Over at the econbrowser blog, economist James Hamilton points us to a recent research paper that examines how accurate the various economic indicators are at telling us when the economy is growing or contracting. The Chicago Fed's national index was one of the best. And Monday's report shows it faded in October.

Not only that, but its three-month moving average fell to -0.91 in October from -0.67 in September, declining for the first time in 2009. That drop was especially significant because the Chicago Fed says a move below -0.70 in the three-month moving average following a period of economic expansion indicates an increasing likelihood that a recession has begun.

Of course, the people who are tasked with determining when recessions begin and end haven't called the latest one over yet. So is this report showing a speed bump on the way to a recovery or something more ominous?  

BofA Merrill Lynch Global Research economist Ethan Harris thinks all the talk of a Federal Reserve rate hike is just that -- talk. Harris, a former Federal Reserve Bank of New York economist, said much of the recent hawkish commentary has come from presidents of the regional Fed banks, and that may not be indicative of the thinking on the Fed's board.

"The signals don't  come from Reserve Bank Presidents or advisers," Harris wrote in a note to clients. "They come from either the overall committee -- in the form of the official statements -- or from the core of the committee -- that means (Chairman Ben) Bernanke, (Vice Chairman Donald) Kohn, and to a lesser extend, New York President (William) Dudley."

The Fed starts its two-day policy-setting meeting on Tuesday, and Harris is certainly not alone in thinking they'll stay the course, keeping benchmark interest rates near zero. In fact, BofA Merrill thinks it will be the European Central Bank that hikes before the Fed.

"The bottom line is that faced with roughly the same economic backdrop -- very low core inflation, moderate headline inflation and a large but slowly closing output gap -- we expect the ECB to be more hawkish than the Fed," they wrote. "We expect a replay of the summer of 2008, when the ECB hiked in response to high headline inflation, but Bernanke held back the Fed for fear of fragile financial conditions. Of course, thankfully, a replay of the fall of 2008 is unlikely."

    Jack Ablin, the chief investment officer at Harris Private Bank, has come up with an interesting way of looking at the U.S. healthcare debate -- in particular, why does health care cost so much. His idea? Think of it like going out for dinner and splitting the bill with hundreds of thousands of other diners versus paying for your own meal. Would you order the steak and champagne or the chicken and a glass of water? Ablin enlisted the help of the owner of Aqua Grill in Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida, to help him find out.

It involved sifting through three years of guest checks and comparing the average spent per patron when a bill was split evenly versus the average when separate checks were tabulated.

"The results were dramatic, but not surprising," Ablin wrote in a note to clients. "On average, splitting the bill costs diners about 20 percent more than paying their own check. The difference would be undoubtedly wider with large parties. Given that we spend about $2.5 trillion on health care annually, imagine the cost savings if we migrated to high-deductable policies and health savings accounts. Congress needs to look at shifting health care payments away from third-party payers and to individuals, using a combination of high-deductible health insurance policies and privately-directed health savings accounts."

In a research note, Harris said the bad news hasn't changed his forecast for U.S. economic growth of 3 percent-plus over the next two years. He says the economy has a natural tendency to eventually return to full employment once the "negative shocks" are gone. He points to six major economic theories to support his view, including Keynesian, the Austrian school, and the "financial accelerator model," which counts Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke among its advocates. 

But he acknowledges there is one well-known economic theory which does not support his forecast:

"The one notable exception to this view is Marxism. In Marxist theory the capitalist world is doomed to ever worsening cycles of boom and bust, culminating in its collapse and the assent of communism. Needless to say, we do not ascribe to this view."

"We would need payroll gains of 200,000 per month every month for three straight years just to get back to late 2007 levels of employment, and even that calculation ignores the labor force growth over the intervening years."

Take your pick of bad September job news: the average workweek declined; average hourly earnings increased a paltry 0.1 percent; the broadest measure of unemployment and underemployment rose to 17 percent; and the average duration of unemployment hit an all-time high of 26.2 weeks.

Welcome to the recovery.

After Frank and other members of Congress delivered opening statements, Frank launched into a spirited rebuttal of one member's comments, but was soon interrupted by the committee's top-ranking Republican, Spencer Bachus.

Bachus: Mr. Chairman, uh, your time has expired. Now if you want to give an additional....

Frank: Excuse me, I'm in my five questions, I'm in my five minutes.

Bachus: How about the opening statement of Chairman Bernanke?

Frank: Oh, I forgot about that. I apologize.

After Bernanke read his statement, Frank offered another apology -- and docked himself 30 seconds of speaking time.

"When you are over 55, you just don't spend like you did when you were in your early 50s, 40s and 30s. 

The aging of the population is not going away any time soon, so the rate of growth of consumer spending is shifting downward in a lasting manner."

Dena Aubin has the full story here.

    "There will be death panels enacted by this Congress, but they will be for non-bank financial institutions that will not be considered too big to die.
    I say that because we have this euphemism that we are going to be 'resolving' these institutions. It has not been my experience that when someone says they are going to resolve something, they kill it. We are talking about dissolution, not resolution. We are talking about making it unpleasant for the entities. This is not a fate people will want."

Original Post Text:
U.S. Representative Barney Frank has never been shy about expressing his opinions. His opening remarks at a hearing he chaired with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Wednesday was no exception. Frank poked fun at a political squabble over healthcare reform as he detailed his position on what to do about non-bank financial firms considered "too big to fail."

"There will be death panels enacted by this Congress, but they will be for non-bank financial institutions that will not be considered too big to die.
I say that because we have this euphemism that we are going to be 'resolving' these institutions. It has not been my experience that when someone says they are going to resolve something, they kill it. We are talking about dissolution, not resolution. We are talking about making it unpleasant for the entities. This is not a fate people will want."

Greg Mankiw, the Harvard University economics professor and former adviser to President George W. Bush, summed it up nicely on his blog:

"I extend my congratulations to the President for a fine decision and my condolences to Ben for having the spend the next four years overworked and underpaid."

So what do you think? Best job in the world? Or worst?