March Spending Driven By Surge In Services The latest personal income and expenditure report for March was of particularly interesting reading. However, as opposed to the mainstream headlines that immediately reported that despite higher payroll taxes consumers were still spending, and therefore a sign of a strong economy, it was where they were spending that was most telling. As I searched the various headlines, and read several of the economic releases, I came across only one analysis that questioned the headline report. Tyler Durden at Zero Hedge: "Despite expectations that following several months of subpar income growth offset by rampaging spending and thus a plunging savings rate, March incomes would rise by 0.4%, while spending would be flat, this did not happen, and instead both spending and incomes rose by the same amount, or 0.2% in the past month. Worse, when adjusting for inflation, real disposable income rose just 1.1% compared to last March, and just barely above the 0% breakeven. On the other side, real spending was up 2.2% Y/Y just barely above the 2% recessionary threshold. And even that number is misleading as spending on Total Goods (including durable, already known as being quite abysmal, and non-durable), dropped by $32.8 billion in nominal dollars. What was the offset? Why a massive surge in consumption expenditures on services, which rose by $53.8 billion, which absent the spending aberration for September 11, 2001, which was reversed in the following month, was the biggest monthly increase on record! What drove this record services spending spree is anyone's guess." Tyler is correct and the chart of the monthly dollar change in services spending shows it to be the largest single monthly increase since January 2002. However, we don't have to "guess" at where the dollars were spent - all we have to do is dig down into the report. In the month of March, as noted above, the increase in services related spending offset the decline in both durable and non-durable goods spending. The chart below shows PCE, and its major subcomponents, on a net dollar and net percentage change from February to March. Of course, as Tyler correctly questioned, where were the dollars on "services" actually spent. For clarification the category of "services" comprises any item that is immediately consumed. This category covers everything from housing to financial services to food to transportation. The next chart below shows the major sub-categories of the "services" component of overall PCE. As you can see consumers spent almost 50% of their money on housing and utilities in March. The stuff that we produce, which has the largest multiplier in the economy, declined which speaks to the weakness seen in all of the recent manufacturing reports. However, if we dig down into the services sector, we can quickly find the reason that consumers are spending less on manufactured goods as their utility costs jumped sharply in March as several cold fronts ran accross the nation. The chart below shows the total increase in services consumption in March, the total spent on household utilities and the total of household utilities spent on electricity and gas. However, as we analyze the services sector spending in more detail, there are some other very interesting data points as it relates to the consumer. The chart below shows the various subcomponents of the services category that had the biggest net percentage change in March. What immediately jumps out is the decrease in bank and securities related fees. With the market surging to all-time highs, and the media chastising individuals for not chasing the markets, you would expect to see these figures rising. Alas, that is not the case and more of individuals disposable income is being diverted into not only utilities, but also public transportation, clothing repair, internet access, personal care labor union dues and employment agencies. The ongoing theme seems to be job hunting. With incomes not rising fast enough to offset real inflation, and more individuals having ever tougher times making ends meet, it appears that they are beginning to clean themselves up and go looking for additional work. Of course, when you aren't looking for work, and need to fill some time, it appears that the onset of spring, is drawing individuals into movie theaters and sporting arenas - including casinos. As a side note - it is mildly amusing is the casino gambling is up while commissions for the largest casino on the planet, the stock market, are down. Maybe individuals are catching on that they have a better chance of winning in Vegas. However, the bottom line is that if you want to know where individuals are spending the bulk of their money in the most recent month - 73% of the money spent on "services" fell into four major categories. The personal income and spending report does little to brighten the economic picture. As we have been discussing over the past couple of weeks, see here and here , the economy clearly peaked in 2011 and has been slowing since. Despite the Fed's inflation of asset prices - there is little translation into the real economy. As we discussed i n this past weekend's newsletter the disconnect between the economy, and the markets, continues to widen due to liquidity driven interventions, the suppression of interest rates and the Central Bank's direct purchases of equities. The reality is that we now live in a world where "freely traded markets" are an anachronism and fundamental rules simply no longer apply. However, the problem is that such actions continually lead to asset bubbles, and eventual busts, that not only impact economic stability but destroy the financial stability of families. The risk is not lost on the Federal Reserve as Minneapolis Fed President Kocherlakota recently stated: "Unusually low real interest rates should be expected to be linked with inflated asset prices, high asset return volatility and heightened merger activity. All of these financial market outcomes are often interpreted as signifying financial market instability... may only be able to achieve its macroeconomic objectives in association with signs of instability in financial markets. These financial market phenomena could pose macroeconomic risks." In other words the only way for the Fed to achieve its goals of inflating the economy is to create an asset bubble. Of course, the insanity is that once the goals are achieved the asset bubble busts and then the process must be started all over again. Of course, through the long course of the Federal Reserve's ongoing interventions into the economy they have never witnessed an asset bubble before it burst and they are unlikely to do so this time either. The consumer is clearly delivering a message about the state of the real economy. Eventually, the disconnect between the economy and the markets will merge. Unfortunately, there is no historical evidence of such reversions being a positive event. Average: 4.142855 Your rating: None Average: 4.1 ( 7 votes)
The Fed's QE Exit Will More Than Quadruple Interest Costs For The US Submitted by Tyler Durden on 05/01/2013 15:27 -0400 Bond Japan Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee With the Fed now openly warning that there may actually come a time when the 'flow' stops; the most recent Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee (TBAC) report has some concerning statistics for those change-ridden hopers who see a smooth Fed exit, deficit-reduction, and blue skies ahead. While they are careful not shout 'sell' in a crowded bond market; hidden deep in the 126 page presentation are two charts that bear significant attention. The first shows what TBAC expects (given the market's expectations) to happen to interest rates in the US as the Fed 'exits' its QE program (taper, unwind, hold) - the result, the weighted-average cost of financing for the US government will almost triple from around 1.6% to around 4.3% over the next ten years. But more problematic is that even with CBO's rather conservative estimates of the growth in US debt over the next decade the USD cost of financing will explode from around $205bn (based on TBAC data) to over $855bn . Still convinced the Fed can exit smoothly? As TBAC warns: Treasury yields could reprice notably when the market is convinced that policy tightening is imminent There is a risk that markets may overshoot to higher-than-fair yield levels due to: Concerns about Fed portfolio unwind Inadequate interest hedging in certain asset classes Portfolio rebalancing by retail investors Annual interest cost on public debt to increase more than 400% (from $205 bn in 2013 to $855 bn in 2023) Main driver : Increase in WAC from 1.7% to 4.3% Secondary factor : ~ 65% increase in stock of debt Given the market's expectations for Fed tapering (or gradual tightening)... The marginal cost of financing will rise significantly... but with the sheer size of debt now (and growing), that will balloon the absolute cost of servicing US debt to over $850bn per year... And just what happens to all those retirees - who need yield - who are being herded into stocks when Treasuries pay over 4.5%? Would seem bullish for bond flows... think Japan... Charts: TBAC Average:
proc report data=sasuser.houses nowd; column style sqfeet bedrooms price; run; a list report that displays a row for each observation in the input data set and which calculates the SUM statistic for numeric variables Answer: By default, PROC REPORT displays character variables as display variables. A report that contains one or more display variables has a detail row for each observation in the data set. By default, PROC REPORT displays numeric variables as analysis variables, which are used to calculate the default statistic SUM. 疑问： 全部是数字以及有字符型变量结果不同。不是添加一个sum数据行的事。 proc report data=resdat.class nowd; column age weight height; run; OUT: SAS 系统 2013年03月18日 星期一 上午12时34分57秒 12 Age Weight Height 253 1900.5 1184.4 proc report data=resdat.class nowd; column sex age weight height; run; SAS 系统 2013年03月18日 星期一 上午12时34分57秒 13 S e x Age Weight Height F 11 50.5 51.3 F 12 77 56.3 F 13 84 56.5 M 12 83 57.3 M 11 85 57.5 M 12 99.5 59 F 12 84.5 59.8 F 15 112.5 62.5 M 13 84 62.5 F 14 102.5 62.8 M 14 102.5 63.5 F 14 90 64.3 M 12 128 64.8 F 13 98 65.3 F 15 112 66.5 M 15 112 66.5 M 15 133 67 M 14 112.5 69 M 16 150 72
标签: Report经管大学堂：名校名师名课
京公网安备 11010802022788号
论坛法律顾问：王进律师
知识产权保护声明
免责及隐私声明
