FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Predicting the Next Recession and Other Ways to Waste Your Time


The people who completely missed the housing bubble, the collapse of which sank the economy in 2008 and gave us the Great Recession, are again busy telling us about the next recession on the way. The latest item that they want us to be very worried about is an inversion of the yield curve. There has been an inversion of the yield curve before nearly every prior recession and we have never had an inversion of the yield curve without seeing a recession in the next two years.

If you have no idea what an inversion of the yield curve is, that probably means you’re a normal person with better things to do with your time. But for economists, and especially those who monitor financial markets closely, this can be a big deal.

An inverted yield curve refers to the relationship between shorter- and longer-term interest rates. Typically, a longer-term interest rate, say the interest rate you would get on a 30-year bond, is higher than what you would get from lending short-term, like buying a three-month Treasury bill.

The logic is that if you are locking up your money for a longer period of time, you have to be compensated with a higher interest rate. Therefore, it is generally true that as you get to longer durations, say a one-year bond compared to three-month bond, the interest rate rises. This relationship between interest rates and the duration of the loan is what is known as the “yield curve.”

We get an inverted yield curve when this pattern of higher interest rates associated with longer-term lending does not hold, as was at least briefly the case last week. For example, on Wednesday, March 27th, the interest rate on a three-month Treasury bill was 2.43 percent. The interest rate on a ten-year Treasury bond was just 2.38 percent, 0.05 percentage points lower. That meant that we had an inverted yield curve.

While this sort of inversion has historically been associated with a recession in the not too distant future, this is not quite a curse of an inverted yield curve story. Most recessions are brought on by the Federal Reserve Board raising the overnight federal funds rate (a very short-term interest rate), which is directly under its control. The Fed does this to slow the economy, ostensibly because it wants to keep the inflation rate from rising.

The higher short-term rate tends to also raise long-term interest rates, like car loans and mortgages, which are the rates that matter more for the economy. However, longer-term rates tend not to rise as much as the short-term rate. In a more typical economy, we might expect a 3.0 percentage point rise in the federal funds rate to be associated with a 1.0–2.0 percentage point rise in the ten-year Treasury bond rate.

We get an inversion in this story when the Fed goes too far, or at least investors in the bond market think it has gone too far. The Fed keeps raising the short-term rate, but investors in longer-term debt think that they see an end in sight to rate hikes and a reversal on the way. If the short-term rate is going to be falling to 2.0 percent or even lower in future months, then investors would welcome the possibility of locking in an interest rate like today’s 2.38 percent on ten-year bonds, even if it means foregoing a slighter higher short-term rate at the moment.

That’s pretty much the story we have today. Since December of 2015, the Fed has raised the federal funds rate from essentially zero to 2.5 percent. With little evidence of inflation and some signs of a weakening economy, many investors are betting that the Fed has stopped hiking rates and will soon be lowering them. This hardly means there we will necessarily be seeing a recession.

It is also worth noting that interest rates in the US are notably higher than in other countries, which do face a recession or near recession conditions. While the US ten-year Treasury bond pays 2.38 percent interest, a ten-year French bond pays just 0.31 percent. In the Netherlands the interest rate is 0.13 percent, and in Germany, you have to pay the government 0.07 percent annually to lend them money.

These extraordinarily low long-term interest rates in other countries puts downward pressure on interest rates here. Getting 2.38 percent interest on a ten-year Treasury bond may not sound very good by historical standards, but it is a lot better than having to pay the German government to borrow your money. This is another factor in our inverted yield curve.

Of course the weakness of foreign economies is bad news for the U.S. economy. Weakness in Europe, a weaker Chinese economy, and Canada possibly seeing the implosion of its housing bubble, means that trade will likely be a drag on growth in 2019 and probably 2020, as the trade deficit rises further. But, slower export growth is not going to be sufficient to push the U.S. economy into recession.

To be clear, the signals all point to a considerably weaker economy going forward. The Trump tax cut gave us a one-time boost. It was not the promised investment boom that lifted growth in 2018. Investment grew modestly, rather it was a story where the wealthy people — who were the main beneficiaries of the tax cut – spent much of the money they got either directly or indirectly as share buybacks and dividends.

This led to a jump in consumption in 2018, but with no further tax cuts on the horizon, we can assume that consumption will return to its modest growth path of pre-recession years. Investment has been weakening, but presumably will be a modest positive through the year. On the other hand, housing is being hit by higher interest rates and is likely to be a drag on growth.

The drag from housing and trade could well push growth below the 2.0 percent trend path we had been on through most of the recovery. The weakness can be amplified if the Republicans’ new found (post-tax cut) concern with deficits, combined with austerity minded Democrats, leads to cuts in federal spending.

However, with wages growing at a respectable pace, and job growth remaining healthy, we should see still see enough consumption demand to keep the economy moving forward. That means slower growth, but no recession.

One story we can rule out is a collapse of the corporate bond market leading to another 2008 financial crisis and recession. The New York Times has been running regular columns from former investment banker William Cohan telling us the corporate debt bubble story (here, here, and here).

As I’ve pointed out many times, the corporate debt market does not move the economy in the same way as the housing bubble did before 2008, and therefore its collapse cannot possibly lead to the same sort of downturn. The housing bubble was both directly moving the economy through an unprecedented boom in residential construction and indirectly through the wealth effect on consumption. People were borrowing against their homes and spending at an unprecedented rate.

When the bubble burst, residential construction collapsed, cutting more than 4.0 percentage points off of GDP (roughly $900 billion annually in today’s economy). The loss of housing wealth led to a plunge in consumption of at least 2 percent of GDP (another $420 billion in annual demand in the 2019 economy).

There is no way that even a major collapse of the corporate bond market could have anywhere near this effect. There is no investment boom, so the impact on investment of some companies being unable to issue bonds or otherwise borrow money is likely to be trivial.

The same applies to any secondary spillover on consumption. We are not now seeing any sort of consumption boom. In an extreme case, where we see a $1-$2 trillion plunge in the value of corporate debt, the ultimate impact on consumption is almost certain to be in the low tens of billions, perhaps a loss of 0.1 or 0.2 percent in annual demand. That is not the stuff of recessions.

Before the Great Recession the New York Times had problems finding people who understood the risks of bubbles to write for them. It seems to still have this problem.

Anyhow, the long and short here is that people need not spend time worrying about the curse of the inverted yield curve. At least not unless something else bad happens, there is not a recession on the horizon.

Enjoy the spring weather!

More articles by:

Dean Baker is the senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, DC. 

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

Weekend Edition
April 19, 2019
Friday - Sunday
Andrew Levine
What Will It Take For Trump to Get His Due?
Roy Eidelson
Is the American Psychological Association Addicted to Militarism and War?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Time is Blind, Man is Stupid
Joshua Frank
Top 20 Mueller Report “Findings”
Rob Urie
Why Russiagate Will Never Go Away
Paul Street
Stephen Moore Gets Something Right: It’s Capitalism vs. Democracy
Russell Mokhiber
Why Boeing and Its Executives Should be Prosecuted for Manslaughter
T.J. Coles
The Battle for Latin America: How the U.S. Helped Destroy the “Pink Tide”
Ron Jacobs
Ho Chi Minh City: Nguyen Thai Binh Street
Dean Baker
Fun Fictions in Economics
David Rosen
Trump’s One-Dimensional Gender Identity
Kenn Orphan
Notre Dame: We Have Always Belonged to Her
Robert Hunziker
The Blue Ocean Event and Collapsing Ecosystems
Theodore C. Van Alst, Jr.
Paddy Wagon
Brett Wilkins
Jimmy Carter: US ‘Most Warlike Nation in History of the World’
Nick Pemberton
To Never Forget or Never Remember
Stephen Cooper
My Unforgettable College Stabbings
Louis Proyect
A Leftist Rejoinder to the “Capitalist Miracle”
Louisa Willcox
Aldo Leopold’s Land Ethic and the Need for a New Approach to Managing Wildlife
Brian Cloughley
Britain Shakes a Futile Fist and Germany Behaves Sensibly
Jessicah Pierre
A Revolutionary Idea to Close the Racial Wealth Divide
George Burchett
Revolutionary Journalism
Dan Bacher
U.S. Senate Confirms Oil Lobbyist David Bernhardt as Interior Secretary
Nicky Reid
The Strange Success of Russiagate
Chris Gilbert
Defending Venezuela: Two Approaches
Todd Larsen
The Planetary Cost of Amazon’s Convenience
Kelly Martin
How the White House is Spinning Earth Day
Nino Pagliccia
Cuba and Venezuela: Killing Two Birds With a Stone
Matthew Stevenson
Pacific Odyssey: Guadalcanal and Bloody Ridge, Solomon Islands
David Kattenburg
Trudeau’s Long Winter
Gary Olson
A Few Comments on the recent PBS Series: Reconstruction: America After the Civil War
Ellen Lindeen
What Does it Mean to Teach Peace?
Adewale Maye and Eileen Appelbaum
Paid Family and Medical Leave: a Bargain Even Low-Wage Workers Can Afford
Ramzy Baroud
War Versus Peace: Israel Has Decided and So Should We
Ann Garrison
Vets for Peace to Barbara Lee: Support Manning and Assange
Thomas Knapp
The Mueller Report Changed my Mind on Term Limits
Jill Richardson
Why is Going Green So Hard? Because the System Isn’t
Mallika Khanna
The Greenwashing of Earth Day
Arshad Khan
Do the Harmless Pangolins Have to Become Extinct?
Paul Armentano
Pushing Marijuana Legalization Across the Finish Line
B. R. Gowani
Surreal Realities: Pelosi, Maneka Gandhi, Pompeo, Trump
Paul Buhle
Using the Law to Build a Socialist Society
April 18, 2019
Gerald Sussman
Russiagate is Dead! Long Live Russiagate!
Lance Olsen
Perverse Housing Policy Perverts Forest Policy
Richard Ward
All Will be Punished
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail