Posted on 04/12/2011 2:18:59 PM PDT by Hojczyk
In 2009 the Obama Administration promised that with their big spending policies the economy would grow by 3.2% in 2009 and then 4% or higher in 2011 and beyond. Team Obama also said the unemployment rate at the end of President Barack Obama‘s term in 2013 would be just 5.2%. Well, it ain’t happening.
The Obama GDP slid to 1.5% in the first quarter of 2011. The New York Times reported:
At a time when the economy should be rebounding the latest GDP number for the first quarter of 2010 shows that the Obama economic policies have failed.
When 2011 began, Macroeconomic Advisers, a forecasting company, expected that America’s economic output would shape up to rise at a 4.1 percent annual rate in the first quarter, the highest pace in over a year.
But economic reports coming in over the last few months have been increasingly disappointing.
Today, after an especially weak report on February’s trade deficit, the group’s economists lowered their first quarter G.D.P. estimate to a sorry 1.5 percent annualized. If borne out, that rate would be slower than each of the last two quarters, at a time when the economy desperately needs to be rocketing forward so that companies will hasten their hiring.
The Commerce Department will release its preliminary number for first quarter G.D.P. on April 28.
Keynesian Epic Fail.
1.5% is horrible.
Imagine how bad it would be if we hadn’t had Recovery Summer /s.
So I guess, in other words, the recession isn’t actually over...like we have been saying for months...despite the billions of wasted dollars.
” When 2011 began, Macroeconomic Advisers, a forecasting company, “
Aren’t these the guys for whom everything is ‘unexpected’???
0’Zero has said we need to make things better with the rest of the world because our standard of living was unfair, so this his gift to our enemies.
/s
The Journal of Economic Progress editorialized praise for the numbers and dismay for not telling the whole story
“The 1.5% first Quarter GDP reported growth rate is for only the visible portion of the growth.
Not noted were the two other components of the GDP growth. That would be the invisible and the virtual economic growth GDP components. Taken together they add 1.2 % to the real total to swell it to 3.2% quarterly growth expressed as an annual rate. The virtual component was estimated by several leading economists to be in the range of .853 % and the invisible or hidden growth to be at .426%. Taken together they conservatively provide the 1.2% total.
Both are estimated figures but leading economists, both academic and financial, show consensus on the accuracy of the estimates. The invisible growth is closely tied to the recent indicated rise in employment and the decrease in unemployment. The virtual is somewhat more difficult to tie down but is a function of the destabilized US$ and the rise in commodity prices.
Union economic director who asked to be off the record indicated he was pleasantly surprised by the magnitude of the surge. The surge exceeds the hope for growth and should be transformed into wage increases that will spur further growth and more and better jobs.’”
************
Fabricating garbage is so easy........ even a FReeper can do it
The fake ponzi-scheme economy keeps lurching along desperate for its next junkie fix of Bernake dollars. Subtract out the government contribution to GDP and it is probably running negative. If we had taken our financial medicine in 2008 and shut the doors on the Wall St. gamblers and rewarded the guys who played by the rules we would most likely be at a point where we were building on something that was tangible and real. Now we are merely extending the bubble as long as possible. These schemes always collapse when you run out of other peoples money.
bm
How does one distinguish true economic growth from the effect inflation has on the cost of a tank of gasoline or a bag of groceries? Wouldn’t increased expenditures due to inflation be falsely seen as GDP growth?
GDP is adjusted for inflation.
The kicker is that GDP includes federal spending.
Are they using the official CPI adjustment for the GDP calculation? If yes, wouldn’t actual inflation rate, which is much higher than what they will admit to in the CPI, show up as growth?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.