Serious investment thinking that doesn’t take itself too seriously.

HOME

LOGIN

ABOUT THE CURIOUS INVESTOR GROUP

SUBSCRIBE

SIGN UP TO THE WEEKLY

PARTNERS

TESTIMONIALS

CONTRIBUTORS

CONTACT US

MAGAZINE ARCHIVE

PRIVACY POLICY

SEARCH

-- CATEGORIES --

GREEN CHRONICLE

PODCASTS

THE AGENT

ALTERNATIVE ASSETS

THE ANALYST

THE ARCHITECT

ASTROPHYSIST

THE AUCTIONEER

THE ECONOMIST

EDITORIAL NOTES

FACE TO FACE

THE FARMER

THE FUND MANAGER

THE GUEST ESSAY

THE HEAD HUNTER

HEAD OF RESEARCH

THE HISTORIAN

INVESTORS NOTEBOOK

THE MACRO VIEW

POLITICAL INSIDER

THE PROFESSOR

PROP NOTES

RESIDENTIAL INVESTOR

TECHNOLOGY

UNCORKED

Staying power versus paying power

by | Mar 16, 2022

The Fund Manager

Staying power versus paying power

by | Mar 16, 2022

Inflation is running hot, even before wage-price pressures have begun.

Central bankers tell us the current burst of inflation will be transitory and workers will not mind the temporary squeeze on their living standards.

In today’s full employment economy, this is not convincing. The implied policy response is flawed, potentially even reckless.

The US inflation rate is at a 40 year high (US Bureau of Labor Statistics). The Bank of England forecasts UK CPI inflation will hit 7.25% this spring, by far the biggest inflation overshoot since the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) was created in 1997 (Bank of England (Feb 2022), Monetary Policy Report).

We are told not to worry. The current inflation burst is transitory. Policymakers cite two reasons for this: first, because the energy shock will hurt demand (it will lower inflation) more than it lifts firms’ costs. And second, because supply chain bottlenecks, driven exclusively by the pandemic, will be resolved swiftly as health risks subside. This perspective has never felt convincing. And the scale and persistence of the inflation spike has made it increasingly untenable. 

The problem is that monetary policy remains exceptionally accommodative. Central bankers are so far down the rabbit hole, and markets so anchored to the belief in persistently low interest rates, there is no obvious way out. To keep a lid on inflation, economies need materially higher real interest rates; but what they need, financial markets cannot tolerate.

Central bankers disagree. In their eyes, inflation can be contained while keeping real interest rates (inflation-adjusted interest rates) at or below zero. They claim the background environment remains structurally disinflationary (China, globalisation, digital technologies, demographics, etc) and the economy is sufficiently flexible, so a wage-price spiral won’t emerge, as it did in the 1970s. If evidence emerges that suggests otherwise, then policymakers assure us they have the tools to manage the problem without undue economic disruption. 

“Critically, the inflation threat is greatest in the country that matters most for global financial markets, the US”

At a minimum, this view appears cavalier. Economies are facing multi-decade highs in inflation, yet the policy accelerator remains flat-to-the-metal and labour markets are red hot (Atlanta Federal Reserve). Critically, the inflation threat is greatest in the country that matters most for global financial markets, the US.

This chart shows workers face a potentially sizeable hit to their real (ie, inflation-adjusted) income at a moment in history when they, in fact, have the upper hand (Atlanta Federal Reserve Wage TrackerBEA). While trade unions may be a spent force, those in work seem more than willing to resist the cost-of-living squeeze now underway by demanding higher wages. 

Economic history tells us that ‘cost-push’ shocks fizzle out most of the time. But whether they do is contingent on the circumstances in which they strike and the response of policy to them. If workers are able to resist the squeeze to their earnings, fears of a wage-price spiral may quickly become a reality.

Recent developments in Ukraine remind us the future is unknowable. But the inflation regime is clearly changing: higher and more volatile inflation is already with us. 

What one can say is current asset prices do not reflect this risk. The rules of the game for investors are changing and portfolios anchored to a belief in transitory inflation are dangerously exposed.

Originally published by ruffer.co.uk and reprinted here with permission.

About Jamie Dannhauser

About Jamie Dannhauser

Prior to joining Ruffer in 2014, Jamie Dannhauser spent seven years as a senior economist at Lombard Street Research, an independent macroeconomic research consultancy, with a specific focus on the UK, US and eurozone economies. He graduated from the University of Cambridge in 2006 with a first class honours degree in Economics. He is currently a member of the IEA’s Shadow Monetary Policy Committee.

INVESTOR'S NOTEBOOK

Smart people from around the world share their thoughts

READ MORE >

THE MACRO VIEW

Recent financial news and how it connects across all asset classes

READ MORE >

TECHNOLOGY

Fintech, proptech and what it all means

READ MORE >

PODCASTS

Engaging conversations with strategic thinkers

READ MORE >

THE ARCHITECT

Some of the profession’s best minds

READ MORE >

RESIDENTIAL ADVISOR

Making money from residential property investment

READ MORE >

THE PROFESSOR

Analysis and opinion from the academic sphere

READ MORE >

FACE-TO-FACE

In-depth interviews with leading figures in the real estate/investment world.

READ MORE >