“The egg industry, like much of the agricultural sector, is commanded by a few heavyweights — the biggest, Cal-Maine Foods, controls 20 percent of the market — that leave little slack in the system to absorb and isolate shocks like disease.
Hundreds of thousands of animals are packed tightly together on a single farm, as my colleague Marina Bolotnikova has explained, where disease can spread like wildfire. According to the government and corporate accountability group Food & Water Watch, three-quarters of the country’s hundreds of millions of egg-laying hens are crammed into just 347 factory farms.
The system also uses genetically similar animals that farms believe will maximize egg production — but that lack of genetic diversity means animal populations are less resistant to disease.
When a hen gets infected, stopping the spread is an ugly, cruel business; since 2022 it has led to the killing of 85 million poultry birds. For the consumer, it often means paying a lot more than usual for a carton of eggs.
Preventing any outbreaks of disease from ever happening isn’t realistic, but the model of modern industrial farming is making outbreaks more disruptive.
And it’s not just these disruptions driving price spikes. Egg producers also appear to be taking advantage of these moments and hiking prices beyond what they’d need to maintain their old profit margins.”
…
“Because our food system is so concentrated and intermingled, it also means any single supply chain hiccup — whether due to disease, wars, or any other reason — can have ripple effects on others, affecting prices in a vast number of essential consumer goods and services.”
“”Pre-1983, mortgage costs were in the CPI as were car payments pre-1998. Now, price indexes do not include borrowing costs. Thus, when interest rates jumped last year, official inflation did not fully capture the effects it would have on consumer well-being.”
Indeed, if we measured inflation as we did in the 1970s, the inflation that started in 2021 would have peaked at 18 percent—double its reported peak. That’s higher than the worst of the 1970 and ’80s. Inflation’s current annual rate would be about 8 percent.”
“Former President Donald Trump’s plan to impose a 10 percent tariff on all imports to the United States would hike prices and cost the average American household $1,500 annually.
That’s the sobering conclusion reached by a new economic analysis from the Center for American Progress (CAP) Action Fund, a left-leaning think tank and advocacy organization. The proposed tariff, which would be applied on top of existing tariffs according to Trump’s campaign, would translate into $1,500 in higher costs for the average American household. That includes “a $90 tax increase on food, a $90 tax increase on prescription drugs, and a $120 tax increase on oil and petroleum products,” according to Brendan Duke and Ryan Mulholland, the two economists who authored the report.”
“Inflation has been a nasty grinch for the past few years—seemingly stealing away our hard-earned dollars while we sleep.
But the rising prices throughout much of the economy make it a little easier to appreciate the things that seem to be inflation-proof.
Like video games. When The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time was released in 1998, it cost $69.99 to order through the Sears catalog. Another Zelda game, Tears of the Kingdom, was released this year—25 years later—and it retailed for $70. That actually made it one of the most expensive games of the year, since most new Nintendo games these days sell for about $60.
Do the math. If Zelda games had kept pace with inflation, the new one should have cost about $130 today.
Sure, games today achieve some cost-savings because they’re digital downloads. That means production companies like Nintendo don’t have to pay for a physical game cartridge or CD-ROM, packaging, or shipping. But games today are also far, far more advanced than anything you could have bought for any amount of money a quarter-century ago.
It’s not just video games that have defied inflation’s steady creep. Toys in general are less expensive today, even before adjusting for inflation, than they were a few decades ago. That’s despite the fact that wages have grown significantly over the same period of time. The average worker in the United States made about $13 an hour in December 1998, compared to about $29 dollar per hour now.
This is true over longer periods of time too. As I wrote earlier this year, the amount of work necessary to buy a single new Barbie has fallen quite a bit since the doll was introduced. According to what University of Central Arkansas economist Jeremy Horpedahl has termed the “Barbie Price Index,” the average American woman has to work about 30 minutes to afford a Barbie—down from about two hours in 1959, when the doll first appeared on store shelves.
In fact, toys are so much cheaper today that some columnists say it’s a problem. “A toy that cost $20 in 1993 would cost only $4.68 today,” writes Katie Notopoulos, a senior correspondent at Business Insider.”
“The Middle East war is widening, but that may be better than the alternative: new inflationary pressure from an obscure fundamentalist militia 8,000 miles from US shores.
The US and UK militaries finally struck back at Houthi forces in Yemen on Jan. 11 and 12, in response to at least 27 Houthi attacks on commercial ships navigating the Red Sea between northern Africa and Saudi Arabia. There were legitimate military reasons for the retaliatory strikes, given that the Houthis have targeted US and allied forces, including Israel. But there was a powerful economic incentive too: The attacks on commercial vessels were starting to drive up shipping costs and threatening to reignite inflation, just as the Biden administration feels it is finally taming the biggest barrier to a second term for President Biden.
The Red Sea is a crucial shipping lane because the Suez Canal, at its northern tip, connects waters that serve Western markets with the Indian Ocean and routes to Asia. Ships unable to transit the Red Sea need to take the much longer and costlier journey around the southern tip of Africa. About 15% of world trade transits the area.”
“The actual problem here is prices.
They’re not going up nearly as much as they were in, say, the middle of last year, but they’re by and large not declining en masse, either. And in most cases, they won’t get back to where they were in the Before Times.
“Inflation in the US is falling relatively quickly compared to all of our other peer countries, and we have the strongest growth out of the recession,” said Felicia Wong, president and CEO of the Roosevelt Institute, a progressive think tank. “But people don’t just want falling inflation numbers, they actually want deflation.”
Deflation probably isn’t in the cards (and the rub is we don’t want it to be). Higher prices might just be the sort of thing we’ve all got to get used to. The truth is we’re never going back to how things were in 2019 — we won’t be returning to the office at the same levels, we’ll never hear “corona” and only think of beer, and that night on the town is going to cost us more than it did before.”
…
“Basically, if I get a raise at work, I think it’s because I’m awesome. That may be partly true, but that’s not all that’s going on — it’s also that the labor market is tight and wages broadly are going up. My current employer doesn’t want to lose me, and my future employer would have to pay me a little more to lure me away.
While many people see their employment situations (good or bad) as something they’ve earned, they see inflation as something that’s happening to them and that it’s the government’s fault. “The reality is inflation takes away and it gives back. It takes away, prices go up, and it gives back, wages catch up,” said Justin Wolfers, an economist at the University of Michigan. “But you code what it takes away as inflation’s fault but what it gives back as your own genius.””
…
“The rate of inflation really is slowing (and, if all goes well, will continue to do so), and the disorienting nature of what’s happened in the economy over the past few years will likely fade. Post-pandemic prices will eventually feel normal, and post-pandemic wages should make those prices more feasible — or at least not significantly less feasible than they were before. Sooner or later, sticker shock will feel a little less shocking.”
“Inflation has fallen from the shocking highs that were reached last year, but the Federal Reserve’s efforts have not successfully returned the beast to its cage.
If rising prices are to be fully tamed, it increasingly looks like Congress will have to get the deficit under control first.
Prices are up 3.7 percent over the past year, according to new inflation data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics on Thursday morning. But so-called “core inflation,” which filters out the more volatile categories like food and fuel prices, rang in at 4.1 percent in the newest report. Some smaller categories have seen considerably faster price hikes over the past 12 months—shelter prices, which include rents and hotel costs, are up 7.2 percent.
In an attempt to control inflation, the Federal Reserve had raised interest rates at 11 consecutive meetings starting in March of last year. Since July, the central bank has left interest rates unchanged—the Fed’s current base rate is 5.5 percent, up from 3.25 percent a year ago. Higher interest rates seem to have brought inflation down, but prices are still rising nearly twice as fast as the Federal Reserve’s target of 2 percent annually.
It’s possible that we’ve reached the limit of what the Federal Reserve can accomplish in terms of taming inflation through monetary policy. The federal government’s $33 trillion national debt and rising budget deficits are creating inflationary pressure in ways that remain underappreciated.
The big problem is that, while higher interest rates are helping curb inflation, they are worsening the federal government’s deficit. Writing at CNBC, Kelly Evans gets at the heart of this conundrum: “If we don’t quickly close the gap between spending and revenues, the debt load will keep growing, and interest costs will keep on rising, and the deficit will thus stay elevated, which grows the debt load even more.””
…
“Changes to monetary policy have brought inflation down from last year’s near-record highs, but the monetary theory upon which that policy is built assumes that fiscal policy will finish the job by reducing deficits. Congress, so far, doesn’t seem interested in cooperating—so expect prices to keep rising at an annoyingly fast rate.”
“According to Freddie Mac, the rate for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage has climbed to 7.09 percent, an uptick from the 5.13 percent it was at a year prior.
A mortgage rate is “the interest rate charged for a home loan,” and effectively the monthly cost of borrowing that money. As mortgage rates have gone up, monthly payments have gotten more and more pricey for people looking to purchase a home even if the base price of the house stays the same.
For example, under a 3.22 percent 30-year fixed mortgage rate in January 2022, the monthly payment on a $400,000 house in New York with a 20 percent down payment was $1,716, per a Bankrate calculator. Now, under a 7.09 percent mortgage rate in August 2023, the monthly payment on the same house with the same price would be $2,477.
Such costs have had an impact on the housing market: As mortgage rates have increased, some potential buyers have held off on purchasing houses, while sellers have similarly been less likely to list their property. For current homeowners, there’s a major incentive to wait until rates go down before deciding to re-enter the market and search for their next house.
“These higher mortgage costs are a tremendous barrier to entry for anyone wanting to enter the housing market,” Gregory Daco, the chief economist for Ernst & Young, tells Vox.”
…
“One of the biggest factors in the rise in mortgage rates is the Fed’s approach to monetary policy, which includes interest rate hikes aimed at combating inflation.”
“The hike in bond yields and subsequent rise in mortgage rates caught some people off-guard since there was no comparable reaction after the Standard & Poor’s downgrade. But that took place in different economic times when the U.S. government had more room to maneuver.”
…
“”Inflation is the economic equivalent of a partial default. The debt was sold under a 2% inflation target, and people expected that or less inflation. The government borrowed and printed $5 Trillion with no plan to pay it back, devaluing the outstanding debt as a result,” he cautions. “Yes, this is not a formal default. And a formal default would have far reaching financial consequences that inflation does not have. Still, for a bondholder it’s the same thing.”
Having been burned by the U.S. government’s policies, investors perceive it as an increasingly risky borrower, just as Fitch (and S&P in 2011) say. As a result, they demand a greater price to loan the feds money—hence higher bond yields. And since 10-year Treasury yields serve as benchmarks for other borrowing rates, such as mortgages, that means higher cost for average Americans who have little say in D.C.’s financial shenanigans but have to suffer the consequences.”
…
“”Such high and rising debt would slow economic growth, push up interest payments to foreign holders of U.S. debt, and pose significant risks to the fiscal and economic outlook,” according to the CBO.
That means unpleasant consequences not just for government officials, but for those of us who live in the economy they hobble. The government will have to pay more to borrow, and so will we. We’ll do so in a country less prosperous than it should have been.”
“the changes are a significant step backward. Biden is effectively undoing a major change made by the Reagan administration—changes that were made, fittingly, to help combat inflation.
That change, made in 1982, repealed the “30 percent rule” that guided the process for determining what wages would be paid on which projects. Under the 30 percent rule, the prevailing wage for any particular area would be based on the highest wages paid to at least 30 percent of workers within the same area.
You don’t need an advanced degree in accounting to see how that mandate could artificially hike wages on federal projects. The government barred itself from even considering bids that might pay average wages, thereby obligating taxpayers to pay more than they might have had to in an open market.”