The Bureau of Economic Analysis reported today that the U.S. economy
grew at an annual rate of 2.5 percent in the second quarter of 2013. The
advance estimate for Q2, released last month, had shown a 1.7 percent
growth rate. Higher exports and lower imports were a major factor behind
the stronger growth estimate. As the following chart shows, Q2 growth
appears to have picked up from its slower pace in Q4 2012 and Q1 2013.
The Q2 data are subject to further revision in a third estimate that the
BEA will release next month.
The
next table breaks the latest growth data down according to the
contributions of each major sector of the economy. The contribution of
consumption expenditure was essentially unchanged at 1.21 percentage
points, a little slower than the average growth of consumption over the
previous eight quarters. Investment contributed a little more to growth
than previously reported, but the upward revision was entirely
attributable to higher nonfarm inventory investment. Inventory
investment is an ambiguous indicator. Higher inventory investment can
indicate either that firms are optimistically stocking up in
anticipation of stronger future sales, or that goods they had planned to
sell were unexpectedly piling up in warehouses and store shelves
because of disappointing demand. >>>Read More
Follow this link to view or download a classroom-ready slideshow with charts of the latest GDP data
Saturday, August 31, 2013
Monday, August 19, 2013
Alexei Navalny: To Change Russia's Economy, Start with Moscow
Alexei Navalny, lawyer, blogger, and opposition activist, has a simple slogan for his campaign to become mayor of Moscow: Change Russia, start with Moscow. His program
urges a broad spectrum of changes to legal, political, educational, and
healthcare systems, but reform of Moscow’s and Russia’s economy
underlie all of them.
Russia’s economy certainly could use a shot in the arm. When Vladimir Putin first became president of Russia, the economy was just beginning to emerge from the chaos of the 1990s. Putin promised, rashly, to double GDP in ten years. If you pick the right measure of GDP and the right years, he managed to do it. (See this earlier post for details.) However, as the next chart shows, the Russian economy was hit hard by the global crisis. In its best post-recovery year, 2010, it grew at barely half the pre-crisis average. Year-on-year growth of real GDP through the second quarter of 2013 has been just 1.2 percent. The economy may have technically entered a recession in the second quarter, although Bloomberg quotes Deputy Economy Minister Andrei Klepach as saying that there was no recession, only stagnation.
What could the mayor of Moscow do about Russia’s GDP? More than one might think. For one thing, the city of Moscow, all by itself, accounts for a quarter of the country’s economic output—about the same share as the top 20 U.S. cities contribute to the American economy. More importantly, though, Moscow exhibits all of Russia’s economic ills in microcosm. Change there really could spark change throughout the country. >>>Read more
Russia’s economy certainly could use a shot in the arm. When Vladimir Putin first became president of Russia, the economy was just beginning to emerge from the chaos of the 1990s. Putin promised, rashly, to double GDP in ten years. If you pick the right measure of GDP and the right years, he managed to do it. (See this earlier post for details.) However, as the next chart shows, the Russian economy was hit hard by the global crisis. In its best post-recovery year, 2010, it grew at barely half the pre-crisis average. Year-on-year growth of real GDP through the second quarter of 2013 has been just 1.2 percent. The economy may have technically entered a recession in the second quarter, although Bloomberg quotes Deputy Economy Minister Andrei Klepach as saying that there was no recession, only stagnation.
What could the mayor of Moscow do about Russia’s GDP? More than one might think. For one thing, the city of Moscow, all by itself, accounts for a quarter of the country’s economic output—about the same share as the top 20 U.S. cities contribute to the American economy. More importantly, though, Moscow exhibits all of Russia’s economic ills in microcosm. Change there really could spark change throughout the country. >>>Read more
Tuesday, August 13, 2013
How Fuel Subsidies Around the World Burden the Rich and the Poor Alike, with Lessons for the US
I have posted frequently (most recently in a three-part series that starts here)
on the topic of underpricing of energy in the United States, but we are
not the only offender. Many countries around the world subsidize
consumer energy prices in ways that bring them to levels even lower than
what U.S. consumers pay. These policies burden the rich and the poor
alike—rich countries like Saudi Arabia and poor ones like Egypt, and
within each country, both rich and poor citizens.
How subsidies hurt the poor
Fuel subsidies both help and hurt consumers. The trouble is that poor consumers get a disproportionately small portion of the help and a disproportionately larger share of the hurt.
The help comes because subsidies make fuels more affordable. That not only reduces direct costs for cooking and lighting, but also indirectly holds other prices down, for example, by reducing transportation costs for food. For individual families, the price reductions can be most welcome. For example, a study by Arze del Granado and others, cited by the IMF study, found that an increase of $.25 per liter in the price of fuel would reduce the real purchasing power of a poor household by more than 5 percent. >>>Read more
How subsidies hurt the poor
Fuel subsidies both help and hurt consumers. The trouble is that poor consumers get a disproportionately small portion of the help and a disproportionately larger share of the hurt.
The help comes because subsidies make fuels more affordable. That not only reduces direct costs for cooking and lighting, but also indirectly holds other prices down, for example, by reducing transportation costs for food. For individual families, the price reductions can be most welcome. For example, a study by Arze del Granado and others, cited by the IMF study, found that an increase of $.25 per liter in the price of fuel would reduce the real purchasing power of a poor household by more than 5 percent. >>>Read more
Sunday, August 4, 2013
US Unemployment Rate Falls to 7.4 Percent in July, a New Low for the Recovery
The latest data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics show the
US labor market continuing to recover. The unemployment rate fell to 7.4
percent, a new low for the recovery. Payroll jobs increased by a
moderate 162,000, as shown in the following chart. May and June job
gains were revised downward.
Payroll job increases were concentrated in service sectors, with retail trade, leisure and hospitality, and business services all showing strong growth. Goods producing industries gained slightly, with job losses in construction more than offset by gains in manufacturing. The government sector showed a rare increase in jobs, most of them in at the local level. Federal and state governments employed fewer workers in July. As the following chart shows, the long decline in total government employment appears to be tapering off. >>Read more
Follow this link to view or download a classroom-ready slideshow with charts of the latest employment situation
Payroll job increases were concentrated in service sectors, with retail trade, leisure and hospitality, and business services all showing strong growth. Goods producing industries gained slightly, with job losses in construction more than offset by gains in manufacturing. The government sector showed a rare increase in jobs, most of them in at the local level. Federal and state governments employed fewer workers in July. As the following chart shows, the long decline in total government employment appears to be tapering off. >>Read more
Follow this link to view or download a classroom-ready slideshow with charts of the latest employment situation
Friday, August 2, 2013
How GDP Revisions Change Our Picture of the Great Recession: The Story in Charts
On July 31, the Bureau of Economic Analysis released revised data for
US national income accounts. The revised data give us a new view of the
Great Recession that began at the end of 2007. It still merits its name
as the most severe economic downturn since the Great Depression of the
1930s, but the contraction now looks a little shallower than previously
thought and the recovery a little more robust.
The following chart compares the old and revised real GDP data over the past six years. The old and new data series are not directly comparable. Not only was the old series stated in 2005 dollars and the new in 2009 dollars, but there are numerous statistical and methodological differences as well, as discussed below. For easier comparison, then, the chart displays both the old and new data in the form of an index with the peak of the previous cycle, Q4 2007, equal to 100.
Several features stand out in the chart. First, the contraction from peak to trough was not quite as deep as reported earlier. Instead of falling by 4.7 percent, real output fell by 4.3 percent. Beginning from the trough, which came in Q2 2009 in both series, the expansion is somewhat stronger according to the new data, especially in 2011. From Q1 2011 to Q1 2012, the economy is now seen to have grown by 3.3 percent rather than the previously reported 2.5 percent. By Q1 2013, real GDP was 3.9 percent above the previous peak, rather than just 3 percent, as reported earlier. >>>Read more and view the rest of the charts
The following chart compares the old and revised real GDP data over the past six years. The old and new data series are not directly comparable. Not only was the old series stated in 2005 dollars and the new in 2009 dollars, but there are numerous statistical and methodological differences as well, as discussed below. For easier comparison, then, the chart displays both the old and new data in the form of an index with the peak of the previous cycle, Q4 2007, equal to 100.
Several features stand out in the chart. First, the contraction from peak to trough was not quite as deep as reported earlier. Instead of falling by 4.7 percent, real output fell by 4.3 percent. Beginning from the trough, which came in Q2 2009 in both series, the expansion is somewhat stronger according to the new data, especially in 2011. From Q1 2011 to Q1 2012, the economy is now seen to have grown by 3.3 percent rather than the previously reported 2.5 percent. By Q1 2013, real GDP was 3.9 percent above the previous peak, rather than just 3 percent, as reported earlier. >>>Read more and view the rest of the charts
Thursday, August 1, 2013
US GDP Grows 1.7 Percent in Q2, Beating Expectations, Major Revision to Earlier Quarters
The Bureau of Economic Analysis
today released its much anticipated advance estimate of second quarter
GDP growth, along with rebenchmarked data for earlier quarters. Q2
growth was reported as 1.7 percent, hardly scintillating, but better
than some analysts had expected. However, growth for Q1 was revised down
from 1.8 percent to just 1.1 percent, and Q4 2012 was revised down from
a feeble 0.4 percent to a near standstill at 0.1 percent. All the
numbers are quarterly data stated at annual rates.
The best way to see what has been going on since the first of the year is to look at the old, the rebenchmarked, and the newly revised data on a sector-by-sector basis, as in the following table:
The first thing we see in this table is that the contribution of consumption to real GDP growth slowed from 1.54 percentage points in Q1 2013 to 1.22 percentage points in Q2. Q1 consumption, in turn, was revised downward from a contribution of 1.83 percentage points. Consumption of durable goods picked up slightly in Q2. The slowdown was about evenly divided between services and nondurable goods.>>>Read more
Follow this link to view or download a classroom-ready slideshow with charts of the latest GDP data
The best way to see what has been going on since the first of the year is to look at the old, the rebenchmarked, and the newly revised data on a sector-by-sector basis, as in the following table:
The first thing we see in this table is that the contribution of consumption to real GDP growth slowed from 1.54 percentage points in Q1 2013 to 1.22 percentage points in Q2. Q1 consumption, in turn, was revised downward from a contribution of 1.83 percentage points. Consumption of durable goods picked up slightly in Q2. The slowdown was about evenly divided between services and nondurable goods.>>>Read more
Follow this link to view or download a classroom-ready slideshow with charts of the latest GDP data
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)