Category: misery index

Fortunate Son

Leave a comment

November 10, 2024

By Stephen Stofka

The country has elected a fortunate son for the second time. Throughout his life, Donald has enjoyed the protection of a phalanx of lawyers who have kept him out of jail. A recent decision by the country’s highest court will give him immunity for another four years. His physical condition and cognitive health are declining so rapidly that he likely will not serve out his full term. His much younger Vice-President J.D. Vance will become President and possibly the leader of the MAGA movement for another eight years.

Another take. Former President Donald J. Trump has made the greatest political comeback in the history of this country. Millions of supporters donated money to his legal efforts to defend the integrity of the vote and challenge voter fraud by the Democratic Party. Despite persistent persecution by Democratic prosecutors, Mr. Trump has emerged victorious. In the days leading up to the election, the former President  held many rallies, demonstrating the vitality of a candidate twenty years younger.

Yet another take – a just the facts, ma’am perspective. Presidents with low approval ratings, including Trump in 2020, do not win reelection. This election’s results repeated that trend. James Carville, Clinton’s campaign manager in the 1992 race, coined the famous phrase “It’s the economy, stupid.” Voters showed more concern about inflation and immigration than Trump’s character and demeanor. Voters are especially sensitive to inflation because they feel helpless, and people do not like feeling helpless.

The misery index is the sum of the unemployment rate and the inflation rate. A comfortable reading is about 7%. In 1980, the index was 20% and Jimmy Carter lost his bid for re-election. Bill Clinton and George W. Bush won re-election with misery readings of 8%, and Obama won the 2012 election when the misery index was near 10%. In the fall of this year, the index was below 7%. Perhaps the misery index is not a consistent predictor.

Which is your take on the election results? Each second of our day we download terabytes of information into our brains. We filter out much of that data, then arrange what remains into a version of the world that is uniquely ours. Then we interpret that stimuli, integrating it into our memories along well-worn neural pathways. In that integration process, we reconstruct the world again, discarding the information that conflicts with our previous experience, beliefs and values. We shape what we experience, and our experience shapes us. We may be traveling with others on a train through time, but we have a unique vantage point as we look out the window.

In her book Lost in Math, physicist Sabine Hossenfelder writes, “If a thousand people read a book, they read a thousand different books.” Each voter creates a unique election story. Media analysts focus on different elements of an election, creating their own version of the contest, weaving a narrative of cause and effect. In the telling of the election, we should remember Nassim Taleb’s caution, in Fooled by Randomness, that “past events will always look less random than they were.” Since we are rational creatures, we are both frightened and fooled by randomness. In an evenly divided electorate where a few thousand votes in several key counties can make a difference,  random events can decide the outcome. A snowstorm in a key state in the days before an election, the path of a bullet at an election rally, a decision by a federal judge.

The percentages of the Presidential election votes were no different than 140 million voters flipping a fair coin.. Heads equals a vote from Trump. Tails was a vote for Harris. Did any individual voter flip a coin? Possibly, but unlikely. As a collective, our individual actions can simulate random behavior. Randomness can make us feel helpless, so we act as though our actions have purpose. We act aggressively or assume a false bravado in the face of random mortal danger. Watch the clip from the Deer Hunter where the prisoners are made to play Russian Roulette.

Those who struggle through life may vote for the calm bravado of someone privileged. Ronald Reagan was known as the Teflon President. The public did not hold him responsible for several controversies and scandals that occurred during his eight years in the White House. In 1981 to 1982, the country suffered the worst recession since the Great Depression fifty years earlier. During the 1983 Lebanese civil war, Reagan ignored warnings that the U.S. Marines barrack in Beirut would be vulnerable to attack. The October 23rd bombing resulted in the loss of 241 lives, most of them Marines. . In his 1984 bid for re-election, Reagan won all but one state, a resounding vote of public approval. In 1986, the Iran-Contra scandal, a secretive trade of arms for hostages with Iran, occupied public attention but Reagan escaped any responsibility or public indignation.

Forty years later Donald Trump can wear that moniker, the Teflon President. A slim majority of voters overlooked his many scandals, his felony conviction, and his chaotic management style during the pandemic and most of his first term. Although the Republican Party’s name remains the same, Trump and his followers have erased the legacy of Reagan. The party’s former symbol, an elephant, has been replaced by a red MAGA hat. It has become a party dedicated not to any consistent set of principles but to one person, a fortunate son.

//////////////////

Photo by Danilo Batista on Unsplash

Keywords: misery index, election, recession, inflation

The Misery Index

Leave a comment

December 18, 2022

By Stephen Stofka

This week’s letter is about a measure of economic discomfort that economist Arthur Okun developed in the 1960s. In the early 1980s President Reagan renamed it the “misery index.” Weather forecasters calculate a misery index of temperature and humidity. Okun’s measure of discomfort added the inflation rate and the unemployment rate. How reliable is this weathervane of human misery? Let’s focus on those points where the index touched a medium term low.

We can begin in the mid-60s as society began to rupture. Young people protested the restrictive norms of the post-war society when employers regarded a man whose hair was longer than “collar length” as unkempt. Polite women wore white gloves to church and formal affairs. In northern cities black people rioted over the prejudice that prevented them from access to business loans in their own neighborhoods. By law, federal home loans were not available to people who lived in “redlined” majority black neighborhoods. The courts and Indian agencies disregarded the property and civil rights of Native American families. There was a lot of misery that was not measured by the misery index.

The late 1990s – another relative low in the misery index – were a heady time. The internet and Windows 95 was but a few years old and investors were exuberant about the “new internet economy.” Fed chairman Alan Greenspan warned of “irrational exuberance” and economist Robert Shiller (2015) wrote a book of that same name, introducing his cyclically adjusted price earnings, or CAPE, ratio. Investors based their valuations on revenues, not profits. In a rush to dominate a market space, companies spent more to acquire a new customer than the revenue the customer brought in. Investors rejected “old economy” manufacturing companies like Ford and GE and turned to the new economy stocks like  Microsoft, Sun Microsystems, CompuServe, AOL and Netscape, companies that connected computers and people. Neither Google nor Facebook existed. Amazon was a company that sold books online. Pets.com raised $83 million at its IPO on the promise of convenient pet food delivery. In the summer of 2000, the air started leaking from the “dot-com” bubble. By the spring of 2003, the SP500 was down 42% from its high. None of that investor misery was captured by the misery index.

The index touched another low in early 2007, a year before the beginning of the 2007-09 recession and the Great Financial Crisis. This time investors were exuberant over both housing and stocks. The top bond ratings companies, like Moody’s and S&P, dependent on the fees they collected from Wall Street firms, slapped Grade AAA stickers on the subprime mortgage backed securities their customers wanted to underwrite. Financial companies played regulatory agencies against each other, choosing the one with the most relaxed standards and supervision. Whiz kids in the back rooms of major financial firms developed trading models that blew up within a few years. Some of the largest companies in the world, champions of the free market who consistently fought regulations, ran to the government with their hands out, pleading for bailouts.  In the 3rd quarter of 2008, Lehman Brothers collapsed and threatened to take down the rest of the financial system. The misery index rose to 11.25%, slightly below our current reading of 11.88%. If the misery index were a tape measure, a carpenter would throw it in the garbage as an unreliable tool.

The collapse of oil prices in 2014 shifted the misery index to another low in 2015. After a decade of near zero interest rates, housing and stock prices had again reached nosebleed levels and the index dropped to another low in late 2019. Was that a harbinger of a coming financial crisis? We never did find out. Within six months, the pandemic crisis struck.  

The misery index is an unreliable measure of discomfort but a good measure of investor exuberance. Medium term lows are an indicator that investor optimism and asset valuations are too high. Relative index highs like the current 12% mark a period of excess investor pessimism. Sometimes a lousy tape measure can be useful after all.

///////////////////////////

Photo by patricia serna on Unsplash

Shiller, R. J. (2015). Irrational Exuberance: Revised and Expanded Third Edition. Princeton University Press.

//////////////////////////