Where did everyone go?
Demography may explain the weakness of America’s recovery
MILTON FRIEDMAN once compared the business cycle to an elastic string stretched on a board. How far the string is plucked determines how much it springs back; similarly, the depth of a recession decides the strength of recovery. America’s recent experience has not been kind to the plucking model. Although the recession was the deepest since the second world war, the recovery has been a disappointment. In the three years since the end of the recession in mid-2009, growth averaged 2.2%, barely half the 4.2% average of the seven previous recoveries.
In part, this is because recoveries from financial crises face greater difficulties. Consumers are too much in debt; businesses cannot or will not spend; a damaged banking system stifles credit. But in its annual economic report, issued on March 15th, Barack Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers argues that this is not the whole story. The plucking model presumes that after a recession, the economy returns to an underlying trend rate of growth that is determined by the supply of workers, capital and technology. Mr Obama’s economists argue that the trend is now much lower than in the past. The recovery, then, is not nearly as disappointing as it is often portrayed; Americans have set their sights too high.
This article appeared in the Finance & economics section of the print edition under the headline "Where did everyone go?"
More from Finance & economics
The property firm that could break China’s back
If Vanke collapses, so might confidence in the state’s management of the economy
Narendra Modi’s flagship growth scheme is off to a sluggish start
Without improvements, it risks wasting trillions of rupees
Diego Maradona offers central bankers enduring lessons
Recent years ought to have reduced the importance of a skilful feint. They have not