Main Menu

Resource utilization goes down over the course of time in the later stages of the Kondratieff wave as the economy matures - and so it is no surprise to me that resource utilization has been going down and is as low as it is in the meantime.  But that is a concept that Keynesians can't relate to at all - and so they just keep hoping, and expecting, that resource utilization will go back up (a lot). 

I will note that the phrase "The Committee anticipates a gradual return to higher levels of resource utilization in a context of price stability" has been in every FOMC statement lately and as far as I can remember, has been for at least a couple of years.  That statement is a classic Keynesian economics statement - it is from a modern Keynesian perspective - and it is in there because the Keynesians honestly believe that it is possible to return to higher levels of resource utilization (which would be necessary for full employment) in a context of price stability (which the Fed always puts in the statement because the Fed has a dual mandate - for full employment at low inflation). 

The reality is that real economic growth goes down over the course of time as a long-term economic cycle matures - and ours is very mature in the meantime (thanks to the enforcement of the law against recessions for so many years).  As a result, our overall economic growth over the course of time is low for an economy that is still growing - and low economic growth makes for fairly low resource utilization.  In fact, our resource utilization has gradually been going down, in phases, for many years already - decades.  That is a long-established trend that is not going to be turned around - contrary to what the Keynesians think.  So we may bring resource utilization up a bit again (although I really kind of doubt that) - but if we do, it won't be by much and it won't be for long.  The next major move is going to be a big one down

I agree with the view of the Fed that the marked decline in their trend measures of inflation since the intensification of the crisis largely reflects "very low rates of resource utilization" - but I do not agree that those low rates of resource utilization can be increased a lot again.  The Fed often, in recent times, has talked in terms of "anticipating a gradual return to more normal levels of resource utilization in the context of price stability."  This is a Keynesian way of thinking - and is simply impossible to accomplish at this stage of the Kondratieff wave (at least in terms of getting back to "normal," meaning from-the-point-of-view-of-the-Fed-and-most-other-people-who-do-not-know-the-Kondratieff-wave-well much higher levels of resource utilization), and that is why it is simply not going to happen.  That is also why it is not really happening so far. 

As for resource slack being likely to diminish only gradually over the next few years, it does seem reasonable to anticipate that underlying inflation will remain subdued for some time, provided that longer-term inflation expectations remain well-contained - but that is looking at the situation from a Keynesian point of view and putting a (unjustified) positive spin on it.  The Keynesians don't want to accept that resource utilization goes down over the course of the later part of a long-term economic up-cycle and going into the subsequent downturn - and so they talk in terms of "resource slack being likely to diminish only gradually over the next few years," which is actually just an acknowledgement of current conditions at this very late stage of the long-term economic up-cycle - resource utilization is not going up much or quickly, compared to past recoveries in recent decades - but expresses the hope that it will eventually go up to much higher levels, and notes that given current conditions, inflation is likely to stay low.  Again, the Keynesians are fighting the last battle, deflation will be the problem in the future.