|Gross Domestic Product..Now Wait a F-ing Sec...||jrm|
Mar 28, 2002 7:26 AM
|OK in the 3rd quarter of 2001 GDP drops (-) 1.3 %. Then in the 4th quarter of 2001 it gains(+) 1.7 %.
So lets say the GDP index is 5,000. So in the 3rd quarter of 2001 it drops to 4923 losing 77 points. Then in the 4th quarter not only does it recover those 77 points but it gains 58 more points as it gains 1.7% in the 4th quarter topping out at 5059. So im supposed to beleive that GDP expands 3.4% in one 3 month period, and right after 9/11.
I mean if i didnt know better, i'd say there full of shlt. and that the whole excellerated reccession recovery noise we are being spoon fed by g'dubya and the media is crap.
|Same thing occurred to me, but...||cory|
Mar 28, 2002 8:09 AM
|...I'm a liberal, so what do I know?|
Mar 28, 2002 8:30 AM
|I'm no economist, but in your example 1.3% of 5000 is 65 so the drop is to 4935. Then a gain of 1.7% is from 4935, not 5000. this gain is 84 points giving a new GDP of 5019. I don't believe you use the same baseline (5000 in your example) for estimating the growth or loss. The baseline is the previous quarter's GDP.|
|That is correct,||TJeanloz|
Mar 28, 2002 10:31 AM
|The gain in GDP is not from the original baseline, but from a quarter over quarter baseline. So GDP growth for the third and fourth quarters combined was .4% (5019/5000)- not 3.4%.
As for the politics of it, the art of measuring and reporting the numbers is not a political decision. Mr. Bush doesn't approve the numbers, or time their release. In fact, I don't believe he's even had the opportunity to appoint a FOMC governer yet- they're all Clinton leftovers. I suppose he could falsify the number by increasing government spending- but he'd have to pay for it badly in the long run.