News

The Online Platform Economy adds an important new element to existing labor markets, however. Simply put, landing a platform job is easier and quicker. Individuals can, and do, generate additional income on labor platforms in a timely fashion when they experience a dip in regular earnings. This is a potentially far better option to mitigate or weather volatility, if the alternatives are to constrain spending or take on additional credit. Moreover, this option meets a target need. Participation in labor platforms is highest precisely among those who experience the highest levels of income volatility—the young, the poor, and individuals living in the West.

It is now certain that President Obama will be the only U.S. president in history that did not deliver a single calendar year of 3.0%+ economic growth, and the fourth-worst in history in terms of average RGDP growth while in office.

The housing market has recovered, but sluggish entry-level construction is putting a squeeze on families that would like to buy their first home. . . It’s a bigger issue at the entry level because builders face tighter margins to begin with. . . For example, consider the typical starter home in California’s Inland Empire, about an hour east of Los Angeles. The FHA loan limit there is $355,350. A typical home might require $70,000 in raw land cost, another $60,000 to develop the land, $100,000 in direct construction costs, and $63,850 in other overhead and selling costs. That brings the total cost to around $294,000. . . Ms. Zelman says impact fees in the Inland Empire now average around $50,000 per home, up from $11,000 in 2005. If this home is going to sell at the FHA limit, the profit—that is, the incentive to build this home—has essentially been washed out by the impact fee.

However, America’s prolonged period of economic growth and fiscal stasis has been eroding. From 2001 through 2008, annual real GDP growth averaged just 2.1 percent. Over the last seven years, it has fallen another third – averaging just 1.4 percent from 2009 through 2016. Combined over the last 15 years, America’s economy has averaged an anemic 1.8 percent real annual growth – just over half its average from 1946 through 2000.

More than half of Bay Area residents think the region will experience a significant economic downturn within the next five years, according to a survey released Tuesday by the Bay Area Council.

More people who were among the top 20% of income earners made money from digital platforms such as Uber and Airbnb than lower-income workers, according to new data from the JPMorgan Chase Institute.

In the JPMorgan Chase Institute’s report Paychecks, Paydays, and the Online Platform Economy, we documented that 4 percent of adults earned income from the Online Platform Economy between October 2012 and September 2015. Despite the tremendous growth in participation in the Online Platform Economy—a 47-fold increase over three years—these online “gigs” remained a secondary source of income for most people. In months when individuals earned platform income, labor platforms, such as Uber or TaskRabbit where individuals perform discrete tasks or assignments, contributed 33 percent of total monthly income, and capital platforms, such as eBay or Airbnb where individuals sell goods or rent assets, contributed 20 percent of total monthly income.

“Consumer spending rose just 0.1% in March, down from an upwardly revised 0.2% increase the previous month, the Commerce Department said Friday. The latest figure was below economists’ forecasts. But personal income increased more than expected. Incomes rose 0.4% last month, up from a downwardly revised 0.1% gain in February. Consumers opted to save more of their higher income instead of spend it amid concerns about the U.S. economy.”

The U.S. economy stumbled out of the gate in 2016 as consumers and businesses showed renewed signs of caution, underscoring the uneven growth that has been a hallmark of the nearly seven-year expansion.

When did Americans decide that 1% or 2% economic growth is acceptable, that puny wage increases are inevitable, and that we should all merely shrug and get used to the country’s diminished expectations? Those questions come to mind watching the desultory reactions to Thursday’s report that the U.S. economy grew by a meager 0.5% in the first quarter of 2016.

Growth has been so anemic for so long, we’re now being told that this is the “new normal.” As the Bureau of Labor Statistics put it, “annual U.S. GDP growth exceeding 3% … is not expected to be attainable over the coming decade.” It lists everything as a cause, except for one thing: federal regulations.

A new study for the Mercatus Center at George Mason University uses an economic model that examines regulation’s effect on firms’ investment choices. Using a 22-industry dataset that covers 1977 through 2012, the study finds that regulation—by distorting the investment choices that lead to innovation—has created a considerable drag on the economy, amounting to an average reduction in the annual growth rate of the US gross domestic product (GDP) of 0.8 percent.

A fiscal-stress test by the credit ratings agency ranked the Golden State last among populous states for ability to mitigate the next economic crises. Texas placed first, followed by Missouri and Washington. California’s weak rating came from high revenue volatility and low budget reserves and fiscal nimbleness.

California, whose state budget is highly dependent on volatile income taxes, is the least able big state to withstand a recession, according to a “stress test” conducted by Moody’s Investor Service.

While the most current complete tax data from the Franchise Tax Board is for 2013, the recently published zip code data enables some preliminary analysis for the 2014 receipts. By region, 40.3% of PIT revenues came from the Bay Area. More importantly, 51.2% of the increased PIT revenues in 2014 came from this region, once again illustrating how much California is reliant on a single region not only for continued jobs and employment growth, but the continued health of the state’s fiscal situation. Los Angeles, with 30% of the population, was the next largest region, paying 27.5% of total PIT and a 25.5% share of the increased PIT receipts. In the absence of state policies that promote more balanced and geographically dispersed jobs growth, California’s finances will likely continue to be reliant on the economic health of one region.