Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Bruce Banner

U K Growth Figures Unexpectedly Revised Downward

Recommended Posts

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rule number one.... Always expect the unexpected.

Rule number two..... Assumption is the mother of all feck up's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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%!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..then there'll be the triple dip and so on.

Clearly more money needs to be printed. :rolleyes:

Absolutely - expect this to be a 'reason' to monetise even more debt (beyond the three hundred and twenty five billion pounds already magicked up).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Grauniad:

: 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.

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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! :P

Remember that 0.1% fall in Q1 2012 would be 0.1% of a smaller amount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not EXACTLY but close enough! :P

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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]

It's not the oil price you need to worry about it's the Chancellor!

https://twitter.com/#%21/faisalislam' rel="external nofollow">

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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? :lol::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

******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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 355 The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.