top of page

My view on what's going on in the financial markets and the global economy, and a few other things that might interest me from time to time.

Black on Transparent.png
Writer's picturetim@emorningcoffee.com

Three key election issues: immigration, inflation and abortion

There are three topics that are likely to most influence independent / undecided voters in the upcoming US presidential election:

 

  • Immigration (economic / social)

  • Inflation / economy (economic)

  • Women’s rights / abortion (social)

     

Plenty of other issues are of course in play, too, but these three seem to be the ones that the candidates are talking about the most, and are also the ones with the clearest lines of demarcation between Republicans and Democrats. 

 

Immigration

Immigration is an inflammatory and often divisive issue that can fire up folks from both a social and economic perspective.  Let me start by saying that my American-centric readers should not for a moment think that immigration is an issue confined to the States, because it most certainly is not.  Immigration has been and will likely continue to be a top drawer issue in almost every recent election in the developed world , most notably at the moment in the US presidential election

 

The narrative around this divisive topic can influence voters and the outcome of elections.  For example, immigration played an arguably decisive role when Brits voted to leave the European Union in the 2016 referendum (“BREXIT”).  In essence, voters believed that exiting the European Union would lessen the migrant inflow into the United Kingdom, saving jobs. In fact, immigration levels seem to have changed little since the UK’s formal exit, and it remains a headline topic in the UK even though the country has left the EU.  More recently, the far right in France gained more support than in decades by making immigration a key issue in the snap election this past summer, throwing the government into a state of gridlock. 

 

The economic sensitivity involving immigration revolves around concerns that incoming migrants take jobs that would otherwise be taken by existing citizens.  This becomes even more inflammatory when the immigrants are illegal and undocumented, and especially if they are being employed “off the books”.  Immigration can also drain state resources since illegal immigrants can avail themselves of certain – but not all (it depends on the state in the US) – government-provided social services like healthcare (Medicaid) and public education. 

 

Regardless of these concerns – some of which might be valid – most rich countries in Europe and Asia are facing demographic trends that necessitate an influx of immigrants to fill jobs as the indigenous population ages, with immigrants providing support to a stretched job market and a declining employment (i.e. tax) base to provide and pay for the services needed by retirees.  Without immigrants, the ratio of retirees to workers can become badly imbalanced, and this makes it difficult for governments to meet the needs of retired workers.  Demographic trends that negatively affect the dependency ratio include things like fertility ratios and life expectancy, with – for  example – lower fertility rates and longer life expectancies making the problem more acute.  This issue is most serious now in rich countries like Japan, Italy, Spain, France and Germany.  Demographically, the U.S. is fortunately still on the younger side of many wealthy countries, with a median age of 38.9 years, compared to Japan (49.9 years), Italy (48.4 years), Germany (46.8 years), France (42.6 years), and the UK (40.8 years).  However, the more robust economic growth in the US, coupled with the size of the economy and the population, make immigration an essential part of a functioning US economy.  

 

More generally, immigrants are needed in most rich countries to fill jobs for which there are simply not enough available (generally unskilled) workers, or to fill jobs that “locals” don’t want to do because they are too low-paying and remedial.  The post-pandemic period was a case in point.  Immigrants, many probably illegal and undocumented, filled positions especially in the global services industry as demand for services soared, including “revenge travel”, returning to restaurants and events, etc.  Strong demand coupled with a tight labour market was a major cause of wage inflation, increasing fears that a wage inflation spiral could become entrenched.  In fact, the availability of immigrants – some probably illegal – helped to somewhat alleviate pressure on jobs, and hence, wages.  The availability of immigrants undoubtedly helped fuel exceptional economic growth in the States, well above other G7 countries after the pandemic.  Even with immigrants filling many jobs, unemployment hovered for months near historical record lows.

 

As the economic argument against immigrants has slightly receded into the background, it has been replaced by an aggressive social narrative.  An “influx” of immigrants can stoke nationalist sentiment, especially if immigrants settle in their own insular communities and make no attempt to assimilate into the national fabric of a country.  In the US presidential election, illegal immigrants have been blamed for many things including higher crime (murders, rapes, etc.), drug trafficking, and even more recently, eating pets.  As unproven and ridiculous as some of these accusations are, they nonetheless seem to be working in that many voters swallow them “hook, line and sinker” without understanding the real impact – both positive and negative – of immigration.  In fact, it’s hard to really understand if people are aware of the legitimate reasons that immigrants are needed in most developed countries.  However, there is no doubt that they are acutely aware of the “baggage” that can come with uncontrolled immigration, especially when the flow of illegal immigrants across the southern border of the US is used to generate sensationalist “fake” news, which is in turn used sow division.

You might ask, “why do people want to leave their country and immigrate to another?”  Wealthy developed countries like the US, Canada and many countries in Europe attract people from countries where the people are poor and often hungry, with limited job prospects.  Many also come because of the freedom and opportunity offered by democratic countries, fleeing their weak or even oppressive governments.  Even worse, minority ethnic immigrants are sometimes oppressed in their own countries, often brutally.  Most of us – at least those that are reading this article – are reasonably well-off, probably residing in the US, Europe or another rich and democratic country.  The fact that we were born in democratic rich countries can make it very difficult to fully understand the plight of poor, hungry and / or oppressed people from poor countries.  As recent history has proven, it can become completely hopeless, so much so that some will risk their lives and those of their families to seek a better life elsewhere. In the US, the Republicans are viewed mainly as anti-immigration, and the Democrats as pro-immigration.  For the record, Congress did not approve the last bipartisan immigration bill in late July, as Mr Trump intervened to encourage his party (even though it had bipartisan approval) to kill it for political reasons.  What a shame.In summary, immigration is actually necessary in most rich countries to sustain the economy and fill open jobs.  Immigrants can be good or bad, but generally, controlled immigration is not bad for some of the ridiculous and unsupported accusations that are now capturing the narrative in the current Presidential election. This is not to suggest that immigration is not a thorny issue, because it is – it is divisive and certainly inflammatory.  Having said this, governments in rich countries are not wrong to want to manage the flow of immigrants, taking the “right” immigrants and sizing the flow of inbound immigrants to sustain the economy without risking the jobs of citizens.  The “right” immigration target might consist of a mix between highly talented professionals in which the US might be facing shortages (doctors, engineers, scientists, etc), and less educated but hard working people that are willing to do jobs like landscaping, waiters/waitresses, housekeeping, etc.   And of course, it goes without saying that criminals and those that eat pets should stay at home!

 

Inflation

Inflation has been above the Fed target of 2%/ annum since March 2021, about one year following the beginning of a series of extraordinary fiscal and monetary stimulus measures to assist the US economy in its recovery from pandemic-related shutdowns and job losses.  Both parties seem to want to pin the problem of inflation on the other, when in reality, the pandemic – a “black swan” event which transcended political parties – can more appropriately be blamed for a sequence of unprecedented stimulus responses to nurse the US economy back to health.  In retrospect, the only conclusion one can confidently make is that the Fed moved to contractionary monetary policy too late, only beginning to raise the Fed Funds rate in March 2022, the same month that inflation reached 8.5%/annum in the US. Ultimately, headline CPI would peak at 9.1% in June 2022, before starting its slow journey down as the Fed continued to tighten the screws.  It now appears that contractionary monetary policy has done its job, with the most recent headline CPI number falling to 2.5%/annum in August.  During the period of unusually high inflation and tightening monetary policy, the U.S. jobs market was exceptional, and the economy continued to chug along.  Given the context, the fact that many Americans seem disillusioned with the state of the US economy is perplexing on the surface.  However, the major issue troubling Americans is inflation which has had a disproportionately harmful effect on lower-middle income families.  The problem with inflation is that prices rarely fall once they have risen.  This means the high inflation which sharply increased the cost of many goods and services will not “reverse” as inflation decreases.  Rather, prices will simply increase more slowly than they were during the period of unusually high inflation.  The same is true for wages –  salary increase are now embedded and are here to stay.  

 Inflation has clearly splattered the Biden Administration because it has occurred on their watch, whether they are to blame of not.  In reality, the major cause of inflation was excessive stimulus, not per se the Biden Administration.  The US government approved three major stimulus plans (two under Mr Trump and one under President Biden) totalling around $4.6 trillion, which included three rounds of direct checks to all Americans.  Concurrently, the Federal Reserve left money too cheap for too long, allowing inflation to take hold and gain momentum.   Inflation has enabled Americans that are net savers and / or investors in stocks to reap a windfall.  However, for most Americans – especially those with no savings and perhaps even net borrowers – high inflation has left them worse-off.  There is little doubt that displeasure among US voters with the U.S. economy is largely wrapped around the issue of inflation, and it is the current administration that must shoulder the blame whether they are fully responsible or not.  Inflation cannot be reversed – price increases are permanent.  Both parties need to appeal strongly to undecided voters that have been most hurt by inflation that the worst is over, and the US economy remains on firm footing for the time being.  Trying to explain the reasons behind the exceptional period of high inflation will likely fall on deaf ears given the generally poor understanding by voters of the trade-offs between resuscitating a moribund economy just after the economy reopened (post-COVID) and the excess inflation this brought.  


Abortion

Abortion is a personal issue, with the debate being about a woman’s right to do with her body what she wishes versus the right of an unborn fetus.  The issue becomes much thornier because of moral and religious overtones.  How you feel about abortion is simply how you feel, and there is no definitive right or wrong.  It is highly personal choice, up to each American to decide.   

 

Democrats are quite vocal in pointing fingers at the Supreme Court for reversing Roe vs Wade, a decision that probably would not have been made without a Supreme Court that is “stacked” with Conservative-minded Supreme Court justices, at least three of which were chosen by former President Trump.  It was Mr Trump’s prerogative as President to nominate replacements for Supreme Court justices that retired or passed away, so like it or not, he was entitled to select conservative-minded justices which – as a reminder – were interrogated and approved by the Senate.    

 

Let’s start by first looking at Roe vs Wade, the decision taken by the Supreme Court in 1973 which ruled that abortion was legal under the 14th amendment governing a woman’s “right to privacy”.  If I understand correctly, it went on to conclude that abortions were legal up to the first trimester and illegal in the third trimester, with decisions in the second trimester left to the states.  States varied in their views of the legality of abortion in the second trimester, generally dependent on the circumstances.   The overturn of Roe vs Wade occurred in June 2022 by a six to three vote by the Supreme Court.  As a result, abortion is no longer federally approved, leaving abortion laws completely in the hands of each individual state.  

 

Based on a survey by Pew Research Center in May 2024, 63% of Americans think that abortion should be allowed in all / most cases, and 37% think that abortion should not be allowed in all / most cases.  Not surprisingly, the survey also shows that 85% of Democrats think that abortion should be legal in all / most cases, but only 41% of Republicans think the same.  Younger and better educated Americans are more likely to favour a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion, too, as the survey illustrates.  This is exactly why the Democrats are making abortion an important political topic in this election.


The map below from the Center of Reproductive Rights provides a good summary of how states currently treat abortion, since this matter is now firmly in the hands of each individual state in the U.S.

 


It is fairly clear that normally Democratic states in the west and the northeast are more liberal with respect to abortion, while states in the south and mid-west tend to be more conservative. 

 

Abortion is an important election issue with the views delineated between Democrats (typically “free choice”) and Republicans (abolish abortion completely).  Of course, many voters probably fall somewhere in the middle (i.e. abortions should be allowed but only under certain circumstances), but the chips are falling where they may on this contentious issue concerning a woman’s right to choose and the murky decision of when a fetus becomes a human being.  It’s not an issue with a right or wrong by any means, but it will be a defining issue in the upcoming election almost certainly.  

 _________________

 

**** Follow E-MorningCoffee on Twitter, and please like and comment on my posts right here on my blog. You need to be a subscriber, so please sign up. Thanks for your support. ****

コメント


bottom of page