Will Prices Increase Once Businesses Reopen?

It is hard to say with any certainty, though my best guess would be no in the short run and probably in the long-run. In the short-run, say, five to 18 months, the aggregated price level will likely experience very little inflation. The long run, however, might be a different story, especially with healthcare.

Price levels should increase with the massive increase in the money supply (liquidity) and government spending. The reason that happens is that these mechanisms mainly increase the demand for goods and services. By printing money, the money ends up in wallets, and these folks now feel as if they have “extra” money to spend on things.

Though this works on paper, it’s harder to see play out in real life. It all comes down to whether individuals and firms will see these new dollars as “extra” or if they decide to save or pay off debts instead. So, it all depends on the “velocity” of money, or how quickly money exchanges in the economy. After the Financial Crisis of 2008/09, we didn’t see an uptick, despite all this liquidity in the marketplace. Granted, the Great Recession was the result of a credit crisis, not a liquidity crisis, like it was during the Great Depression. Nonetheless, banks were afraid to lend, and people were afraid to spend. 

The same thing might happen this time around. Just because businesses begin to reopen, doesn’t mean that people will all of a sudden flock to the stores and go back to spending as usual. It is starting to look like there will be a prolonged return to normality, which may take several years for us to figure out the “new” normal. There’s been extensive discussion of the “shape” of the recovery going from U-shaped, to V-shaped, to W-shaped, and now to the Nike “swoosh” shape.

So, when thinking about whether or not prices will increase, we have to analyze what has been happening on both the demand side and the supply side of different industries. 

Technology – decreasing now, decreasing later

The technology sector is poised to be able to make huge gains from this crisis. For one, we have seen many of the tech companies see windfall profits as we have transitioned to online and remote work. These industries can undoubtedly increase their prices, and we would pay them. However, these firms have low marginal costs. That is, any pricing over $1 is profitable for many established tech companies. 

Though these companies can increase their prices, it makes more sense to try and retain all of the new customers they have recently acquired.  

Automobiles – decreasing now, increasing later

Cars and trucks are a good indicator of what’s to come. New cars, used cars, rentals, everything is down to record lows. Demand has decreased substantially. Moreover, “plans to purchases a vehicle in the next five months declined 34% in April.” There is also an excess supply of used cars. So prices for automobiles have seen a substantial decrease. When businesses begin to reopen, we may see some folks racing to their nearest dealership to take advantage of the deals. These consumers will likely reduce the excess supply and increase prices, but not any higher than they were pre-COVID.

In fact, due to COVID perhaps restructuring the labor force a little bit, there may be an ample supply of unemployed workers looking for jobs, which may push wages down, and thus, allow for cars to sell at a lower price. Since it costs less to make cars, we can charge less to sell them.

Energy – decreasing now, increasing later

On the other hand, we are experiencing meager prices for oil and gas. With such low prices, this may increase the demand for cars, particularly trucks and SUVs. It all depends on how long we have the supply glut. 

As airlines pick back up and we start driving to work and all over the place, we’ll likely see the prices rebound. But, as mentioned, this will be a slow process, especially since a good part of the oil price decline has been a supply glut that was unrelated to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Food – Increasing now, decreasing later

Food supply chains have seen an enormous disruption, namely those that deal with both grocery stores and restaurants. Meatpacking firms have experienced a detrimental blow due to COVID infections, reducing the supply, and pushing prices up. Moreover, packaging requirements make it hard to merely direct food that was to be sent to restaurants over to grocery stores. As a result, beef prices are at record highs. Chicken is still relatively steady but pushing for higher prices. Eggs have seen a considerable price increase. Pork has also seen a rise. 

Furthermore, the demand for foods that don’t go to restaurants has increased substantially. Think macaroni and cheese, frozen foods, canned goods, and snacks (I’ve been buying way more Oreos as a result of the lockdowns). These foods are experiencing an increase in prices now but may see a reduction as people start going back to work.

As the meat processing plants begin to recoup their labor force, the supply of processed meat will increase again and push prices down. Importantly, as schools reopen, this will help soften the food glut we are now experiencing, especially at lower prices. Hopefully, some of the regulatory barriers that have softened to allow the supply chain to redirect food to grocery stores will help. 

Something that may come out of this COVID crisis might be investments in further automating the food processing system. So, this will likely also reduce prices. 

Education – I dunno

Universities are suffering severe losses in tuition revenue. Usually, recessions cause the demand for a college education to increase. Moreover, easy access to tuition assistance in the form of subsidized and unsubsidized loans flame that demand. On top of that, as all levels of government allocate more funds toward unemployment and COVID relief, this will reduce public funds that are allocated toward education, thus pushing tuition prices up even more.

However, this time it might be different. If universities have to transition to more online classes, enrollments will decline. We already see it. People go to college, not only to get a degree but for the college experience. How long will it take to get fans back into the Doak football stadium? With such low enrollments, the rate of tuition growth will likely slow down if it doesn’t go negative. 

Moreover, with the transition to online learning, how many firms will be happy with certifications that are obtained outside of the traditional university setting? 

Healthcare – increasing now, increasing later

I can’t see any reason healthcare costs will decrease. COVID-19 has not only hurt the healthcare system, but it has also caused other treatments to be delayed. This “pent-up” demand will unleash and push health care prices through the roof. Because of the lockdowns and the halting of “elective” procedures, health care consumers have delayed prescriptions, treatments, and other health care services. This will cause health care issues down the line and will flood the system again. 

We will likely see this play out most tangibly in our insurance premiums in the coming year. 

Housing – decrease now, decrease later, and maybe increase after a while

Housing prices are predicted to fall a few percentage points in 2020 and will probably not increase until the end of 2021. Lower prices and friendly interest rates are a boon to buyers. But, buyers have experienced a tremendous loss in income. Perhaps, many homeowners have attempted to refinance their homes at lower interest rates. Granted due to COVID lockdowns, the refinancing process has been a hassle for many. But, once businesses start reopening, we’ll see these refinances happen quite rapidly. The uptick in refinances will put upward pressure on interest rates which should slow down housing sales even further.

In sum

Indeed, a reopening of businesses may increase the demand for those goods and services that were temporarily shut down. However, depending on the gravity of the loss of income, the demand increase for these “nonessentials” may not be enough to increase prices. Prices should stay relatively low relative to pre-COVID levels and will likely increase at the tail end of the swoosh. 

Master Chefs Grow Slower Than New Cooks

Inspired by a podcast at MacroMusings, let’s talk about growth. 

Alex Tabarrok and Tyler Cowen, co-authors of a couple of excellent textbooks on the principles of economics, discuss what they mean by “cutting edge” growth and “catching up” growth. 

The reason for this distinction arises because of the claim that particular institutions promote economic growth. However, we see countries like Libya, Cambodia, and China experience very high economic growth with institutions that are very different from the United States. Libya and Cambodia are two of the most corrupt countries in the world, while China is ranked 87 out of 180 in the Corruptions Perceptions Index. They claim to be “democracies” yet, there is little political stability. China is not a democracy at all and still boasts one of the highest growth rates in the world. 

There’s something missing in the formula. Tabarrok attributes this phenomenon to the two distinctions of economic growth: “cutting edge” v. “catching up”. The United States has strong institutions such as political stability, relatively free markets, private property rights, little (blatant) corruption, the rule of law, and so forth. These institutions foster economic growth. But the growth rates are slower in the US because economic growth has to come from innovations. 

I’ve caught a few episodes of the latest Master Chef, and it got me thinking about growth in the kitchen. Imagine you are 20 years old and you have no idea how to boil water, let alone cook a simple scrambled eggs breakfast. How long do you think it would take to learn how to cook the staples like chicken, rice, beans, pasta, eggs, even steak? A week? Maybe two?

Actually, not that long. 

This short time is “catching up” growth. You don’t need to experiment with foods and figure out how to cook them for the first time. You simply follow time-tested and established recipes step-by-step to learn how to cook. If you imitate how somebody cooks any of those staples, you’ll learn how to do it very quickly. You can pick up different techniques pretty quickly. Like, if you heat a pan and put raw food on it, it will magically become cooked. Surprise!

But what happens when you are a solid cook? Yeah, like when family won’t kick you out of the kitchen when you decide to cook or when friends want to come over when they hear you are making a meal. Your ability to improve starts to slow down. You start to experiment with different flavors, cuisines and food items. Sooner or later, “elevating” your dishes become hard to tell. 

The finalists on the last few shows of Master Chef are all cooks who can make a delicious meal. They are pretty much at the top of their cooking game. Their improvements are minimal. Host Gordon Ramsay is all about the “finesse.” It’s not merely about getting something tasty on a plate. It’s about the presentation, combination of flavors, and creativity that goes into the culinary experience. Ramsay and the other judges critique these dishes for points most of us don’t care about. 

Pushing the envelope in the kitchen is very slow, in part due to the trial and error process necessary to come up with something good and new to the world. This is “cutting edge” growth, creating new ideas and products that add value to the world. The United States’ slow growth is attributed to the fact that its growth comes from innovations, not merely imitating others. 

Coming up with new dishes is a much slower process than learning how to make Granny’s home-cooked meals. China is quickly learning all of Uncle Sam’s dishes. At some point, their growth will slow down, and both countries will have to come up with new recipes. And, that’s easier said than done, just ask the Master Chefs. 

Why Thanos Shouldn’t Have Skipped His Macroeconomics Class

Watching Avengers: Infinity War, I felt the pain and guilt of Tony Stark as he saw Peter Parker disintegrate. My heart broke when my favorite doctor found no possible way to defeat Thanos, and just accepted the fact that he, together with half of the universe, would turn into dust. That’s why I’m looking forward to a possible time-travel solution in the upcoming movie, Avengers: End Game. But if they really want to stop Thanos and save the universe, Captain America, Ant Man, and the surviving superhero crew should time travel to when Thanos was a teenager and convince him to not skip his macroeconomics class. If only he had learned about the Solow Model, things would have been very different.

[Be advised: spoiler alert!] Thanos claims he actually wanted to save the universe by wiping out half of its population – to make sure what happened to Titan, his homeworld, would not happen to the rest. He believes overpopulation will lead to self-destruction. So why not simplify things and give half the universe a better chance at surviving?

Thanos probably slept through most of his macroeconomic class and only woke up for the Malthusian growth model. In 1798, Thomas Robert Malthus published An Essay on the Principles of Population, in which he claimed populations tend to increase at a faster rate than food production. This was a challenge for future generations – who would have to fight over resources or starve. This is what the Malthusian growth model predicts will happen, and thus, Malthus concludes, population growth should be controlled.

Enter the Industrial Revolution. In his model, Malthus disregarded technological changes and capital accumulation as a way to improve people’s standard of living. Thanks to genetically modified organisms (GMOs), farm tractors, and advanced irrigation systems, for example, food production is booming despite the drastic increase in population size and limited land space. Luckily, in 1956, Robert Solow published A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth, in which he developed a model that accounted for those changes.

The model was named after its creator, and his macroeconomics contribution resulted in Solow winning the 1987 Nobel Prize in Economics. The Solow growth model explains long-run economic growth by taking into consideration capital accumulation, population growth, and technological improvements. Contrary to what the Malthusian model predicts, the Solow model shows that, in the long run, a country’s standard of living will continue to improve if all total factors of production increase, which includes labor, capital, and technology.

Based on the Solow growth model, Thanos made a huge mistake. In the long run, each world is worse off as there will be plenty of capital but not enough labor to turn it into output. Growth has been compromised and the population left behind might actually be worse off! Luckily, we haven’t reached the end of the story yet. Let’s hope in the next Avengers movie, our favorite Marvel superheroes can teach Thanos a thing or two about the Solow growth model.

Barnes & Noble or Barnes & No More?

By Jessica Feese (Creighton University)

Anyone looking to buy a bookstore? Recent news has it Barnes & Noble is on the lookout to sell. Barnes & Noble enthusiasts may treat this as the end of the world, but just look at the facts: Barnes & Noble (B&N) is a company that sells elastic goods. In other words, there are a lot of substitutes to the company, books are a luxury, and time is money. And demand for books from Barnes & Noble has been slowly decreasing. As proven by Fortune.com, “the company’s market value is around $400 million, down about 80% from its 2006 all-time high about $2 billion”.   Continue reading “Barnes & Noble or Barnes & No More?”

I Charged Too Little to Mow the Lawn

After the financial crisis of 2008 and 2009, my friend and I decided to start a landscaping business. Neither of us had gone to landscaping school nor did we have a particular affinity for lawn-mowers. (At least, not yet.) But hey, we thought, we live in Florida, grass grows like crazy most of the year, and, like haircuts, lawn mowing is pretty recession-proof. More importantly, we would be “business owners” instead of restaurant waiters. Continue reading “I Charged Too Little to Mow the Lawn”

The Truth Behind Facebook Arguments

I confess: I’m addicted to the battlefield that is the Facebook comments section. Maybe I need to go see a psychiatrist, but the moment I discover a comment thread where two wildly different ideas clash, my interest is immediately piqued. I even enjoy a healthy dose of schadenfreude whenever a conversation devolves into personal attacks. Continue reading “The Truth Behind Facebook Arguments”

Selena Gomez Makes $550,000 for Each Sponsored Instagram Post

If you mosey on over to Selena’s Instagram page, you’ll see that she is sporting a ton of Puma gear. According to E! News, she signed a two year deal worth over $30 million. Kim Kardashian is another all-star advertiser earning $500,000 per post. Cristiano Ronaldo carries a whopping 104 million followers and also cashes in at around $400,000 per sponsored post.

Continue reading “Selena Gomez Makes $550,000 for Each Sponsored Instagram Post”

Do Financial Regulations Decrease Financial Literacy?

Ask the average person about her smartphone, and the odds are better than even that she’ll be able to recite the make, model, and salient features such as battery life and camera quality. She may even be in a position to rank the phone relative to other handsets and to make a recommendation as to whether it offers good value for money. Continue reading “Do Financial Regulations Decrease Financial Literacy?”

Why Big data Won’t Save Central Planners from the Knowledge Problem

Among statisticians, economists, and business executives, “Big Data” is all the rage. Large and detailed data sets that, until recently, couldn’t even be stored on a computer are now managed and analyzed using innovative statistical techniques. Hopes are high that these advances will improve scientists’ ability to predict human behavior. Some enthusiasts even speculate that Big Data will render markets obsolete, enabling central planning of the economy. Big Data is more than a buzzword, but its potential is often wildly overstated. Continue reading “Why Big data Won’t Save Central Planners from the Knowledge Problem”