Q1 Gdp Figures

[Bob Loblaw]

Just heard that Q1 figures will be negative (unsubstantiated rumour but from someone who is 'in the know')

[FIGGY]

Just heard that Q1 figures will be negative (unsubstantiated rumour but from someone who is 'in the know')

When are they out?? PMI and the likes all look + so I cant see it myself but you never know

EDIT 27th April

Edited April 5, 2011 by FIGGY

[Unsafe As Houses]

When are they out?? PMI and the likes all look + so I cant see it myself but you never know

1st estimate: 27 April.

If the rumour turns out to be true then I think that means we will be officially back in recession.

[leicestersq]

Just heard that Q1 figures will be negative (unsubstantiated rumour but from someone who is 'in the know')

Oh my, that would be a problem would it not?

The conservatives are trying to close the deficit by letting growth happen whilst not increasing the state sector as much as the general rate of growth in the economy.

But they are still going to grow the state in nominal terms. However, if the nation's economy shrinks, then they are going to grow the state in relative terms to the whole economy as well. That will mean that the deficit will blow out and become unfundable.

Given that rising oil prices always cause economies to contract, I just dont see how they can hope for sustained growth during the term of the Parliament. The loony left who think we can tax and spend our way out of recession via Plan 'B' are going to be disappointed. Instead Plan 'C' will have to be used, cuts to nominal government expenditure if we are going to avoid Plan 'D', which is the IMF running the country for us.

[EmmaRoid]

(unsubstantiated rumour but from someone who is 'in the know')

[thecrashingisles]

(unsubstantiated rumour but from someone who is 'in the know')

Ed Balls' press office?

[DungBeetle]

PMI's say different. I think it would be unlikely, am guessing 0.5% growth.

[Killer Bunny]

PMI's say different. I think it would be unlikely, am guessing 0.5% growth.

+1

[mattyfc]

Just heard that Q1 figures will be negative (unsubstantiated rumour but from someone who is 'in the know')

I would expect it to be 0.9-1.5% judging by the survey data out and already released figures.

The ONS has already released a lot of the data for Jan, services up 1.3%, Manufacturing / Industrial production 1%, retails sales 1.5% etc, February looks a little softer and march seems to have been better than January.

I suppose the ONS can publish any number they like. I think they will be in danger of a severe credibility problem if Q1 was negative considering every other piece of data points to very strong growth. Who is meant to audit the figures they produce anyway?

[Caveat Mortgagor]

But they are still going to grow the state in nominal terms. However, if the nation's economy shrinks, then they are going to grow the state in relative terms to the whole economy as well. That will mean that the deficit will blow out and become unfundable.

Not so. Public spending is falling (in real terms), the govt is relying on real growth in the private sector to derive a meaningless yet positive GDP figure that soothes the masses.

All the same, If GDP is negative, but by less than the extent of the real public spending cuts then in relative terms the state got smaller.

Edited April 5, 2011 by Caveat Mortgagor

[Pent Up]

+1

+2

The Pent Up complete ******** forecast is currently putting it at +0.6%

[leicestersq]

Not so.

So.

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/

Those look like rises in nominal expenditure to me.

[Bloo Loo]

I expect no GDP figures are going to be released.

That WOULD be unexpected.

as for the optimists above, Q1 is more than just January.

[Democorruptcy]

They would be mad to spend all that taxpayer money, steal from savers and make everything more expensive for everyone just for a negative figure.

+1.3%

[DungBeetle]

I expect no GDP figures are going to be released.

That WOULD be unexpected.

as for the optimists above, Q1 is more than just January.

Except we have PMI's for Feb and March, and they are usually a good general indicator.

[200p]

Its a romantic notion, for David Cameron, that this Great Nation will get together (as we are all in this together), and with our stiff upper lips grow and prosper out of this recession.

Give it up, just print the goddamm money and hand it out, thats all we're good for.

[Killer Bunny]

A boucne from Q4 would be reasonable to expect. Cuts in real spending started this week.

[leicestersq]

They would be mad to spend all that taxpayer money, steal from savers and make everything more expensive for everyone just for a negative figure.

+1.3%

I thought that they were mad?

[Fishman]

When are they out?? PMI and the likes all look + so I cant see it myself but you never know

EDIT 27th April

We can't have Wills and Kate getting married on the 29th (with all the pomp and ceremony that goes with a Royal wedding) during a recession.

So it will be positive.

[Caveat Mortgagor]

So.

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/

Those look like rises in nominal expenditure to me.

You will note that I specified 'real terms'.

Anyway, your reply misses the point. This was not initially a semantics issue, but a numbers issue. You got your numbers wrong, then your reply showed you hadnt read my post.

Back on topic...

You asserted that the state will be greater in relative terms to the whole economy if GDP shrinks. Its my assertion that you have your numbers muddled up.

Perhaps you havent accounted for the fact that spending in the rest of the economy will also be adjusted for inflation before a final GDP figure is reached.

Edited April 5, 2011 by Caveat Mortgagor

[DungBeetle]

You will note that I specified 'real terms'.

Anyway, your reply misses the point. This was not initially a semantics issue, but a numbers issue. You got your numbers wrong, then your reply showed you hadnt read my post.

Back on topic...

You asserted that the state will be greater in relative terms to the whole economy if GDP shrinks. Its my assertion that you have your numbers muddled up.

Yup I agree, "real terms" is the important bit. Always.

[frenchy]

I would expect it to be 0.9-1.5% judging by the survey data out and already released figures.

The ONS has already released a lot of the data for Jan, services up 1.3%, Manufacturing / Industrial production 1%, retails sales 1.5% etc, February looks a little softer and march seems to have been better than January.

I suppose the ONS can publish any number they like. I think they will be in danger of a severe credibility problem if Q1 was negative considering every other piece of data points to very strong growth. Who is meant to audit the figures they produce anyway?

Afternoon Flashman welcome back!

[leicestersq]

You will note that I specified 'real terms'.

Anyway, your reply misses the point. This was not initially a semantics issue, but a numbers issue. You got your numbers wrong, then your reply showed you hadnt read my post.

Back on topic...

You asserted that the state will be greater in relative terms to the whole economy if GDP shrinks. Its my assertion that you have your numbers muddled up.

Perhaps you havent accounted for the fact that spending in the rest of the economy will also be adjusted for inflation before a final GDP figure is reached.

I think I was talking about nominal changes in my post. If nominal GDP decreases and nominal state expenditure increases, then there is a real increase in the relative size of the state, at least as far as spending is concerned, irrespective of what inflation might be.

However, I do take your point that I should have been more precise and said 'nominal GDP' rather than 'the nation's economy'.

Notwithstanding, the main point still applies, if nominal GDP is falling, then the nominal rises in Govt expenditure will be ruinous. Indeed I would go further and that if inflation were to rise, much of government expenditure is tied to the inflation rate, and that would have to rise in nominal terms too. Any real GDP fall is going to blow the deficit in the UK sky higher than it already is.

[Nickolarge]

Just heard that Q1 figures will be negative (unsubstantiated rumour but from someone who is 'in the know')

Rumour maybe, but unsubstantiated....No.

The evidence is all around you. You don't even have to do more than scratch the surface.

[Nickolarge]

I expect no GDP figures are going to be released.

That WOULD be unexpected.

as for the optimists above, Q1 is more than just January.

Exactly. I'm going with a minus figure. Probably less than half a percent.