Inflation hits landmark low, has nowhere to go but up

The July inflation report, released this morning, will likely go down as something of a landmark: the Consumer Price Index fell 2.1% over the previous 12 months, the biggest year-over-year drop since 1950. This was entirely due to a 28.1% drop in energy prices over that period, and as energy prices began falling in August 2008, the year-over-year price drop will begin narrowing next month. Negative 2.1% will stand as the low point for inflation in this economic cycle.

Then what happens? The current inflation trend, as represented by the once-mocked but now obviously pretty useful “core” inflation number (which excludes food and energy) appears to be a little under 2%—year-over-year, core inflation was at 1.5% and over the past three months the annualized rate has been 1.7%.

Where’s inflation headed after that? I don’t think anyone has the faintest idea yet. A strong economic recovery and accompanying increase in the velocity of money (that is, all the cash the Federal Reserve has pumped into the financial system actually begins to circulate in the real economy) could result in a quick rise in the inflation rate. The economic data over the past few days, though, show that the strong-recovery story is still mostly just that, a story. Retail sales are down. Consumer sentiment is down. Industrial production is up a little, but mostly because of the temporary cash for clunkers boost to the auto industry. Jobless claims are up.

Still, on the inflation/deflation front, it certainly ain’t the early 1930s all over again. The year-over-year inflation rate quickly went from about zero to -4% in the months following the 1929 stock market crash, then fell below (rose above?) -9% in May 1931 and stayed there until April 1933. According to the Irving Fisher/Milton Friedman monetary explanation of the Great Depression, it was this extreme deflation that caused most of the era’s economic problems—because people who had taken out loans before prices (and wages) started collapsing couldn’t afford to pay them back, and this in turn led to a seemingly neverending banking crisis. Ben Bernanke does appear to have succeeded in keeping that from happening this time around

Related Topics: Economy & Policy
  • Latest on Business

    LM Otero / AP

    Senate Approves Hike in Airline Security Fees

    (WASHINGTON) — A Democratic-controlled Senate panel Tuesday approved a $2.50 increase in airline security fees that would double the per-passenger fee for those taking nonstop flights.

    Why Greece Isn't Leaving the Eurozone YetSlate

    Associated Press

    Stocks Rally Further in Run-up to EU Summit

    MOSCOW — Global stocks enjoyed one of their best days in weeks on Tuesday ahead of a summit of European leaders that’s expected to be dominated by calls to boost economic growth.

    Europe remains the focus of attention across all financial markets in the run-up to the June 17 Greek election that could go a long way to determining the country’s membership of the euro as well as the future of the single currency zone.

  • http://www.abnormalreturns.com/2009/08/friday-links-vegas-bets-big/ Friday links: Vegas bets big Abnormal Returns

    [...] “Over the last 12 months, CPI has fallen 2.1 percent, the largest 12 month decline since 1950.”  (Calculated Risk also EconomPic Data, Curious Capitalist) [...]

  • curmudgeon57

    I suspect that the money the Fed is putting into the economy is going into the pockets of Wall Street bankers, and will never circulate into the “real” economy.
    -
    I’ve always had significant problems with the perception/reporting of overall versus core inflation rate. When the overall rate was high due to substantial increases in energy prices (now believed to be an artifact of energy traders), economists and economics writers bemoaned the onset of inflation, even though the core rate was low. When energy prices dropped, economists and economics writers noted that the core rate was still positive, indicating an onset of inflation.
    -
    Look it up in the archives; it’s true.

  • thantoni

    the way the term “velocity of money” is used in the second paragraph doesn’t reflect the proper macroeconomic definition. velocity can be estimated if we divide the total amount of cash money (monetary base) with the total amount of transactions in a given period of time. even though the banks lend the whole amount of money they were given by Fed this doesn’t entails the increase of transactions. In my opion the writter was refering to liquidity of money.

  • http://www.billshrink.com/blog/economic-recovery/ 10 Signs the Economy ‘Might’ Be Recovering

    [...] at the savings and wages of working Americans. While we may not be entirely out of the woods yet, TIME Magazine reports that July’s inflation report clocked it at negative 2.8%, which, “…will [...]

blog comments powered by Disqus