This post provides links to a number of interesting articles I have read over the past few days that you may also enjoy.

• John Hussman (Hussman Funds): Rumors of the death of the credit crisis are greatly exaggerated, October 26, 2009. In recent months, I’ve strongly rejected the notion that the credit crisis has been conveniently placed behind us and that the U.S. is now in a typical post-war economic recovery (and can be approached as such from an investment perspective). This view continues to strike me as dangerous and even naïve.

• Dave Nadig (IndexUniverse.com): Nouriel Roubini - big crash coming, October 23, 2009. Roubini will be the keynote speaker at IndexUniverse’s upcoming “Inside Commodities” conference on November 4 at the New York Stock Exchange. IndexUniverse sat down with Dr. Roubini ahead of the conference to take his temperature

This post provides links to a number of thought-provoking articles I have read over the past few days that you may also find of interest.

• Fred Bergsten (Foreign Affairs): The dollar and the deficits: How Washington can prevent the next crisis, November 2009. If the US is serious about recovering from the global economic crisis, it must balance the budget, stimulate private saving, and embrace a declining dollar.

• Randall Forsyth (Barron’s): Weak dollar equals strong stocks, for now, October 14, 2009. As long as there is no ready substitute for the dollar, Wall Street can celebrate the currency’s steady decline. And U.S. GDP will be boosted by a cheap greenback’s spur to exports and deterrent to imports. This cannot go on forever, however. The dollar’s fall may not have started on President Obama’s watch, but it may become his problem.

Mark Thoma has assembled a set of useful discussions of multipliers. Econbrowser has added a handy new category "multipliers", that compiles entries on the topic. In addition, Ethan Ilzetzki, Enrique G. Mendoza and Carlos A. Vegh provide a very useful cross-country (including emerging market economy) survey here and here [pdf].

This post provides links to a number of interesting articles I have read over the past few days that you may also enjoy.

• Randall Forsyth (Barron’s): No bull! Rally hits the wall, August 19, 2009. Coming off a “sugar high,” stocks have stalled below the early August highs. Pause or correction?

• Brian Wesbury and Robert Stein (Forbes): This recovery is no sugar high, August 18, 2009. The way we see it, those who were pessimistic about stocks and the economy early this year are going through the classic five stages of grief. First, they denied a recovery was going to happen anytime soon. Then they lashed out with anger at those who spotted signs of the recovery. Now, they are bargaining, admitting the existence of the recovery that they did not see coming, but belittling it. Next, as things keep

Richard Posner has a critique of public intellectuals who work in the public sphere (with special reference to Christina Romer), either in government service, or in journalistic fora. Mark Thoma and Brad Delong have already made clear the (many) points at which Mr. Posner has gone astray. Parenthetically, I'll add that I wonder about the analytical abilities of anybody who lumps Phillip Glass (!) and Elliott Carter together into the highbrow music category (see page 18 in his tome Public Intellectuals: A Study of Decline (1991)). More substantively, I have a few of additional observations, some of which are amplifications of Brad Delong's points.

First, I agree with Mark Thoma that Mr. Posner apparently has little understanding of macroeconomics, either of old-style Keynesian type, or the new(er) real business cycle type, or certainly New Keynesian approaches. His charge that her current pronouncements are at sharp variance with

Or, "return of the black helicopters"

Plenty of examples of hyperbole in current policy discussions, but here I want to return [0] to the specific topic of whether several key data series examined by economic analysts can be trusted, or whether in fact they are deliberately manipulated by government bureaucrats. Case in point is Econbrowser reader DickF's comments:

The government thinks it can run the economy on data that is years old and inaccurate at best. Also any time numbers are manipulated by government there is a political element involved. The whole reason the numbers are manipulated is to the will be "more normal" but who decides what is normal? In the government political bureaucrats who know their jobs depend on pleasing the politically connected. This is just another reason why centrally planned economies always fail. The hubris in government economic circles is enormous.

...

I am not saying that the agencies

Has the massive Obama stimulus plan put us on a collision course with virulent inflation?

It sure looks that way.

Let me explain …

When the U.S. Commerce Department on Friday said the U.S. economy contracted at a 1% annual pace in the second quarter, the report was actually seen as good news: It was a slower decline than in each of the two prior quarters, and economists had expected a contraction of 1.5%.

“This is good news,” Nariman Behravesh, an economist with IHS Global Insight Inc. (NYSE: IHS), told The San Francisco Chronicle.

But here’s the wild card: Although government spending did increase during the April-to-June quarter, only about 7.7% – $60.4 billion – of U.S. President Barack Obama’s stimulus package had actually made its way into the U.S. economy by June 30, the quarter’s official conclusion. Of that total, the largest component went to U.S. states to …

Has the massive Obama stimulus plan put us on a collision course with virulent inflation? It sure looks that way. Let me explain …

When the U.S. Commerce Department on Friday said the U.S. economy contracted at a 1% annual pace in the second quarter, the report was actually seen as good news: It was a slower decline than in each of the two prior quarters, and economists had expected a contraction of 1.5%.

“This is good news,” Nariman Behravesh, an economist with IHS Global Insight Inc. (NYSE: IHS), told The San Francisco Chronicle.

But here’s the wild card: Although government spending did increase during the April-to-June quarter, only about 7.7% – $60.4 billion – of U.S. President Barack Obama’s stimulus package had actually made its way into the U.S. economy by June 30, the quarter’s official conclusion. Of that total, the largest component went to U.S. states to help defray the jump in

With the recent barrage of appaling macroeconomic data from the first quarter in the context of especially Europe, one has to wonder whether those much hailed green shoots aren't, as Hempton pointed out recently, turning into brown shoots. Personally, I think don't think we are out of the woods yet; in fact, as far as I can see we haven't even entered yet since the real question is what the new global economy will look like what level of capacity and trend growth key economies will be able to muster.

Consequently and although I am lukewarm about the idea of green shoots and second derivatives, I am more positive about the narrative presented by BlackRock Inc's Bob Doll when he points to the potential in emerging markets;

Emerging-market stocks may gain an average of 20 percent this year as they rebound faster and stronger than their peers in developed countries,

Hal Varian and Hyunyoung Choi (paper here) document the usefulness of Google Trends and Google Insights for Search for purposes of updating assessments of current economic magnitudes. I see that Mark Thoma also calls attention to this intriguing data source.

Scott Irwin has collected an archive with some of the difficult-to-find classics in commodity research.