As per usual I wanted to give both of these things more attention but its to the point that something is better than nothing.
First, this chart from Calculated Risk

Nothing had or has me doubting the basics of the Smith/Yglesias growth thesis than this chart.
That smack down looks awful structural. It looks like something happened to driving big time. The only reason I persisted in making aggressive calls on auto sales was because I just couldn’t think of a convincing narrative about this as permanent structural. There were many candidates, I don’t have time to go through, but none of them really convinced me.
This has to be temporary I thought – even if its an age of driving shift thing – that’s not permanent.
If its just cash constrained households economizing on trips and businesses economizing on shipping then we are going to see a roar back and that means huge auto sales. Depending on the speed of convergence 20 Million SAAR would not be crazy. Note we are at 14.2 now.
The thing is a roar back will also mean very rapid increases in gasoline consumption which in turn means much higher prices. What does that mean for the recovery. Three very quick factors
1) Higher gas prices shunt consumer funds towards Oil Producing countries who then send the funds to US Treasuries. This is effectively a monetary contraction because lending does not increase– no change in interest on reserves. Yet, Treasury buying increases, this implies that excess reserves go up. This is contractionary for the economy.
Importantly this does not require the Fed to tighten. No action on the Feds part is passive tightening in the face of higher gas prices because the funds go straight to T-Bills. Its as if consumers are just saving more.
2) Higher gas prices cause effective depreciation rate of cars to go up. Old cars now even more costly to maintain. Natural rate of interest rises. Unconstrained consumers willing to dig deeper to buy new more fuel efficient cars. This is expansionary for the economy.
3) Higher gas prices cause more investment in oil and gas exploration, a change over from heating oil to natural gas in some plants, major oil and gas infrastructure projects. Think of it as raising the marginal productivity of energy extraction, distillation and distribution capital. Natural rate rises. This is expansionary.
Now I am not sure how these three shake out. I really have no handle on (2) and though I am reading up on (3) I cannot yet give an opinion on the size of the energy sector expansion we could see.
So, its hard to say even if higher gas prices are contractionary or expansionary. However, unless something odd happens, they are coming.

16 comments
Comments feed for this article
Thursday ~ February 16th, 2012 at 9:33 am
FreeDem
What’s the difference between the plateau we’re at now and the plateau in the late 70s and early 80s? If that was temporary, why can’t this be temporary? Why does now “look” structural, given the context of previous plateaus.
Thursday ~ February 16th, 2012 at 10:37 pm
Eric
It may not look structural, but it may be structural nonetheless. Also, what happened to the median wage in the US since the 70s? Pretty much nothing. There *was* a structural shift in the the US economy in the 70s, even if the elites were mostly insulated from it and didn’t really notice. Anyway, oil production is very likely peaking, and if that’s not structural, it’s hard to imagine what would be…
Thursday ~ February 16th, 2012 at 9:36 am
Curt Doolittle
This post is another example of why you’re the best at what you do, Karl.
Explicative. Non-argumentative. Factual. Unafraid to hypothesize. Confidence without bravado. And in the interest of all regardless of affiliation.
Economics for the common good, not for ideological advancement.
You’re the best.
Thursday ~ February 16th, 2012 at 10:05 am
reason
Oil to gas substitution could be a big driver in the intermediate future.
Thursday ~ February 16th, 2012 at 10:16 am
JazzBumpa
Karl -
Good post.
The thing is a roar back will also mean very rapid increases in gasoline consumption which in turn means much higher prices.
You’re assuming demand pull on gasoline price at the pump. Is there any evidence for this? I see all petroleum prices as highly manipulated on the supply side, with demand as a follower. Look at the slope of the curve in your graph. There is a continuous slow decrease in slope going back to about 2000 – a few years before prices took off.
FreeDem -
Everything was different in the 70′s. Look at the curve coming into ’79. If anything, the slope was increasing, and there was a bump up just before the plateau. There was also high inflation, which Volker killed as the plateau was happening.
Here, the price bubble was dragging down consumption even before the crash, and inflation has been tame for decades. I don’t think there are any points of similarity.
Cheers!
JzB
Thursday ~ February 16th, 2012 at 10:37 am
JazzBumpa
Karl -
Check this out. Commercial trucking index has recovered, while total driving slump continues. Discretionary personal driving must be off even more than your graph indicates.
http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2012/01/ata-trucking-index-increased-sharply-in.html
JzB
Thursday ~ February 16th, 2012 at 1:54 pm
IVV
Furthermore, I would easily say that higher gas prices are contractionary for discretionary personal driving.
Thursday ~ February 16th, 2012 at 7:16 pm
JazzBumpa
IVV -
I don’t think there is any disagreement on that point.
Cheers!
JzB
Thursday ~ February 16th, 2012 at 10:50 am
No Country For Constitutional Men
They are loading up the dealers with more vehicles than the dealers know what to do with them, and subprime credit for auto sales is what is moving the market at this point. Look at your local paper for examples of stupid from people that didn’t learn from the last debacle. The Retail Gasoline Deliveries figure doesn’t lie because it can’t be manipulated, and it says we are trouble on growth just as your chart indicates. No way do we get close to 20, and 14 is a real jump of faith on a continuing basis. At some point, there are no greater fools.
Three different shipping indexes also paint a picture of global collapse in demand for raw materials and consumer goods.
Thursday ~ February 16th, 2012 at 11:25 am
Lord
Inelasticity means 1 is large and immediate. While 2 will lead to more investment and more than generally justified because efficiency improvements are not that effective, durability limits the speed at which this occurs. It has really been notable how limited and slow 3 has been at this time. It was large in the late 70s which led to the rapid fall in oil prices in 83 while the industry feared a repeat this time so was unwilling to make any investment this time to the point of reducing exploration and development during the recession. If the Fed defines inflation as an increase in oil prices then it isn’t going to be undertaken which means real oil prices will rise over the long term rather than quickly and collapse.
Thursday ~ February 16th, 2012 at 12:14 pm
rjs
see the chart:
http://peakoil.com/consumption/why-is-gasoline-consumption-tanking/
Thursday ~ February 16th, 2012 at 12:32 pm
anoncubed
What’s the difference between the plateau we’re at now and the plateau in the late 70s and early 80s?
Peak oil + condensate production.
Thursday ~ February 16th, 2012 at 12:56 pm
Thursday Highlights | Pseudo-Polymath
[...] Oil and recession. [...]
Thursday ~ February 16th, 2012 at 12:56 pm
Stones Cry Out - If they keep silent… » Things Heard: e208v4
[...] Oil and recession. [...]
Saturday ~ February 18th, 2012 at 12:23 am
Stuff I Read Today « J.J.Lo
[...] Smith on Oil and the Economy: Sort of goes over my head, but the conclusion is a new one (to me); He’s saying that [...]
Sunday ~ February 19th, 2012 at 9:14 am
BullseyeMicrocaps.com » Has America Lost Its Drive?
[...] Karl Smith posted on Oil and the Structural Recession. This seems to be one of Karl’s thinking-out-loud posts, with more questions than answers, [...]