GDP Grows at 8.2% Rate

3rd quarter best in nearly 20 years thanks to tax cuts, low interest rates.

The U.S. economy, propelled by tax cuts and low interest rates, roared ahead at an 8.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter, the best showing in nearly 20 years, while Americans' incomes and spending both showed healthy gains in November.

The Commerce Department report that the GDP grew at an 8.2 percent rate in the third quarter, propelled by a surge in consumer spending, was identical to the preliminary estimate made a month ago and represented the strongest growth since an 8.4 percent rate of increase in the fourth quarter of 1983.


Well, how are the Dems going to spin this one? One poster told me yesterday that it's all a lie, that there is no upturn in the economy.....

Looks around for

That would be me. The dollar is falling our trade deficit is huge or debut is the highest ever. CNN reports a story yesterday how wal-mart sales are down but today the sales are great. Let's see how holiday sales are, my bet is they will use the terror alert as the reason they where down. American media is all propaganda today CNN has a story about the dollar steadies vs the euro but just yesterday it went down another penny. Sounds like Enron on a huge scale to me.

Yes, Yes, Yes, we all know...all US media bad, www.whatreallyhappened.com & Rense.com good...

But seriously, the proof is in the pudding. The economic cycle is directly on track. The market is back up, productivity is through the roof, GDP is the same, jobless rate is falling, consumer spending is up, retails vendors are making money, (except for those reporting directly to DD)...best economic times in 20 years...all those who are respected economists are pleased. After the war is over, the recovery will continue, and we can get back to paying down the deficit. How can anybody say this is but a ruse???? Some proof, please, other than, "because I say it's so"...

How does the third quarter real GDP compare with same quarter last year? 2001? 2000? 1999? etc.

Of course 8.2% growth can be spun to look good in an abysmal economy. Where the baseline is so bad and you choose to measure in a percentage growth term rather than real terms, it's easy to fake a "best performance in 20 years". It's just about how to lie with statistics.

I will research this and come back with the full story, so non-econometrician ATS members don't get duped. That's in keeping with the mission of this website.

"Best economic times in 20 years?" That is truly delusional.

I mentioned this figure about a week back. Every response was "Oh, and you believe what the government tells you? You're more naive than I thought!" People will only believe what they want to belive, or what they fear to believe, and right now, lots of people want to believe the government is bad, and fear it, too...

Ok, again, I must ask for proof. Remember, I asked for proof? Not just, "The government lies", or "because I say so".

I'll research the figures from previous years, but I don't see how that will matter much now, as what we are looking for is an improving economy, which we surely have, regardless of all the naysayers. The proof is in the numbers. I'm sorry, but faking performance of this sort is not possible, no matter how many times you say it. It is utterly impossible for all the factors involved to be faked by retailers all over the US.

Excuse me for a slight misstatement, I ment to say "best performance", not times...but I am in no way delusional...those who would say this is all "fake" are the ones who are delusional....and that is borne out by fact....

You are 100% correct. The dems are so afraid that they are not only going to be kept out of the White House again, but that they will loose even MORE seats in the House and Senate, that they are putting a negative spin on everything good that happens! It really is funny, and I'm enjoying watching it take shape. From Dean saying the capture of Saddam doesn't matter, to Maddy Albright intimating that we have Bin Ladin in custody, it's getting to be a real circus. The one thing you DON'T see from the Dems in Congress is someone bashing the economy right now, because they are smart enough to see that it would be instant political death!!! The economy is on the rise, and there isn't a THING they can do about it!!!!

No problem there, I could see you got a little excited.

It is the nature of spin to take one figure out of context and use it to justify an undeservedly positive assessment. I would not deny that there must be a correction in any economic cycle. There must be a positive quarter coming out of bad bad times. But it sure cannot fit into "best economic times in 20 years" or "best performance" category. Superlatives like that are difficult to place in the assessment of anything done by the Bush admin - you need more than a positive blip out of the abyss to make sweeping statements like that!

It is a good idea to keep researching, yes. The more positive signs the better any American ought to feel, down to the level of which sectors are responsible, and whether those are now a real and sustainable trend. Unemployment trends and size of labor force trends are also probably significant to a lot of ATS members.

In the end it's all worthwhile to be thoroughly informed. That's just how your government wants you NOT to be.

Wow glad you�re so happy. But hey lets not forget we have been out of a recession only to be still in it a few times in the last 3 years. So I�ll wait it out before I get excited. Not going to believe any media hype about the economy it can be spun anyway just like everything else. Read the stories you can see how they are spun to look better then they are. Example right now I am reading on CNN about the rise in personal spending a good indictor
"The confluence of factors that so lifted consumer spending in the third quarter is dissipating," said Lara Rhame, senior economist at Brown Brothers Harriman. "Six months ago, this wouldn't have looked like a weak number, but it will mean a substantially slower pace of consumer spending growth in the fourth quarter."
Yet this article title is a raise in consumer spending. Yes for last month.
It�s all spin. Of course tax cuts will raise spending you would have to be a complete fool to think it wouldn�t but will it last? That�s the biggy. I refinanced my home and redid my kitchen, bathroom, 2 bedrooms and family room plus my living room. Rates where so low I had to do it you know. Plus I figured I�ll live here for at least 10 more years so why not do some upgrades. I�m sure a lot of people did what I did but will it keep happening? Income levels are not rising. High paying jobs are still moving off shores something�s got to give we can�t forget the layoffs and bad economic news when the first good report comes in. The reverse is true also.

Again, your spin doesn't add up. Show me a time where the growth in GDP and productivity has equaled what it is now? From what ever trough or depression we may have been in! You can spin things away from what the Bush administration has done all you want, but it just doesn't hold water. The positive steps, to include the tax cuts Dean wants to totally repeal, that the administration has taken have set the economy back on track.


Oh, and nobody here was getting excited...just stating the facts, Ma'am....

[Edited on 23-12-2003 by Affirmative Reaction]

No, let me make it more clear.

You have simply quoted a percentage growth figure. It is not meaningful without the other material. It is the basis of spin that you have bought.

You have not shown anything yet which gives the SCALE of GDP or "productivity". You have only provided a comparison. It is vital to know with what the comparison is being made. If it is on an exceptionally low or all-time low figure, then to use a percentage increase is totally meaningless, to make it clearer.

Let's dig further - I would genuinely be pleased to see positive signs, in real terms, of economic turnaround (especially where it is not inflated by war spending) and will spend some time looking for them over a couple of weeks. 'Nuff said for now.

Wow common sense is a tough one for you isn't it. What I don't understand is why you hang out on the biggest conspiracy web site on the internet yet you always time and time again toe the government line on all the propaganda. Attacking anyone who challenges anything the government is trying to cover up. You do this with the economy, Politics, even frickin chemtrails. Doing a search on your name and the threads you trash raises an eyebrow. That is why I called you a Rove plant. But when I started digging I found it�s across the spectrum you�re a government plant. Only here to make sure people don�t think for themselves a and try and sway others off certain theories not all theories just some. With the same old argument you�re a crazy conspiracy theorist or you get your news from rense.com. My story wasn�t a news related one it�s a common sense one which you bashed cause you can�t have the people thinking for themselves. Or let the truth get out.

HA!

Common sense is by far not your strong suit, my dear. It really is funny how far off the mark you are, but if you wish to continue following me around this site calling me a plant of some sort, please, feel free to do so. The ignore box is a wonderful tool, is it not?

Ahhh, NOW I understand why it's called the political mud pit!

Sure ignore me. I'm not the only one that thinks you�re a plant Affirmative Reaction. Toe that government line every story you get crazy about just makes us more suspicious. I always thought chemtrails was hogwash thanks to you I'm taking another hard look at it.

Ok, lets look at it this way....since you seem to have your own way of looking at things....

If we are talking percentages, and I have 100 oranges, and I increase my stock of oranges by 8.4%, that will give me 108.4 oranges, correct?


By the same token, if I have 1000 oranges, and increase my holdings by the same percentage, I end up with 1008.4 oranges, correct?


Now...while that is an extremely simple analogy, which one gives me more of a difference? It means more to me if I only have 100 oranges and I increase by 8.4 than it does than if I have 1000...therefore, it goes without saying that if the numbers are low, the increase has more of an impact....


Simple, yes, but my masters is not in economics...

Fair enough. Now you're talkin'!

That impact, for you, is significant.

For someone who was employed in Orange County when there was 1000 oranges in 1999, and who cannot get a job in oranges, now seeing an increase from 100 to 108.2 oranges three years later (to continue the analogy), the impact of the 8.2 oranges is far less important to their own circumstances. It's a matter of perspective.

But you have hit the nail on the head in the difference between a percentage growth and an absolute measure.

Of course, adding 82 oranges to 1000 oranges would be more of a signal of best economic times. That is how many you would add if you added 8.2% on the better baseline - not 8.2.

Happy Christmas! I will return to this.



[Edited on 23-12-2003 by MaskedAvatar]

Sorry, public math is not my strong pont, should have put 1082 oranges...


where the HELL is my calculator when I need it?


And oh, BTW, since we now have an increase in oranges, we can now employ more orange pickers, which employes more orange juice makers, truckers to haul the OJ, stockers to put it on the shelf, checkers to sell it, . and so on, and so on.....

MA: Why do you even try?

AR: SO now that we have an increase in oranges, we can hire more illegal aliens to pick them! So, Americans will STILL be unemployed. Let's have a friggin party!