May. 29, 2008
On the economy
Strap in, this is going be a rough recovery ride
Steven Pearlstein
Suddenly, it seems, we're getting hit from all
directions.
Energy and food prices are soaring. The housing market
continues to collapse. Government revenue is falling, and taxes are rising.
Airlines are jacking up fares and fees while reducing service. Banks are
pulling credit lines. Auto companies are cutting production once again. Even
investment bankers are losing their jobs.
The tendency is to see these as separate developments,
each with its own causes and dynamic. Fundamentally, however, they are all
part of the same story — the story of the global economy purging itself of
large and unsustainable imbalances that for a time allowed many Americans to
think they were richer than they really were.
Most of us understand that an overabundance of cheap,
easy credit created a housing bubble that artificially inflated the price of
land and housing, produced too many homes and homeowners, and persuaded too
many Americans to dip into their home equity to support a lifestyle their
income could not sustain. Now that the bubble has burst, we are coming to
accept the reality of lower prices, reduced production, declining
homeownership rates and the wisdom that a house is not an ATM or a substitute
for a retirement fund.
Put another way, residential real estate is finding a
new equilibrium, that magical place in the economist's imagination where
supply and demand of houses and mortgages come back into some sort of rough
balance at a lower price.
But the thing to remember is that it's not just
residential real estate. The same factors that were behind the housing bubble
were also at work, to varying degrees, in the auto bubble, the commercial real
estate bubble, the travel bubble, the college tuition bubble, the retail
bubble, the Web 2.0 bubble and most recently the commodities bubble. Unlike
housing, which began losing steam two years ago, these other sectors have just
begun the painful process of repricing and finding a new balance between
supply and demand.
Take the case of the airline industry, which likes to
blame its woes on skyrocketing fuel prices.
While there's an ongoing debate about why the price of
oil has doubled over the past year, there is little doubt that the declining
dollar is a significant factor. The decline is the result of years of large
and growing U.S. trade deficits that should have caused the exchange rate to
adjust years ago but didn't because so many of our trading partners in Asia
and the Middle East were intent on linking their currencies to the dollar. In
the process of maintaining those dollar pegs and reinvesting those surpluses
in Treasury bonds and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac securities, they created a
surfeit of cheap credit that spawned all those bubbles.
Now that the process is reversing itself, the overvalued
dollar is being repriced. But in the short run, it has played havoc with the
cost of commodities, most of which are priced in dollars. Producers have
raised their dollar prices to prevent a decline in the global purchasing power
from their commodities sales. At the same time, some of the excess credit that
financed mortgages and corporate takeovers has been shifted to commodity
speculation, turbocharging the swings in prices of everything from corn
futures to jet fuel. At some point, that speculative bubble will burst and
energy prices will plunge. When things finally settle down, the new
equilibrium price is almost certain to be well above where it was last year at
this time.
That said, jet fuel is hardly the airlines' only
problem. The reality is that for too many years, airlines have sold too many
tickets at prices that failed to reflect the real cost of providing the
service passengers want and expect. That includes such things as cleaning
planes; handling reservations, check-ins and baggage without undue waiting;
serving a decent meal when necessary; and treating passengers fairly when
flights are canceled. But they also include costs that may be less obvious,
like keeping up with preventive maintenance, hedging fuel costs, paying a
decent wage to front-line employees, investing in modern air traffic control
systems, and paying a price that reflects the true value of scarce air space
and landing rights.
Airline executives will say that if they were to charge
enough to reflect all these costs, they would have many fewer passengers.
That's the point: A sustainable equilibrium will inevitably involve a smaller
industry with fewer planes, fewer flights, fewer passengers and fewer
employees.
And what about that $199 round-trip fare from Washington
to L.A.? Sad to say, it was no less a part of the previous economic mirage
than the no-doc subprime loans, Google at $750 a share and takeover deals
financed at 80 percent leverage.
What I've described is a double whammy for American
households: the slower growth that comes with downsizing a number of key
industries that expanded as a result of the credit bubble, along with rising
prices for food, energy, health care and almost everything imported. And you
can add a third blow, this one from government.
Across the country, state and local governments are
already hip-deep into budget crises in response to declining revenue from
property assessments and real estate transfers. Here in Washington, a dramatic
dropoff in revenue from business profits and capital gains has wiped out any
hope of reducing federal operating deficits that, under the likeliest
political and economic scenarios, will exceed $500 billion a year for as far
as the eye can see.
This is another example of an unsustainable equilibrium
that has roots in the trade deficit and the credit bubble. Despite the happy
talk you might be hearing from the presidential candidates, it presents
Americans with a stark and unpleasant choice.
One option is to raise taxes and leave less money for
private spending, which is what many state and local governments have begun to
do. The other is to accept lower levels of government service and subsidies,
which inevitably will lower the incomes of some households while forcing
others to go without services or pay for them privately. Either way, it
amounts to a lower standard of living than we thought we had achieved.
Is all this the end of the world? For the richest
country on the planet, certainly not. But it does represent the end of a
decade or more during which Americans were permitted and even encouraged by
the rest of the world — and by their own leaders — to live way beyond
their means. As a result, the United States has gone from being the largest
creditor nation to the world's largest debtor. For the first time since the
early 1980s, Americans will have to endure several years of uncomfortably slow
growth and uncomfortably high inflation as the U.S. economy regains its
balance and creates a foundation for more solid and sustainable growth.
Steven Pearlstein is a
business columnist for The Washington Post. Reach him at pearl steins
@wash post.com