Skip to comments.U.S. 1Q GDP Growth Revised Down to 1.9%
Posted on 05/31/2012 6:29:23 AM PDT by scooby321
U.S. economic growth was a bit slower than initially thought in the first quarter as businesses restocked shelves at a moderate pace and government spending declined sharply.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxbusiness.com ...
You are too fast!
I was trying to be the first to log in the obligatory “unexpected”!
Na na na na.....
Na na na na.....
Government spending declined? I’ll believe that when I see it.
and let us not forget, they played games with the GDP deflator to get the GDP number that high. With a more reasonable number to correct for inflation, the GDP is likely zero or negative (ie recession).
I see that it’s Thursday. The day the numbers are “revised down.”
Every figure has to be revised downward.
No, Bain capital!
It’s the Bush tax cuts!
Republicans in Congress refuse to act becasue they hate black presidents, black attorney generals, women, kids, hispanics and puppies!
Eat the rich!
(take your pick)
True, it should be called “Revise Down Thursday” and “Unexpectedly Friday”
And the talking heads were doing all the dancing they could to make 2.2 seem like a positive when it was announced. Lets see them spin the decrease.
Recovery Summer Part IV!
Can’t be true. I just heard on Fox News that economic indicators were looking up as consumer spend more.
I’m so confused..../s
3.0, 2,2, 1.9%, who still relies on these numbers? Is it all just for historians sake?
Does the number truly mean businesses use that as a reliable indicator for making decisions or is it purely for pundits on both sides to use for their ‘narrative’?
Never mind my ignorance. I will self-educate more on the subject.
In reality, studies are generally small, intentionally limited in scope, designed to illuminate one piece of a much larger puzzle. This is how scientific rigor is maintained. Thus, the words that are used may sound like they mean something to the general public, but the specific meanings of each word may have implications understandable only by reading the whole paper, and maybe by having several years of reading papers, in order to understand the context.
Sooo... each of these economic numbers may have a specific meaning to economists that indicate something very specific. There are leading indicators, that predict what will happen 3 or 6 months in the future. There are lagging indicators, useful for some purposes, but only in hindsight - in other words current indicators predict what lagging indicators will do. That's why U-2, or new unemployment claims, which they make such a big deal of, may be helpful to some, but are certainly no indicator of the health of the economy, and especially not unless considered with all of the unemployment stats as a whole.
I don't know why I wrote all that.
Yeah, looks like “initially thought “is the new “unexpected “? Isn’t this the place where we show the pic of the contortionist guy with his head inspecting his sphincter?
I heard Stu Varney early this morning say that part about consumer spending being up——true enough if you can keep from snickering-—with the price of gas setting records and sales of guns and ammo also setting records there is indeed a smidge of truth init. I expect confirmation soon that sales of pitchforks are up.
That chart is a great way to illustrate how fast jobs were going into the overseas terlet even during the housing bubble. The geniuses who were responsible for promoting that bubble should be tied to anchors and allowed to ride the red and blue lines all the way to the bottom. Both of those lines are going to be upside down for at least another decade——
Unfortunately the CPI has been heavily degraded over time, especially over the prior three admins. Instead of calculating the cost of a set standard of living, it now calculates the cost of a declining standard of living. In turn the inflation adjusted GDP has been overstated.
Some links you might find of interest:
Amen to that.
FYI more info available on how the CPI, and therefore inflation adjusted GDP have been degraded.
Thank you. Its a start (for me) ..... I was wondering out loud who exactly uses these numbers, and for what purpose.
I kept seeing periodically reports of such and such indicators which are supposedly telling us how economics is doing, and revisions of them (almost always) afterwards.
Nowadays it seems purely for academic/historic purpose, because nobody (in general public) can have trust in the numbers per se when they come out. Unless people keep and make charts.
Exactly. And people do. Revisions are inevitable - the numbers are too big, there’s just going to be error. But people here who are tracking the numbers have exposed a systematic effort to game the system and minimize numbers they don’t like.
It would have been much easier for you to say we have a Muslim Traitor playing POTUS who is doing everything he can to destroy America
The presstitutes lie continuously to cover for their Muslim boy who is simply enabling the radical left to destroy America too.
Obama's Muslim buddies are destroying on purpose but the radical left is doing it because they are STUPID.
Americans look at the headlines and have no idea what is going on. Whether they read DU or FREEREPUBLIC, all they know is it ain't going well. Americans are the biggest fools in history.
But after the election, the downward revision will make your head swim.