Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Revised Q2 GDP Prints 1.8%, Higher Than Expected, But Prior Revised Lower
Zero Hedge ^

Posted on 07/31/2013 5:33:56 AM PDT by Perdogg

The Q2 GDP printed at 1.7% compared to expectations of 1.0%, however this was entirely offset with the Q1 revision from 1.8% to 1.1%. Since the series is being entirely revised, it is safe to say that these are Apples to Oranges numbers.


TOPICS: Business/Economy
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 07/31/2013 5:33:56 AM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch; SeekAndFind

ping


2 posted on 07/31/2013 5:35:05 AM PDT by Perdogg (Cruz-Paul 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

I’m not entirely sure what this sentence means, but don’t they do this every quarter?


3 posted on 07/31/2013 5:46:54 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

I guess the GPP numbers could be called: bring me the new numbers??

Reminds me of the old joke: CEO is hiring a new CFO and has 3 candidates. He asks the first what is 2+2. Guy laughs and says 4 of course. “not you, leave” and he asks candidate 2 the same question. 2nd candidate says, well, perhaps you are asking a trick question? What base are you using? “not you, leave” so he asks the third candidate the same question. The third one answers “it is whatever you want it to be”. HIRED.


4 posted on 07/31/2013 5:49:14 AM PDT by Mouton (108th MI Group.....68-71)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Futures are all completely flat


5 posted on 07/31/2013 5:51:55 AM PDT by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
the Q1 revision from 1.8% to 1.1%

Eh, 40% off, yeah these are honest numbers. Might as well give us three decimal places with it instead of just one to make it look even more legitimate too.

6 posted on 07/31/2013 5:54:08 AM PDT by jiggyboy (Ten percent of poll respondents are either lying or insane)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jiggyboy

So, basically, they dropped Q1 by .8 and shifted it to Q2 to show ‘Growth’. In reality, they reported 2.4% for Q1, revised it down to 1.8%. Now it is revised down to 1.0%, so Q2 looks like progress.

We need to start a trend map showing the first 5 years of each president. The left is getting away with their spin because our side refuses to draw comparisons to the past. Gingrich had it right in the primaries when he constantly benchmarked Reagan’e economic turn-around to Obama’s lack of progress.


7 posted on 07/31/2013 6:03:08 AM PDT by ilgipper (Obama is proving that very bad ideas can be wrapped up in pretty words)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

Yes there are revisions but in this case they revised to complete GDP model and revised all data back to 1929. This has been known to be coming.


8 posted on 07/31/2013 6:07:47 AM PDT by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch

To what purpose?


9 posted on 07/31/2013 6:11:19 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

I seem to remember that the government is now including items of hypothetical valure into the GDP, such as a child’s finger painting that may someday be worth $50k, after they become the first translucent-transexual POTUS.


10 posted on 07/31/2013 6:11:37 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

This is not terribly uncommon. Models and measurements can always be made more accurate. The new data is all the same model and therefore comparative to each other. What you can’t do is compare a previous version of the data to this version. Thus the “apples” and “oranges” comment from ZH.


11 posted on 07/31/2013 6:14:04 AM PDT by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

Self-preservation as usual by our government masters.


12 posted on 07/31/2013 6:19:18 AM PDT by John W (Viva Cristo Rey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

The constant over estimated amount is a thinly veiled attempt to give a false impression.

By the time the real number is determined, no body is noticing.

This is a low information society.


13 posted on 07/31/2013 7:00:17 AM PDT by School of Rational Thought
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Great!!!

GDP grew at 1.8% during the last quarter.

But, even according to the Department of Commerce’s last re-computation of GDP growth going back to 1929 the average 1929 - 2007 was 3.2%.

So, we are roughly half of an eighty year average. And, we are happy with it. Why?

Oh yes. To be otherwise would be racist. At least according to the LMSM.


14 posted on 07/31/2013 8:02:06 AM PDT by Nip (BOHEICA and TANSTAAFL - both seem very appropriate today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nip

I agree.


15 posted on 07/31/2013 8:02:45 AM PDT by Perdogg (Cruz-Paul 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg; Nip; School of Rational Thought; John W; Wyatt's Torch; SampleMan; skeeter; ilgipper; ...

I’ll bet that if you looked inside the numbers for both quarters, you’d see that most of the growth came from the oil patch and related industries.


16 posted on 07/31/2013 9:39:32 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
Here is a view of GDP by component:


17 posted on 07/31/2013 9:46:20 AM PDT by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch

not sure I understand the graph. do you have the link?


18 posted on 07/31/2013 9:56:50 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-07-31/full-gdp-revision-broken-down-component


19 posted on 07/31/2013 10:05:11 AM PDT by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch

You can’t really tell what industries are pulling the wagon from this chart.


20 posted on 07/31/2013 10:32:52 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

This is how BEA sums up. You get a little more detail in the full report. Oil and Gas would be in non-res and likely export.


21 posted on 07/31/2013 11:12:29 AM PDT by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch

saw exports in the chart you provided but no non-res.

what’s non-res?


22 posted on 07/31/2013 7:29:28 PM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

Non-res is a component of Fixed Investment.


23 posted on 08/01/2013 6:03:15 AM PDT by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson