Guide to Interpreting U.S. GDP Figures

 

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.

An update for second quarter GDP figures were released today and growth was revised downward to 1.0% from the initial reading of 1.3%. There will be another revision next month and then further revisions each year in late July or early August. Expect the numbers to get worse as time goes on.

Media attention is not equally distributed to all the versions of the same GDP report. The most attention goes to the first release called the Advance Report. These have tended to be highly optimistic since the Credit Crisis began. The Second and Third Reports that follow (also known as the Preliminary and Final Reports) get slightly less attention, although these are almost always within the same ballpark. The big revisions come in the yearly updates in July and while these can be devastatingly bad, little attention is paid to them by the mainstream media. Nor is the information provided in them used by the mainstream media to interpret current data. The primary reason for this is that the mainstream media rarely interprets government statistics at all no matter how absurd and ridiculous they are. Instead, they mindlessly repeat them in a parrot-like fashion. The public then thinks it's getting real news when it isn't.

On July 29, 2011, the BEA (Bureau of Economic Analysis) revised the GDP figures back to 2006 and stated that GDP growth in Q1 2011 had only been 0.4% instead of 1.9%. There was some comment attached to this report about how seasonal adjustments had inaccurately overstated the numbers. It would be logical to think that such overstatements would be happening in Q2 as well and that these will not be corrected by the BEA until the revision in July 2012. Looking at changes made to the GDP numbers in the last few years certainly provides more than enough reason to believe that the BEA provides the best news possible when the media pays the most attention and the worst news when no one is looking.

The history of the GDP for Q4 2008, the quarter when the Credit Crisis was at its worse, provides a good example of how the government reports GDP. The first report out was a reading of -4.0% -- a bad enough reading, but much better than what was really taking place. After many revisions downward, the BEA this July said the GDP had actually changed by -8.9%. This is an absolute error of almost 5.0%. If the BEA states quarterly growth is +3.0%, you may wish to ponder if it was really
-2.0% instead, but you won't be hearing about the difference until years later. One is normal healthy growth and the other indicates a recession.

The year over year GDP figures can have even bigger errors. The difference from Q4 2007 and Q4 2008 originally indicated 3.3% GDP growth (during the worst recession since the Great Depression, this pigs-can-fly number went unquestioned by the media), but by the July 2011 revision a GDP decline of 3.3% was admitted. This is more than a 6.0% absolute difference. You might want to consider subtracting 6% from any year over year GDP number that the government provides.

The GDP figures produced by the BEA can be highly unreliable and yet the mainstream media doesn't discuss this, nor does it warn investors about it in its reporting. When hearing the news about GDP growth being a passable 2% to 3%, you should assume it might barely be positive or even somewhat negative. For reports like the recent ones that indicate growth of 1% or less, you should assume the economy is noticeably contracting. The BEA will not admit these discrepancies until well into the future however.  You can also assume other statistical manipulations being used to overstate GDP won't be admitted at all.
 
Disclosure: None

Daryl Montgomery
Author: "Inflation Investing - A Guide for the 2010s"
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Q2 GDP Up Only 0.7% Without Government Spending

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.



The Bureau of Economic Analysis revised second quarter GPD growth down from 2.4% to 1.6% today. Stimulus spending peaked in the second quarter and despite the big boost that it provided, the U.S. economy only expanded at a rate that indicates the U.S. standard of living isn't declining further.

The U.S. needs GDP growth (adjusted for inflation) at about 1.5% for the well-being of the average person to remain the same. This is because of population increases and other factors including some overstatement of the numbers. Actual growth, meaning more jobs and increased incomes for the American people, only takes place when the GDP number is above that level. The U.S. right now needs a substantial amount of actual growth just to make up for the decline from the Credit Crisis/Great Recession and to get back over eight million lost jobs. Despite $2.7 trillion in federal deficit spending in the last two years, it's just not happening.

At the bottom of the Credit Crisis/Great Recession GDP declined at a 6.8% annual rate. So far during the 'recovery' GDP growth has been:

2009 Q3  1.6%
2009 Q4  5.0%
2010 Q1  3.7%
2010 Q2  1.6%

Most of this has come from changes in inventories -in the first three quarters, approximately two-thirds of 'growth' came from this one factor. Indeed this also would have been true of the Q2 number as well if the inventory component hadn't been lowered. Inventories for Q2 were originally reported as being responsible for GDP growth of 1.05% (divided by the new 1.6% total, this would indicate inventories were 66% of Q2 GDP growth). However the inventory contribution to GDP was revised downward even though according to the BEA, "Private businesses increased inventories $63.2 billion in the second quarter, following an increase of $44.1 billion in the first quarter". The smaller increase in inventories in Q1 was responsible for GDP increasing by 2.64%. This is a peculiarity of GDP math. In 2009 Q4 inventories decreased (yes, decreased) by $36.7 billion and this created 2.83% GDP growth. A decrease in inventories also created a 1.10% increase in GDP in Q3 2009.

Government spending was supposedly responsible for 0.86% of GDP growth last quarter. Subtracting that from 1.6% leaves only a 0.74% increase in Q2 GDP. Describing this as anemic would be an understatement. The federal government however accounts for almost a quarter of the U.S. economy and its spending increased by 9.1% in Q2. This would seem to indicate that the federal government contributed a lot more to Q2 GDP growth than what the BEA claims. It also begs the question as to how good the GDP numbers will be when government spending significantly declines as it is scheduled to do in fiscal 2011.

Q2 GDP would also have also been a lot lower without big increases in 'Gross Private Domestic Investment', which was up a whopping 25%. 'Equipment and Software' was up by 24.9% between April and June. In the recently released durable goods report for July, it had a big drop, as did machinery and other components in this category.  Two years of stimulus spending is responsible for revving up the investment component of GDP in the second quarter, but economic reports from early in the third quarter indicate that its impact is already waning. We will have to wait though until just before the November election to see the first numbers for Q3 GDP.

Disclosure: No positions

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. There is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Less Credit and Income = More Consumer Spending?

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.


As of June, consumer borrowing has now dropped 16 out of the last 17 months. Credit Card debt has fallen 21 months in a row. The personal savings rate in June rose to 6.4% from 2.1% before the recession began. Wages and Salaries are down 3.6% in the last two and half years. Despite decreased credit and income and increased savings, all three of which are negatives for consumer spending, GDP figures claim American consumers are buying more.

U.S. GDP growth has been fueled by consumer borrowing for many years. Consumer credit grew faster than GDP before the Credit Crisis hit, but is now moving in reverse.  June 2010 total credit card debt (revolving credit) has now fallen below the November 2005 level. American consumers over the decades have accumulated far too much debt and deleveraging is a trend that is likely to go on for many years. This is certainly a negative for an economy that has been built on consumer spending. Even with consumer credit staying steady, it would be hard for the GDP to rise.

The reduction in consumer borrowing is not a voluntary process. The big banks are cutting credit limits, cancelling cards and demanding pay downs. Consumers are choosing to save more though. The savings rate was only 2.1% in 2007. Then it was 4.1% in 2008 and 5.9% in 2009. It was 6.0% or over each month of the second quarter of 2010. More savings means less consumer spending and this trend is likely to continue as long as consumers feel insecure about the economy.

According to the BEA (Bureau of Economic Analysis), wages and salaries of U.S. workers have declined only 3.6% since the first quarter of 2008. This small drop is really surprising considering the unemployment rate was 5.0% in December 2007 and was 9.5% in July 2010. More government jobs and government subsidized jobs prevented this number from being much worse.

Even more amazing, total personal income actually increased by 1.5% during this time. How is this possible during a recession?  Examining the figures indicates that there was a 27% increase in 'Government Social Benefits to Persons' in the last nine quarters. These various forms of stimulus payments, which are essentially welfare, along with government subsidized employment, were paid for by the approximately $3.5 trillion in deficit spending in 2008, 2009, and 2010. This has been the major source of funds for consumer spending recently.

So even though consumers have been borrowing less, the government has been borrowing more and giving the money to consumers to spend (or at least to some consumers). This is equivalent to the 'bread and circus' of Roman times. It is not a sustainable model for economic growth. Nor is it even honest to claim that this is actually economic growth. We don't exactly live in an age of financial honesty however - and that is another trend that can be expected to continue.

Some of the data for this article can be found at: http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.aspSelectedTable=58&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear=2008&LastYear=2010).

Disclosure: No positions.

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. There is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

The Impossible Contradictions of U.S. Consumer Spending

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.


Consumers are the key to any U.S. economic recovery since they account for around 70% of GDP. Revised 2009 fourth quarter GDP figures just released indicate that consumer spending rose 1.7% on an annualized basis. This was after a reported 3.8% rise in the third quarter. These numbers are certainly good and indicate an economy on the mend if they are accurate. Unfortunately, there is little likelihood that they are.

To spend more money, consumers have to have more money. They can get the extra money through higher compensation (such as wages), larger interest and dividends payments, by drawing down savings or by being given additional credit. All of these numbers for 2009 indicate that consumers had less money to spend. According to BEA (Bureau of Economic Analysis) figures updated as of February 26, 2010 and the latest Federal Reserve credit statistics, the following changes took place during 2009:

Employee Compensation     Down    3.2%
Interest Income                   Down    4.9%
Dividend Income                 Down  16.4%
Revolving Credit                 Down     9.5%
(mostly Credit Cards)

Consumers not only had less income and credit available, they also saved more. The U.S. savings rate went up from 3.8% at the end of 2008 to 4.1% at the end of 2009. So consumers earned less money and then on top of that they saved more of that smaller amount of money. Their borrowing power dropped as well. Yet, while this is happening the government keeps reporting consumer spending is going up. There seems to be some sort of contradiction here.

The recent GDP figures indicate that this mystery can be explained by a huge drop in personal tax payments in 2009. The government claims that individual taxes dropped 25.8% during the year, an amount that is much, much bigger than the decline in income and which occurred during a period when there was no major federal tax cut (there were numerous small ones for certain groups in the stimulus package). The supposed large drop in taxes paid gave U.S.consumers an increase in disposable income. They apparently went out and spent it all immediately.

Based on the above information, there are those who might not believe that U.S. consumer spending is actually increasing. For instance, people who took first grade arithmetic and have at least some minimal attachment to reality are likely to be skeptical. If on the other hand, the average U.S. taxpayer cut their tax bill by 26% last year (presumably a number of people got 30% and even 40% reductions) while experiencing only a small drop of income, I am obviously out of the loop. In that case, please send me the name of your accountant ... unless of course he or she has been indicted or is already in prison.

Disclosure: None

NEXT: Greek Crisis Impacts World Currencies and Gold

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer,New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Economy is Bad, but GDP Report OK

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. In addition to the term helicopter economics, we have also coined the term, helicopternomics, to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government and to update the old-fashioned term wheelbarrow economics.

Our Video Related to this Blog:

For those who missed it, the cover of the latest issue of Newsweek has a blaring headline, "The Recession is Over". This 'just wishing makes its so' approach to economic forecasting is being pushed by the Fed and some of its compatriots. I have yet to read though of even one industry that is showing growth in the alleged economic rebound that is taking place. Nevertheless, there was a lot of fanfare for the release of today's GDP Report and how it would show things are getting better. I had no doubt that it would considering the GDP figures are probably the most manipulated and unreliable ones that the U.S. government produces.

Yesterday I checked the 2007 and 2008 GDP figures. If you look at the BEA (Bureau of Economic Analysis) website, you will see that during 2008 the U.S. GDP increased over $450 billion. This a rather eyebrow raising figure considering that the U.S. was in the worst recession since the 1930s during all of 2008 and the classic definition of a recession is declining GDP. If only our current batch of government statisticians had been around in the 1930s they could have made the GDP numbers go up and shown conclusively that there was no Depression! Then they could have used the good GDP numbers to show people that they weren't really hungry and unemployed.

The headline number in today's GDP Report was a decline of 1.0%. For the past year the economy has declined 3.9% (or at least that's the not as bad as the real story official number). It also seems that first quarter GDP was revised downward from minus 5.5% to an even worse minus 6.4%. Looking inside the report, there is little that is positive other than the current declines are less than the previous declines. The big improvement in last quarter GDP did not come from either the consumer or business sectors, but from government spending and trade.

Consumer spending which accounts for 70% of GDP can be summarized as: spending on durable goods fell 4.0%, spending on nondurable goods decreased 7.1%, and spending on services was down 2.5%. Business investments fell at an 8.9% annualized rate during the second quarter and Inventories declined by $141.1 billion. Investments in structures dropped 8.9%, and investments in equipment and software fell at a 9.0% pace. Investments in housing went down for the 14th consecutive quarter, dropping at a 29.3% annual rate. While the actual economy itself was devastated, good news came from the government sector of GDP. Federal spending rose 10.9%! Imagine how good the GDP Report could be if the federal government printed and spent even more money?

Interestingly, the GDP deflator (the inflation rate used to calculate GDP) was 2.2%. I was amazed the government admitted to so high a number. Last year for the second quarter report it was 1.2% even though this was when oil and food prices were skyrocketing. The government claimed that there was almost no inflation at that time despite the obvious. According to classic economics, inflation can't exist during a recession. Also according to classic economics money printing causes inflation. It's quite obvious which one is winning in this case.


NEXT: Critical Juncture for Dollar and Stocks

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer,New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21


This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.