Bruce Banner Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Breaking news on BBC...... UK economy shrank by 0.3% in final quarter of 2011.... Unexpected, of course.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCountOfNowhere Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 I was expecting that to be unexpected. Sky also reporting: Breaking news: Economy shrank by 0.3% in final quarter of 2011 - worse than interim estimate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted March 28, 2012 Author Share Posted March 28, 2012 Good job it wasn't expected or we'd have been in recession. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 And with the run up to Christmas. Clearly everyone was practising for the Jubilee quarter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted March 28, 2012 Author Share Posted March 28, 2012 Rule number one.... Always expect the unexpected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichM Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Woods? Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Breaking news on BBC...... UK economy shrank by 0.3% in final quarter of 2011.... Unexpected, of course.... Noooo. I don't believe it! It cannot be true! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted March 28, 2012 Author Share Posted March 28, 2012 Serious question - does revising down mean that they can then show a nice jump up in the next quarter? Or am I being too cynical? Buckers I believe it does. It certainly does with the various house price indexes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WageslaveX14 Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 I remember seeing an article in the Telegraph before Christmas which celebrated the fact that a deeper fall in economic activity in Q4 lessened the chances of a technical recession. This is true, because if activity fell by 0.3% in Q4 2011 and flatlined in Q1 2012, a 'technical recession' would be avoided - there are not two successive quarters of 'negative growth' (incidentally, a stupied phrase). The tenor of the article was that a fall of 0.3% then a static quarter of 0% movement was better than a fall of 0.2% in Q4 and a fall of 0.1% in Q1 2012, even though they end up at exactly the same place, and involve exactly the same amount of economic activity. I bet we get several commentators saying exactly the same thing now, without realising how absurd this view is. People obsess far too much about headline GDP figures and technical recessions, without thinking about why they are measuring GDP in the first place, or what it represents in the real world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Miyagi Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Rule number one.... Always expect the unexpected. Rule number two..... Assumption is the mother of all feck up's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pent Up Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Serious question - does revising down mean that they can then show a nice jump up in the next quarter? Or am I being too cynical? Buckers Could even save us from recession if the next Q was -0.1%! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zugzwang Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 We've had the wrong kind of winter. Gas consumption is well down. Production too, I'd hazard. Doesn't augur well for the current quarter's GDP. Double dip ahoy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuffy Chuffnell Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 ..then there'll be the triple dip and so on. Clearly more money needs to be printed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 ..then there'll be the triple dip and so on. Clearly more money needs to be printed. Absolutely - expect this to be a 'reason' to monetise even more debt (beyond the three hundred and twenty five billion pounds already magicked up). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellerkat Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 From the Grauniad: 9.48am : Here's the details of this morning's UK GDP data for the final three months of 2011. Services sector output: fell by 0.1% quarter-on-quarter, Industrial production: fell by 1.3% q/q (inc. a 0.7% drop in manufacturing output) Construction industry: fell by 0.2% q/q Consumer spending rose by 0.4% q/q Exports grew by 1.6% q/q Households' real disposable income fell 0.2% q/q. This all added up to a 0.3% decline in overall GDP. 9.42am http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/mar/28/eurozone-debt-crisis-mario-monti-almost-over?commentpage=3#block-12' rel="external nofollow">: The most startling fact in this morning's UK GDP data is that household disposable income fell by 1.2% during 2011 . [Ouch!] According to the Office for National Statistics, that's the biggest annual decline since 1977. With the UK economy managing only meagre growth through the last year (GDP grow by just 0.7% during the 12 months), it underlines the weak position of the UK, even though it is likely to dodge a double-dip recession. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R K Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 #austeriteh It does what it says Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCountOfNowhere Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Rule number one.... Always expect the unexpected. I wasn't expecting you to say that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RufflesTheGuineaPig Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 The tenor of the article was that a fall of 0.3% then a static quarter of 0% movement was better than a fall of 0.2% in Q4 and a fall of 0.1% in Q1 2012, even though they end up at exactly the same place, and involve exactly the same amount of economic activity. Not EXACTLY but close enough! Remember that 0.1% fall in Q1 2012 would be 0.1% of a smaller amount. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WageslaveX14 Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Not EXACTLY but close enough! Remember that 0.1% fall in Q1 2012 would be 0.1% of a smaller amount. I didn't think that was worth saying, but good, important point well made. A 0.3% fall followed by a quarter with no change would leave the GDP at 99.7000% of its starting point. By striking contrast, a 0.2% fall, followed by a 0.1% fall in the next quarter would leave GDP at 99.7002% of its starting point. I apologise for any confusion that my first post might have caused, and your reply in no way underlines my initial point about the way people treat tiny changes in GDP figures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lorna1999 Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 I didn't think that was worth saying, but good, important point well made. A 0.3% fall followed by a quarter with no change would leave the GDP at 99.7000% of its starting point. By striking contrast, a 0.2% fall, followed by a 0.1% fall in the next quarter would leave GDP at 99.7002% of its starting point. I apologise for any confusion that my first post might have caused, and your reply in no way underlines my initial point about the way people treat tiny changes in GDP figures. Did anyone else hear the new description for 'double dip recession' that has obviously become a worrying phrase for TPTB? Instead, we now are at risk of 'zig-zag patterns of growth' FFS. Is it just me that hates this sematic manipulation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuffy Chuffnell Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Did anyone else hear the new description for 'double dip recession' that has obviously become a worrying phrase for TPTB? Instead, we now are at risk of 'zig-zag patterns of growth' FFS. Is it just me that hates this sematic manipulation? It's Newspeak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R K Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Meanwhile, now that Osborne's 0.8% rise in inflation caused by his VAT hike have dropped out he attemps to repeat the exercise with his rise on pasties. [/url] Faisal Islam @faisalislam And re UK: ONS says Budget vAT hikes on pasties and excises will add 0.4% points to inflation.... Ouch. It's not the oil price you need to worry about it's the Chancellor! https://twitter.com/#%21/faisalislam' rel="external nofollow"> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zebbedee Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Did anyone else hear the new description for 'double dip recession' that has obviously become a worrying phrase for TPTB? Instead, we now are at risk of 'zig-zag patterns of growth' FFS. Is it just me that hates this sematic manipulation? WHAT!!! our economies going to go back in time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19 year mortgage 8itch Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Meanwhile, now that Osborne's 0.8% rise in inflation caused by his VAT hike have dropped out he attemps to repeat the exercise with his rise on pasties. It's not the oil price you need to worry about it's the Chancellor! ******ing hell, didn't realise pies were such a large part of the economy. No wonder were such fat ******s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rantnrave Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 ******ing hell, didn't realise pies were such a large part of the economy. No wonder were such fat ******s. In answer to the question, it appears that we ate all the pies and continue to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.