tritsofme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-29-04 12:42 AM
Original message |
3rd Quarter GDP Prediction Thread |
|
Its the last big economic number to come out before the election, and could give either side some election eve ammo on the economy.
This is what growth has been since Q1 2003: Q1 1.9; Q2 4.1; Q3 7.4; Q4 4.2; Q1 4.5; Q2 3.3
The advance GDP number for the July-September quarter of 2004 will be released by Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) at 7:30 CDT, the Street expects that real GDP expanded 4.3% in that quarter.
I think that is an absolutely ridiculous prediction especially with $40-50 oil, I say more like 3%.
What do you all think?
|
Langis
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-29-04 12:46 AM
Response to Original message |
tritsofme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-29-04 01:57 AM
Response to Original message |
tritsofme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-29-04 05:15 AM
Response to Original message |
3. We must have some predictions... |
|
Edited on Fri Oct-29-04 05:15 AM by tritsofme
Wake up and spit out a number.
|
tritsofme
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-29-04 07:13 AM
Response to Original message |
ProfessorGAC
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-29-04 07:22 AM
Response to Original message |
5. No. It Won't Be That High |
|
Remember that the real GDP is estimated based upon projected inflation values and monetary velocity changes vs. changes in nominal GDP. But, the actual cash flow is very high due to fuel prices, so nominal GDP went up. Since they don't include the direct cost of fuel and heating in the CPI, these numbers normally have to be adjusted 6 to 9 months after the fact when the "fuel lag" kicks in.
The reason why most economists don't include fuel is because of its volatility and that makes their simple minded conclusions harder to derive. In addition, they claim that the fuel costs will eventually show up in the price of goods, so they don't want to double count inflation.
What they forget, unfortunately, is that over 60% of the costs in fuel that the average consumer pays is in the direct cost of buying gas, natural gas, or heating oil. So, the "lag" they count on is almost always understated. Therefore, it takes a long time to determine what the real growth was as the "true" inflationary rate calculations lag even longer than their theoretical lag.
So, i don't know what they'll report tomorrow, but my ultimate estimate is about 1.8% real. The Professor
|
shtinkycat
(126 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-29-04 08:00 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Doesn't meet street expectations.
|
wishlist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-29-04 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. 3.7% is bad- leaves Bush with a lously overall GDP for his tenure |
|
They were hoping for enough over 3.7% to raise up the pitiful GDP numbers since Bush took office to at least closer to what we have experienced under previous Administrations. However, this will probably put a damper on any big interest rate hikes in the near future.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 07:42 PM
Response to Original message |