speeches · February 12, 1959
Regional President Speech
Karl R. Bopp · President
INFLATION - A THREAT TO RETIREMENT PROGRAMS
36th Annual Convention of the National Council on Teacher Retirement
of the National Education Association
Morning Session, Friday, February 13, 1959
Sheraton-Ritz Carlton Hotel, Atlantic City, N. J,
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
FOR RELEASE:
9:00 a.m., Eastern Standard Time,
Friday, February 13, 1959-
INFLATION - A THREAT TO RETIREMENT PROGRAMS
By Karl R. Bopp
President, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia
Before the
36th Annual Convention of the National Council on Teacher Retirement
of the National Education Association
Morning Session, Friday, February 13, 1959
Sheraton-Ritz Carlton Hotel, Atlantic City, N. J.
In the past quarter of a century we have experienced depression, war,
prosperity, and inflation« Yet, by and large, I think these have been years of
economic accomplishment and progress. The prospect of long-run inflation,
however, is a cloud on the horizon. It is this threat that you have asked me to
discuss.
We have come a far way from the depression in a brief period of time.
You may recall the Report of the Committee on Economic Security in 1936 from
which our Social Security laws were developed. It began this way:
"The need of the people of this country for ‘some
safeguard against misfortunes which cannot be wholly
eliminated in this man-made world of ours' is tragically
apparent at this time. . • . Many millions . . . have
lost their entire savings, and there has occurred a very
great deorease in earnings."
Concerning the problems facing older people, the report continued:
"There is insecurity in every stage of life. . . .
For those now old, Insecurity is doubly tragic because they
are beyond the productive period. Old age comes to everyone
who does not die prematurely and is a misfortune only if
there is Insufficient income to provide for the remaining
years of life. With a rapidly increasing number and percentage
of the aged, and the impairment and loss of savings, this
country faces, in the next few decades, an even greater old
age security problem than that with which it is already
confronted."
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-2-
We have passed laws and made private arrangements to prevent old age
from becoming a misfortune, but I believe that the savings and the economic
well-being of millions of older people, as well as others, are still threatened
today - not by a recurrence of depression, but by inflation. Consumer prices
have risen in «ill but two years since 1946. In 1958 they increased almost 3 per
cent. The value of the dollar has diminished by about one-third since the end
of World War II.
Last month another committee, a Federal Advisory Council, composed of
representatives of industry, labor, and the public, issued a report on the Social
Security System, The Council reported, unanimously, that the methods used to
finance old age and survivors insurance are sound. But the Council issued a
warning:
". . . the trusteeship is so large, and the number of people
involved so great that the defeat of beneficiaries' expectations
through inflation would gravely imperil the stability of our
social, political and economic institutions•"
Let me add, that while the trusteeship is great now, it is becoming
larger all the time. There are almost 15 million people of retirement age today.
By 1975 it is estimated there will be almost 22 million. Experience tells us
that an even larger proportion will be covered by Social Security and also by-
private pension plans.
Inflation threatens more than just the purchasing power of retirement
benefits. By undermining efficiency and economic growth, it threatens the economic
foundations that make retirement programs possible. I should like to review briefly
the nature and magnitude of the economic accomplishments that have accompanied the
expansion of retirement programs in the postwar period.
Since World War II, our gross national product in real terms has increased
about AO per cent, or about 3 per cent a year. Unemployment has been relatively
low, averaging about U par cent*
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-3-
Our economy also has worked well. It has shown a remarkable resiliency
in adjusting to new conditions. In the postwar period we have won at least
three battles over mass unemployment and depression. Last year was an example.
The recession was sharp, but short. In most respects our economy began recovering
after the first quarter of 1958. Recovery has continued and the outlook is that
1959 will be a much better year than 1958.
With economic stability and growth has come the ability to provide more
fully for our sick, our disabled, and our disadvantaged. The relative affluence
that we now enjoy is the fundamental basis for the principle of retirement without
dependency. With sustained economic expansion we can look forward to a future in
which all our goals will be more fully attained.
I have grave doubts, though, as to whether we can continue to have sustained
and rapid economic expansion with inflation. You might be interested in the opinion
of the late Lord Keynes. He wrote:
"Inflation has not only diminished the capacity of the investing
class to save but has destroyed the atmosphere of confidence
Which is a condition of the willingness to save. Yet a growing
population requires for the maintenance of the same standard of
life, a proportionate growth of capital."
The kind of economic system that we have will function most efficiently
when the value of money remains constant. Prices are of strategic Importance in
our free market economy. They allocate our resources into those employments in
which they can most profitably be used. When competition is keen, resources are
allocated into those employments in which our consumers want them to be used.
There axe imperfections and frictions, of course. Things do not work so smoothly
or so quickly as Adam Smith and some others believed. Nevertheless, as I see it,
this is basically the way in which our economy operates; the consumer dictates,
the quest for profit motivates, and the price system allocates.
Countless decisions to earn and spend, to borrow and lend are channeled
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
through the cold exacting calculus of a free market to allocate our resources.
The standard unit of these calculations, of course, is the dollar. Balance sheet
and income statements are written in dollar terms. They can reflect change
accurately only if the dollar itself - the unit of measurement - remains reasonably
constant*
An outstanding American economist once gave an excellent illustration of
how inflation leads to faulty decisions and obscures inefficiencies. In the early
1920's he bought a shirt from a woman shopkeeper on the outskirts of Berlin. The
woman, who wished to prove she was not a profiteer, told him: "I am charging you
only as much as it will cost me to replace the shirt. I have, of course, made
my usual profit on that shirt, which I bought for less."
Let us analyze some economic implications of this transaction. In one
accepted accounting sense, the woman had made a profit. Her selling price was
greater than her bookkeeping cost. But it is clear that if she used this "profit"
to meet her living expenses, she would not be able to replace her inventory.
Instead of living off income she would be living off her inventory. In real
terms, she had no income even though in money terms she had a profit.
If this were the only implication, one might feel sorry for the poor
woman and pass on. I have introduced the transaction, however, to illustrate some
principles. In an intricately balanced market system, such decisions have wider
effects.
Competitors, even those who are not fooled by the money illusion, will
have to meet her price or lose business. They may be more efficient, but they
cannot compete, except at & loss«
Inflation tends to obscure such inefficiencies. It can rescue for a time
some businesses which otherwise would be forced to correct their errors or fail.
On the other hand, efficient businessmen may be put in jeopardy because they face
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-5-
competition that does not permit them to raise prices while their suppliers may
not face such competition. Or businessmen who are otherwise efficient may find
themselves in trouble simply because they do not understand the destructive impact
that inflation can have on capital.
If we accept inflation which thus frustrates efficiency and seems to
reward illusion, I doubt that our economy can grow up to its potential. I doubt
whether we will fully realize many worthy objectives.
I further doubt that the economic growth we do manage will be continuous
and stable* Time and time again inflationary excesses have culminated in severe
slumps. Yet it has always been difficult to convince people that the heady wine
of inflation is apt to leave a hangover* I am reminded of Thomas Hart Benton, an
early Congressman from my original home state of Missouri, who kept warning the
public prior to the depression of 1837 of the dangers stemming from a rapid increase
in paper currency. Few listened and for his trouble he was regarded as "a little
exalted in the head*n
Mr. Benton was somewhat naive about the nature of banking, but he well
understood the basic injustice of inflation. He declared:
"This is an enormous and crying evil, the parent of
unnumbered impositions upon the whole community, and especially
upon the weaker part* In paying double for the necessaries of
life, the effect has been precisely the same as if the purchaser
had received but half a pound, half a yard, and half a bushel,
when he paid for a full pound, a full yard, and a full bushel.**
Some would have us believe that a little bit of inflation is not bad.
I think that this is a siren*s song. Even a creeping inflation of say 2 per cent
or 3 per cent a year can be destructive to economic interests of large groups of
people with fixed incomes. Conspicuous among these groups are those on retirement
and those accumulating funds for retirement. A price level that rises at 2—1/2
per cent a year compounded will double in about 29 years*
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-6-
But I wonder if we could really hold inflation to 2-1/2 per cent a
year if the idea that inflation had become a way of life were held universally.
There are forces at work in our economy that tend to turn a creeping inflation
into a leaping inflation.
Perhaps the most powerful force spurring inflation into a walk, a trot,
and a gallop is man* s perverse ability to turn his fears into reality. Once people
begin to expect a rising price level they do -things that tend to bring it about.
If they are afraid that prices will rise next month, they have a real
incentive to make next month's purchases this month. They have an incentive to
trade money for goods, real estate, stock, and anything else they think will rise
in value. When many people think and act this way, prices are certain to rise -
not next month, but this month, and by more than originally expected.
Clearly we must throw up our defenses against inflation. But what sort
of defenses should they be?
Schemes to protect the purchasing power of victim groups - workers, public
utility stockholders, government bondholders, and others - have been adopted or
proposed here and in foreign countries. By and large, I think cost-of-living and
other purchasing power adjustments contribute to inflationary pressures by increasing
costs.
I have fequently heard it suggested that pension funds can protect themselves
against inflation by investing in common stocks. It seems to me that this road is
not necessarily paved with gold over its entire length.
An assumption on which this suggestion is based is that corporate earnings
tend to keep pace with increases in the general price level. Offhand, this assumption
sounds reasonable enough. Nevertheless, I do not find convincing evidence to support
it. Corporate profits after taxes are today a smaller fraction of gross national
product than they were thirty years ago. How can we be sure what their relative
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
importance will be thirty years from now?
A plausible response to this objection is that investment managers
should place retirement funds into the equities of growth companies. Before we
accept this answer uncritically, we should remember that it is easier to select
companies that have grown than those that will grow in the future. The history
of American corporations is filled with blue chips that have turned pink. Not
all Investors can buy at the bottom and sell at the top.
There is another feature of equity investment that merits attention.
It is the principle that even the sweetest substance may turn bitter when used
to excess.
Ultimately, it is primarily the earnings of a corporation that give value
to its stock. Of course, it is not past but prospective earnings that are critically
important. Increasing demand for equities forces up the so-called price-earnings
ratio or the number of dollars paid for one dollar of earnings. As more and more
investors attempt to hedge against inflation by purchasing equities, the price-
earnings ratio rises. If this persists, is it not likely that a stage will come
when neither actual nor hoped-for returns on the investment will be sufficient to
offset the decline in the value of the dollar that they anticipate?
When this stage is reached, the only reason they have to invest in equities
is the hope that stock prices will rise further. For a time they may. Eventually,
however, the idea that the speculators are merely fooling one another is likely
to take hold; and, depending on the impact of the revelation, a technical or
turbulent adjustment ensues.
Please do not misunderstand what I am saying. Investment in equities
has much to commend it* It has made possible much of our phenomenal industrial
and commercial growth. It has an appropriate place in many retirement accounts.
What I am saying is that investment in stocks is an imperfect and hazardous -
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-8-
rather than a sure-fire - hedge against inflation for a whole society* It works
only so long as most investors do not try to take advantage of it.
You as educators are interested also in the other side of investment
marketsj namely, in the demand for funds. Many important institutions cannot
issue equities and yet must be financed. Governments - federal, state, and local -
school and other authorities find they have to pay more to attract funds from
private investors. Increasing costs in these areas affect us all, of course, as
taxpayers.
From an ethical point of view, it seems to me that all groups are equally
entitled to protection from inflation. I must confess, however, that the plans,
schemes, and proposals that have been advanced to protect particular groups seem
to me economically unsound. Wouldn't we promote justice and also save a good
deal of economic and political conflict by preventing inflation in the first place?
Of course, there are a number of ways to attack inflation. The Government
could establish ceilings; that is, we could establish direct controls over the
prices of goods, services, and the factors and resources of production. I submit,
that this approach would create more problems than it solved.
Prices, as I have already mentioned, perform a vital and unique function
in our economic system. They are the automatic rationing device that compel
consumers to decide, as best they can, what and how much they want most. They
also are the nerve endings that keep producers in contact with consumers' decisions.
Establishment of direct controls over wages and prices means we forego
the market and the price system as a means of allocating resources and rationing
goods and services. Since people would demand more goods than were available at
ceiling prices, new methods of distribution would have to be devised to determine
whose demands would be met and whose denied. As our experiences during World VJar II
plainly indicated, we would be forced to distribute our resources on the basis of
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-9-
centralized rationing systems. The abrogation of the market-price system would
entail its replacement by a widespread, far-flung system of planning and control -
a system that would be costly, inefficient, and frustrating.
There are other alternatives. I am not one of those who believe that
inflation is inevitable. It is a human phenomenon and people can do something
about it. Once it is understood, they will do something about it. For my own
part, I do not find the reasoning of those who say inflation is inevitable any
more convincing than the reasoning of those who in the 1930*e concluded that we
were a mature economy incapable of full use of our resources. The words inevitable
and perpetual are too powerful to describe future human behavior.
Inflation is a result of varied and complex forces and it must be
attacked on a wide front. Our output of goods and services is moving to new
record levels. Certainly under these circumstances, as Chairman Martin said
recently:
"We must face up to the reality of either raising taxes or
revising our tax structure to produce more revenue or reducing
the priorities of some other programs until we can get things
in better balance."
Just a year ago, Carl £. Allen, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of
Chicago, indicated forcefully what is needed in the private sector of the economy.
He said:
"It is human nature, when we overreach ourselves and have
no one to blame for our excesses other than ourselves, to seek
out a culprit on the one hand and a savior on the other. I
believe that elements in labor are doing just that today. They
turn to industry as the culprit and to the Government as their
savior. And there are elements in industry which have priced
themselves out of a market. They have themselves to blame for
their excesses, so they look to labor as the culprit and to the
Government as their savior. The culprits are different, but
unfortunately the hoped-for saviors are the same - the Government.
. . . We can hope that management and labor in the months ahead
will recognize that lasting rewards cannot come from constantly
increasing prices, but rather that their mutual interests and the
well-being of the country both require price stability."
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-10-
We need also to understand the role of flexible monetary policy. We have
had such a policy for eight years, easing credit When declines have been under way,
as in 1957-1958, and moving away from ease as business recovers. Monetary restraint
is never popular. To be effective, some borrowing and spending must be restrained.
It may be. as some have urged, that certain areas of the economy should be sheltered
somewhat from the impacts of credit restraint. But I should like to emphasize that
expansion of the sheltered areas necessarily reduces the unsheltered areas and
thus makes the impact on them greater. This in turn can create new "hardships,"
leading to attempts to extend the sheltered areas. Special dispensations for
special groups tend to weaken general credit restraints. If special dispensations
become widespread, general credit restraint becomes meaningless.
I have said I do not believe that inflation is inevitable. If we
understand its erosive effects and how it operates, we will as a people attack it
on the wide front that is necessary.
The war against inflation entails sacrifices, but the rewards far over
balance them. By containing inflation we will eradicate many injustices and build
a firm economic foundation for social progress. We will be able to develop fully
our private and public programs. We will make our free enterprise system not only
an efficient economic machine but an even more satisfying way of life.
Digitized for FRASER
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Cite this document
APA
Karl R. Bopp (1959, February 12). Regional President Speech. Speeches, Federal Reserve. https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/regional_speeche_19590213_karl_r_bopp
BibTeX
@misc{wtfs_regional_speeche_19590213_karl_r_bopp,
author = {Karl R. Bopp},
title = {Regional President Speech},
year = {1959},
month = {Feb},
howpublished = {Speeches, Federal Reserve},
url = {https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/regional_speeche_19590213_karl_r_bopp},
note = {Retrieved via When the Fed Speaks corpus}
}