics” - Mark Twain

  3. Question #1: What are you trying to measure? Example: Poverty in the US Great Society Programs Started “War on poverty” declared 1964 *Source: US Census

  4. Poverty Rates in the US by county *U.S. Census Bureau

  5. Poverty Rates Around the World Problem: Different Countries Use Different Standards!! *Source: CIA World Fact book

  6. How do we define poverty?

  7. Poverty in the United States was defined by Mollie Orshansky of the SSA in 1964 as 3 times the cost of the Dept. of Agriculture’s “Low cost food plan” 2017 POVERTY GUIDELINES That number has been indexed by inflation every year

  8. USDA Food Plans: 1964 (Poverty Line in 1964) (Approximate Poverty Line Today) Average Annual Inflation Rate (1964-2017) = 4.8%

  9. Food Budget as a percentage of household income: 1964 Lower Income Households spent around 33% on Food in 1964

  10. Food Budget as a percentage of household income: Current 16.5% for the bottom fifth of the income distribution No Family Spends Anything Near 33% on Food Today!!!

  11. Food makes up around 13%

  12. USDA Food Cost 2017 Suppose we use current food prices and the current budget share (Poverty Line in 2017?) Assuming Food is 16.5% of the overall budget

  13. Actual Calculation So, which is it and why should we care? 9.3% Difference Redefined Household Budget (Current food prices)

  14. A more important question: What is it that really influences our well being? VS. The Griffins have a household income of $45,000. Median income is Quahog is $85,000 The Simpsons have a household income of $35,000. Median income is Springfield is $40,000 Which of these two families do you think is happier?

  15. The Europeans use a relative poverty measure that defines poverty as a certain percentage of median household income 40% of Median US Household Income = $22,400 Median US Household Income = $56,000

  16. Altering the definition of poverty can make a big difference when comparing across countries!! It also makes a big difference when looking across time periods!

  17. The common international poverty line has in the past been roughly $1 a day. In 2015, the World Bank came out with a revised figure of $1.90 a day. Percentage of Population Living on Less that $1.90/day *Source: United Nations

  18. Principle #2: How is your variable measured? Where does the data come from? Example: U.S. Unemployment 1991 Recession 2001 Recession 2007 Recession Current 4.3%

  19. Each month, the Department of Labor surveys 60,000 households. Each household is asked a series of questions: 1) “Are you currently working?” (Note: no mention of part time or full time) YES You are employed (152.9 Million) No 2) “Have you looked for a job in the past 30 days?” YES You are unemployed (6.86 Million) No Unemployment Rate (UR) Unemployed = Labor Force You are not in the labor force (94.79 Million) 6.86 = .043 (4.3%) = 152.9 + 6.86

  20. Main problems with the Household Survey • underemployment(those that would like to work full time, but only work part time) • The “discouraged worker effect”: Those that have given up trying to find a job are counted as not in the labor force rather than unemployed • Selection bias: those that are unemployed are more likely to answer the survey. • Moral hazard: due to unemployment insurance, it is difficult to tell how hard individuals are trying to find work

  21. Over the same month, the Department of Labor surveys 400,000 businesses and asks one question. “How many employees are currently on your payroll?” (Establishment survey) Total Non-Farm Payrolls (146.6 Million) Wait a minute, that’s not what the household survey reported??? Which is it ??? “Are you currently working?” (Household Survey) YES You are employed (non-agriculture) (151.2 Million)

  22. The two surveys track each other reasonably well, but there are noticeable differences.

  23. Household Survey vs. Establishment Survey The household survey includes self employed workers and private household workers. The establishment survey does not. The household survey counts people on unpaid leave as employed – the establishment survey does not. The household survey only counts people over the age of 16 – the establishment survey is not limited by age.

  24. The Establishment Survey is that it will often times “Double Count” Jobs Suppose you quit your job at company A and find a new job at company B – if this is done in the same payroll period (most payrolls are bi-weekly) you will be counted twice!! No Turnover Turnover Pay Period Pay Period Job at Company A Job at Company B count = 1 payroll job count = 2 payroll jobs In months with high job turnover, the establishment survey will overstate employment.

  25. Principle #3:Is your variable in terms of current prices or fixed prices Example: The Top 10 All Time Grossing Films (in Millions – US) • Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015): $936 • Avatar (2009): $760 • Titanic (1997): $658 • Jurassic World (2015): $652 • Marvel’s The Avengers (2012): $623 • The Dark Knight (2008) $534 • Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016) $532 • Beauty and the Beast (2017) $504 • Finding Dory (2016) $486 • Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace (1999): $474

  26. Nominal Variables are in terms of a current dollars. Real vs. Nominal Variables Real variables are in terms of purchasing power. Star Wars – The Force Awakens Star Wars – A New Hope 2016 Movie Ticket = $8.43 CPI = 238 1977 Movie Ticket = $2.23 CPI = 60 238 Consumer Price Index 60 1983 Prices in 1977 were approximately ¼ of what they are today, so every dollar earned in 1977 had 4 times the purchasing power of a dollar earned today

  27. Inflation adjusting corrects for this by adjusting each year’s nominal grosses to reflect a common year’s dollars (i.e. we convert each year’s nominal grosses to reflect dollars with equal purchasing power) Target year Price Real X = Nominal X Current Year Price Target Year CPI (2000) 1977 $s 2016 $s 175 Real Gross = $460M 175 Real Gross 60 = $936M 238 Current Year CPI (2016) = $1,341M = $688M ( 2000 Dollars) ( 2000 Dollars) These two dollar figures are comparable because they represent the same year’s dollars!

  28. Let’s try this again….let’s convert both grosses to current (2016) dollars Target year Price Real X = Nominal X Current Year Price 1977 $s Target Year CPI (2000) 2016 $s 238 Real Gross = $460M 238 Real Gross 60 = $936M 238 Current Year CPI (2016) = $1,824M = $936M ( 2016 Dollars) ( 2016 Dollars) These two dollar figures are comparable because they represent the same year’s dollars!

  29. The Top 10 All Time Grossing Films– Inflation Adjusted (Millions of 2016 Dollars) • Gone With the Wind (1939): $1,739 • Star Wars Episode IV(1977): $1,533 • The Sound of Music(1965): $1,226 • ET: The Extraterrestrial(1982): $1,221 • Titanic (1997): $1,166 • The Ten Commandments (1956): $1,128 • Jaws (1975): $1,103 • Dr. Zhivago (1965): $1,069 • The Exorcist (1973): $952 • Snow White (1937): $948 *Note: This is done using movie ticket prices only: Gone With the Wind (1939) Nominal Gross: $46,470,300 1939 Ticket Price: $.23 2016 Ticket Price: $8.61 **Note: Star Wars: The Force Awakens is currently #11 *** All eight Star Wars Movies are in the top 100 earning a total of close to $7B !!! (2016 $) (1939 $)

  30. Principle #4: Annualizing Example: Calculating Inflation in the US The Bureau of Labor Statistics Calculates the Price Level on monthly basis, and reports inflation on a monthly basis. The Bureau of Economic Analysis Calculates the Price Level on quarterly basis, but reports inflation on an annual basis. Inflation (2017Q2) = .80% Inflation (2017July) =.10% These numbers are not comparable!

  31. Principle #4: Annualizing Example: Calculating Inflation in the US The Bureau of Economic Analysis Calculates the Price Level on quarterly basis, but reports inflation on an annualbasis. 2017Q1: 112.100 2017Q2: 112.327 Without Logs Using Logs To Annualize

  32. Principle #4: Annualizing Example: Calculating Inflation in the US The Bureau of Labor Statistics Calculates the Price Level on monthly basis, and reports inflation on a monthly basis. June 2017: 243.790 July 2017: 244.048 Without Logs Using Logs To Annualize

  33. Principle #5: Economic data can be can be broken into 3 components: • Trend (many years) • Business Cycle (1-5 years) • Seasonal (Months) Suppose that we were to plot GDP over time. It would look something like this. Trend GDP Seasonal Cycle Business Cycle Its important to understand where we are in the various cycles! Time

  34. Example: Tax Cuts, Tax Revenues and “VooDoo Economics” The Bush Tax Cuts of 2001 & 2003 lowered marginal tax rates across the board, lowered the capital gains tax, eliminated the estate tax, and lowered the “marriage penalty The tax cut was advertised as “the largest tax cut in history”

  35. What do we mean by the “cost” of a tax cut, anyways? Suppose that the Griffin family has a household income of $50,000. Currently, the income tax rate is 20% of all income earned Under the current tax code, the Griffins pay $10,000 per year in Taxes. The cost of the tax cut is the $5,000 in lost revenues If the government cuts the tax rate to 10%, then the Griffin’s tax bill falls to $5,000 By this measure, the Bush Tax cuts have a price tag of around $130 Billion per year!!

  36. Let’s take a look at previous marginal tax rate changes to put the Bush tax cut in a historical context. Kennedy 1964 Reagan 1981 Coolidge 1925 Bush 2001/2003 Wilson 1917 FDR 1933 *Source: Congressional Budget Office

  37. Given an income distribution in 1964, 1981, and 2001/2003, we can estimate the per year “cost” of the three major tax cuts What’s the problem with comparing these numbers?

  38. When expressed in real terms as a percentage of GDP, the Bush tax cuts aren’t so big after all! Kennedy 1964 Cost (in 1964 dollars): $11.5B CPI: 30.9 Real GDP: $2998.6B 175.1 $11.5B = $67.6B (2.25% of GDP) 30.9 Reagan 1981 Cost (in 1981 dollars): $38.3B CPI: 87.0 Real GDP: $5,291.7B 175.1 $38.3B = $79.9B (1.5% of GDP) 87.0 Bush 2001/2003 Cost (in 2003 dollars): $134.6B CPI: 175.1 Real GDP: $10,301B 175.1 $134.6B =$134.65B (1.3% of GDP) 175.1

  39. Consider the following example. The Griffin family has a household income of $50,000. Currently, the income tax rate is 20%. Under the current tax code, the Griffins pay $10,000 per year in Taxes. The drop in the tax rate caused revenues to increase rather than decrease! Suppose that a drop in the marginal rate encourages Lois Griffin to go back to work. With the two income earners, the Griffin family income rises to $120,000. At the 10% rate, their tax rises to $12,000 Could this happen?

  40. Tax Revenues = (Tax Rate) (Tax Base) The basic logic behind the Laffer Curve is that the tax base should be negatively related to the tax rate. Tax Revenues Is there evidence of a Laffer curve in practice? Tax Rate 0% Revenue Maximizing Rate 100%

  41. Tax Revenues Tax Rate 0% Revenue Maximizing Rate 100% Do we see evidence of a Laffer Curve? Source: Congressional Budget Office

  42. Let’s take a look at previous marginal tax rate changes to put the Bush tax cut in a historical context. Kennedy 1964 Reagan 1981 Bush 2001/2003 Recession Expansion *Source: Congressional Budget Office

  43. The Laffer effect of a tax cut should affect the trend, but not the cycle… New Tax Code GDP Old Tax Code This is what we have measured This is what we should be measuring Time In other words, we have overstated the Laffer effect in the previous slides

More Related