Good News for the Economy

Tony · 30th October 2003, 08:26 AM

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20031030/D7UGHGD02.html ..full article

Quote:

WASHINGTON (AP) - The economy grew at a scorching 7.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter in the strongest pace in nearly two decades. Consumers spent with abandon and businesses ramped up investment, compelling new evidence of an economic resurgence.

The Fool · 30th October 2003, 02:16 PM

No discussion topic? No comment? Are you now working as a volunteer reposting bot for apnews?

komencanto · 30th October 2003, 02:18 PM

Wow, not they can beat the chinese at their own game of explosive economic grown.

Segnosaur · 30th October 2003, 02:22 PM

Well, I believe in giving credit where credit is due:

Thank you economic cycle.

Several months ago, many people were criticizing Bush for his poor economic record. Many people (including myself) defended him, saying that it was part of the regular economic cycle. Now that the economy has picked up again, I have to give most of the credit to the cycle. (I think the tax cuts were a good idea, but things would probably be looking better anyways, regardless of who was in the white house.)

Hopefully it will keep going, but I know there's still a good chance it will stumble. Keep spending folks!

Zep · 30th October 2003, 02:28 PM

There's nothing like a war to kick-start an economy...

Hmmm....

I wonder if THAT was the REAL excuse for Operation Iraqi-Freedom....

corplinx · 30th October 2003, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Segnosaur
Well, I believe in giving credit where credit is due:

Thank you economic cycle.

Several months ago, many people were criticizing Bush for his poor economic record. Many people (including myself) defended him, saying that it was part of the regular economic cycle. Now that the economy has picked up again, I have to give most of the credit to the cycle. (I think the tax cuts were a good idea, but things would probably be looking better anyways, regardless of who was in the white house.)

Hopefully it will keep going, but I know there's still a good chance it will stumble. Keep spending folks!

I didn't blame Clinton for the economic downturn in 1999, and I didnt blame Bush Sr. for the bear market during his administration. Likewise, I don't give Bush credit for this upswing. The last president who probably had a tangible effect on the economy was Reagan due to the drastic nature of the tax cuts he implimented and the increases in government spending. Bush's tax cuts were slim and the top end hasn't even fully kicked in yet.

What I want to see now is how democrats who flame Bush for a sluggish economy now dodge giving credit for the growth. If you blame the guy when its bad, you have to give props when its good.

corplinx · 30th October 2003, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Zep
There's nothing like a war to kick-start an economy...

Hmmm....

I wonder if THAT was the REAL excuse for Operation Iraqi-Freedom....

Doubtful. There wasn't a real bump that could be attributed to Kosovo or Gulf I. The scale of these wars isn't enough for war spending alone to drive the economy the way it did during WW2.

Segnosaur · 30th October 2003, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Zep
There's nothing like a war to kick-start an economy...

Hmmm....

I wonder if THAT was the REAL excuse for Operation Iraqi-Freedom....

You know, there may be something to that....

While I don't believe the anti-war people who chant "It's all about Oooiiiillll!", I do think that the effect of stablilized oil prices (once Iraq resumes full production) will have a beneficial effect on the economy. (That was one of the minor reasons I supported the war.) Plus, a democratic Iraq will probably be a better trading partner than one under Saddam.

a_unique_person · 30th October 2003, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by corplinx

What I want to see now is how democrats who flame Bush for a sluggish economy now dodge giving credit for the growth. If you blame the guy when its bad, you have to give props when its good.

Both sides play that game, and I would really, really appreciate it if they would stop it. They won't.

a_unique_person · 30th October 2003, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Zep
There's nothing like a war to kick-start an economy...

Hmmm....

I wonder if THAT was the REAL excuse for Operation Iraqi-Freedom....

Dubya has just implemented one of the classic "Big Government" intervention kick starts of an economy from a Keynsian point of view. This is the sort of economic policy that Conservative Governments are supposed to loath, and the Lefties love.

If the Democrats had done this, you would never see the end of newspaper headlines and lead stories on the disasterous state of debt. For Dubya, they will overlook it, or mention it in passing.

However, jobs are still not doing too well, and the spending is all on useless things like bombs. Infrastructure would have been a better target.

Supercharts · 30th October 2003, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by a_unique_person

Both sides play that game, and I would really, really appreciate it if they would stop it. They won't.

"They" are not players. "They" play the "game" for their own advantage - in terms of what has been reported. Good news to support whatever political party is out of contention.
Economics dances to a different tune.
Leave the economy alone and everything will be alright in the end.
No one complains when things are good..

a_unique_person · 30th October 2003, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Supercharts

No one complains when things are good..

Can't agree with that. America is the richest country on earth, but I still hear plenty of complaining happening there.

corplinx · 30th October 2003, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by a_unique_person

Both sides play that game, and I would really, really appreciate it if they would stop it. They won't.

Well, duh.

epepke · 30th October 2003, 07:05 PM

Yeah, well, if I get a job I'll think that the US economy is fine, but not before.

dsm · 30th October 2003, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by corplinx

If you blame the guy when its bad, you have to give props when its good.

Why??

Cain · 30th October 2003, 09:55 PM

Paul Krugman:

Quote:

The Commerce Department announces very good growth during the previous quarter. Many observers declare the economy's troubles over. And the administration's supporters claim that the economy's turnaround validates its policies.

That's what happened 18 months ago, when a preliminary estimate put first-quarter 2002 growth at 5.8 percent. That was later revised down to 5.0. More important, growth in the next quarter slumped to 1.3 percent, and we now know that the economy wasn't really on the mend: after that brief spurt, the nation proceeded to lose another 600,000 jobs.

The same story unfolded in the third quarter of 2002, when growth rose to 4 percent, and the economy actually gained 200,000 jobs. But growth slipped back down to 1.4 percent, and job losses resumed.

My purpose is not to denigrate the impressive estimated 7.2 percent growth rate for the third quarter of 2003. It is, rather, to stress the obvious: we've had our hopes dashed in the past, and it remains to be seen whether this is just another one-hit wonder.

Full Article

peptoabysmal · 30th October 2003, 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by a_unique_person

Dubya has just implemented one of the classic "Big Government" intervention kick starts of an economy from a Keynsian point of view. This is the sort of economic policy that Conservative Governments are supposed to loath, and the Lefties love.

If the Democrats had done this, you would never see the end of newspaper headlines and lead stories on the disasterous state of debt. For Dubya, they will overlook it, or mention it in passing.

However, jobs are still not doing too well, and the spending is all on useless things like bombs. Infrastructure would have been a better target.

Either you missed the part of the story that this economic news is about consumer spending or you've gotten us confused with the Palestinians.

Most American families don't budget for bombs.

Anyway, I think you can credit most of this quarter's upturn in consumer spending directly to me. I just bought a new Dodge truck that cost more than my first house (no joke!).

fishbob · 30th October 2003, 10:44 PM

Quote:

7.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter

I reserve the right to consider this data over a longer period of time. Maybe a running average over 3 or 4 quarters.

Could be an anomaly, could be the start better economic times. It may be cause for hope, but it seems a little early to be certain. I am not going to go out and buy a boat just yet.

shanek · 31st October 2003, 10:21 AM

Those who are reluctant to credit Bush with the economic recovery are wise to do so, as can be seen in the thread discussing a basic Macroeconomics course:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showt...threadid=28574

From the course lectures:

Quote:

The bottom line is, generally speaking, increases in the standard of living over long periods of time in any particular country are not related to social institutions, the rise of unions, the nature of government, or whether there are Democrats, Republicans, conservatives or liberals in charge. The truth is, the source of income growth in the long run is related to improvements in the productivity of labor.

It's also important to understand what " 7.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter" means:

Quote:

We have to set some limit on a time period for our measurement. So typically in the United States, we measure GDP every quarter...But we report it each quarter at an annual rate...We report them by converting quarterly GDP to an annual basis. So if GDP in the quarter were actually $2 trillion, then we'd multiply it by four and report GDP at an annual rate of $8 trillion.

So this 7.2% is the amount the economy would grow in a year if this same rate of growth occured in the three following quarters.

Tricky · 31st October 2003, 10:32 AM

How long before that record deficit disappears?

dsm · 31st October 2003, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tricky
How long before that record deficit disappears?

What record deficit?? Ah, it's just a problem with accounting...

dsm · 31st October 2003, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by fishbob
I am not going to go out and buy a boat just yet.

Probably a good policy...

Does anyone see anything happening in the economy that will be driving future economic growth (like the Internet did in the 90s)? Can mere productivity gains actually drive an expansion?

Grammatron · 31st October 2003, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by dsm

Probably a good policy...

Does anyone see anything happening in the economy that will be driving future economic growth (like the Internet did in the 90s)? Can mere productivity gains actually drive an expansion?

I think the next big drive and subsequent bubble explosion will be the wireless communications and content delivery. Where people will be able to do their work on their cell phone. Of course I could be wrong.

shanek · 31st October 2003, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dsm
Does anyone see anything happening in the economy that will be driving future economic growth (like the Internet did in the 90s)? Can mere productivity gains actually drive an expansion?

Actually, productivity gains are pretty much the only thing that really can expand the economy. The Internet caused the growth that it did because it's a new technology which was very good at increasing productivity in pretty much every aspect of most every business across the board. So really, the question your asking is if there's anything in the future that will allow a dramatic increase in productivity like the Internet did. If you ask me, we haven't even reached the full potential of the Internet yet; not even close.

dsm · 31st October 2003, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by shanek

Actually, productivity gains are pretty much the only thing that really can expand the economy. The Internet caused the growth that it did because it's a new technology which was very good at increasing productivity in pretty much every aspect of most every business across the board. So really, the question your asking is if there's anything in the future that will allow a dramatic increase in productivity like the Internet did. If you ask me, we haven't even reached the full potential of the Internet yet; not even close.

I'm not sure I agree with this -- it seems too one-sided. Sure, the Internet increased the productivity of the general worker, but the increased amount of work (in the form of Internet jobs) that needed to be done absorbed that increase in productivity (at least for a time). The perception of the general population (beginning with the early adopters and finally the mainstream) was that the Internet could provide them with more of what they wanted (entertainment, shopping, information, and so on) and that, in turn, drove the Internet economy.

So, while I see productivity increases as an enabler of growth, I don't see it as a driver.

shanek · 1st November 2003, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by dsm
I'm not sure I agree with this -- it seems too one-sided. Sure, the Internet increased the productivity of the general worker, but the increased amount of work (in the form of Internet jobs) that needed to be done absorbed that increase in productivity (at least for a time).

Actually, that isn't how it works. No one would have started up those internet jobs if they hadn't figured on getting a return on their investment. People are willing to pay a certain amount to a person to work a job because they feel the gain from their work is worth more than that amount.

Productivity is really the only thing that can drive growth. How can you grow if you can't produce more?

dsm · 1st November 2003, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by shanek

Productivity is really the only thing that can drive growth. How can you grow if you can't produce more?

I don't know -- this still seems a little "chicken and egg"-ish. Without productivity to enable sustained growth, the economy isn't going to go very far. However, without the push of a vision about where the economy (or some portion thereof) could go, there is no driver to create the enhanced productivity to use in growing the economy.

As Grammatron suggested, wireless communication may be the next big thing, but I tend to think it already hit, bubbled, burst, and is now going through a slow steady uptick. I would like to see the Internet hit again as I still think there is much that it could do. However, the information economy is not well-established in the minds of the average person yet, so there is much to do before people will view it as worthy of paying for.

shanek · 1st November 2003, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dsm
I don't know -- this still seems a little "chicken and egg"-ish. Without productivity to enable sustained growth, the economy isn't going to go very far. However, without the push of a vision about where the economy (or some portion thereof) could go, there is no driver to create the enhanced productivity to use in growing the economy.

As Grammatron suggested, wireless communication may be the next big thing, but I tend to think it already hit, bubbled, burst, and is now going through a slow steady uptick. I would like to see the Internet hit again as I still think there is much that it could do. However, the information economy is not well-established in the minds of the average person yet, so there is much to do before people will view it as worthy of paying for.

Just because you don't know what effect a particular innovation, invention, or other piece of technology will have does not invalidate the overall effect of technology in its constant increase in the amount of an economy's total output.

30th October 2003, 08:26 AM	#1
Tony Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Texas Posts: 13,768	Good News for the Economy http://apnews.myway.com/article/20031030/D7UGHGD02.html ..full article Quote: WASHINGTON (AP) - The economy grew at a scorching 7.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter in the strongest pace in nearly two decades. Consumers spent with abandon and businesses ramped up investment, compelling new evidence of an economic resurgence.
	__________________ It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company. - Mark Twain

30th October 2003, 02:16 PM	#2
The Fool Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 11,558	No discussion topic? No comment? Are you now working as a volunteer reposting bot for apnews?
	__________________ And what is good, Phaedrus,and what is not good. Need we ask anyone to tell us these things? R. M. Pirsig. (Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance) Lose half your IQ....Ask me how.

30th October 2003, 02:18 PM	#3
komencanto Thinker Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 168	Wow, not they can beat the chinese at their own game of explosive economic grown.
komencanto Thinker Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 168	__________________ --Robert Wiblin (message me if you want my email)

30th October 2003, 02:22 PM	#4
Segnosaur Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada, eh? Posts: 6,071	Well, I believe in giving credit where credit is due: Thank you economic cycle. Several months ago, many people were criticizing Bush for his poor economic record. Many people (including myself) defended him, saying that it was part of the regular economic cycle. Now that the economy has picked up again, I have to give most of the credit to the cycle. (I think the tax cuts were a good idea, but things would probably be looking better anyways, regardless of who was in the white house.) Hopefully it will keep going, but I know there's still a good chance it will stumble. Keep spending folks!
	__________________ Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I cheered when then the WTC came down. - UndercoverElephant (a.k.a. JustGeoff) I cheer Bin Laden... - JustGeoff (a.k.a. UndercoverElephant) Bin Laden delivered justice - JustGeoff (a.k.a. UndercoverElephant) Men shop for lingerie the way kids shop for breakfast cereal... they will buy something they know nothing about, just to get the prize inside. - Jeff Foxworthy

30th October 2003, 02:28 PM	#5
Zep Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 26,985	There's nothing like a war to kick-start an economy... Hmmm.... I wonder if THAT was the REAL excuse for Operation Iraqi-Freedom....
Zep Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 26,985

30th October 2003, 03:30 PM	#6
corplinx JREF Kid Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 8,944	Quote: Originally posted by Segnosaur Well, I believe in giving credit where credit is due: Thank you economic cycle. Several months ago, many people were criticizing Bush for his poor economic record. Many people (including myself) defended him, saying that it was part of the regular economic cycle. Now that the economy has picked up again, I have to give most of the credit to the cycle. (I think the tax cuts were a good idea, but things would probably be looking better anyways, regardless of who was in the white house.) Hopefully it will keep going, but I know there's still a good chance it will stumble. Keep spending folks! I didn't blame Clinton for the economic downturn in 1999, and I didnt blame Bush Sr. for the bear market during his administration. Likewise, I don't give Bush credit for this upswing. The last president who probably had a tangible effect on the economy was Reagan due to the drastic nature of the tax cuts he implimented and the increases in government spending. Bush's tax cuts were slim and the top end hasn't even fully kicked in yet. What I want to see now is how democrats who flame Bush for a sluggish economy now dodge giving credit for the growth. If you blame the guy when its bad, you have to give props when its good.
corplinx JREF Kid Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 8,944	__________________ In the tradition of "Stop Silvia!" Stop Hal Bidlack: http://skepticalcommunity.com/forums...hp?f=1&t=28671

30th October 2003, 03:32 PM	#7
corplinx JREF Kid Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 8,944	Quote: Originally posted by Zep There's nothing like a war to kick-start an economy... Hmmm.... I wonder if THAT was the REAL excuse for Operation Iraqi-Freedom.... Doubtful. There wasn't a real bump that could be attributed to Kosovo or Gulf I. The scale of these wars isn't enough for war spending alone to drive the economy the way it did during WW2.
corplinx JREF Kid Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 8,944	__________________ In the tradition of "Stop Silvia!" Stop Hal Bidlack: http://skepticalcommunity.com/forums...hp?f=1&t=28671

30th October 2003, 03:37 PM	#8
Segnosaur Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada, eh? Posts: 6,071	Quote: Originally posted by Zep There's nothing like a war to kick-start an economy... Hmmm.... I wonder if THAT was the REAL excuse for Operation Iraqi-Freedom.... You know, there may be something to that.... While I don't believe the anti-war people who chant "It's all about Oooiiiillll!", I do think that the effect of stablilized oil prices (once Iraq resumes full production) will have a beneficial effect on the economy. (That was one of the minor reasons I supported the war.) Plus, a democratic Iraq will probably be a better trading partner than one under Saddam.
	__________________ Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I cheered when then the WTC came down. - UndercoverElephant (a.k.a. JustGeoff) I cheer Bin Laden... - JustGeoff (a.k.a. UndercoverElephant) Bin Laden delivered justice - JustGeoff (a.k.a. UndercoverElephant) Men shop for lingerie the way kids shop for breakfast cereal... they will buy something they know nothing about, just to get the prize inside. - Jeff Foxworthy

30th October 2003, 03:54 PM	#9
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Mt Disappointment Posts: 33,336	Quote: Originally posted by corplinx What I want to see now is how democrats who flame Bush for a sluggish economy now dodge giving credit for the growth. If you blame the guy when its bad, you have to give props when its good. Both sides play that game, and I would really, really appreciate it if they would stop it. They won't.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

30th October 2003, 04:05 PM	#10
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Mt Disappointment Posts: 33,336	Quote: Originally posted by Zep There's nothing like a war to kick-start an economy... Hmmm.... I wonder if THAT was the REAL excuse for Operation Iraqi-Freedom.... Dubya has just implemented one of the classic "Big Government" intervention kick starts of an economy from a Keynsian point of view. This is the sort of economic policy that Conservative Governments are supposed to loath, and the Lefties love. If the Democrats had done this, you would never see the end of newspaper headlines and lead stories on the disasterous state of debt. For Dubya, they will overlook it, or mention it in passing. However, jobs are still not doing too well, and the spending is all on useless things like bombs. Infrastructure would have been a better target.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

30th October 2003, 04:10 PM	#11
Supercharts Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 1,185	Quote: Originally posted by a_unique_person Both sides play that game, and I would really, really appreciate it if they would stop it. They won't. "They" are not players. "They" play the "game" for their own advantage - in terms of what has been reported. Good news to support whatever political party is out of contention. Economics dances to a different tune. Leave the economy alone and everything will be alright in the end. No one complains when things are good..

30th October 2003, 04:29 PM	#12
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Mt Disappointment Posts: 33,336	Quote: Originally posted by Supercharts No one complains when things are good.. Can't agree with that. America is the richest country on earth, but I still hear plenty of complaining happening there.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

30th October 2003, 05:01 PM	#13
corplinx JREF Kid Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 8,944	Quote: Originally posted by a_unique_person Both sides play that game, and I would really, really appreciate it if they would stop it. They won't. Well, duh.
corplinx JREF Kid Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 8,944	__________________ In the tradition of "Stop Silvia!" Stop Hal Bidlack: http://skepticalcommunity.com/forums...hp?f=1&t=28671

30th October 2003, 07:05 PM	#14
epepke Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 7,950	Yeah, well, if I get a job I'll think that the US economy is fine, but not before.
epepke Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 7,950

30th October 2003, 07:13 PM	#15
dsm Muse Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Silicon Valley Posts: 970	Quote: Originally posted by corplinx If you blame the guy when its bad, you have to give props when its good. Why??
	__________________ DSM

30th October 2003, 09:55 PM	#16
Cain Straussian Join Date: May 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 6,939	Paul Krugman: Quote: The Commerce Department announces very good growth during the previous quarter. Many observers declare the economy's troubles over. And the administration's supporters claim that the economy's turnaround validates its policies. That's what happened 18 months ago, when a preliminary estimate put first-quarter 2002 growth at 5.8 percent. That was later revised down to 5.0. More important, growth in the next quarter slumped to 1.3 percent, and we now know that the economy wasn't really on the mend: after that brief spurt, the nation proceeded to lose another 600,000 jobs. The same story unfolded in the third quarter of 2002, when growth rose to 4 percent, and the economy actually gained 200,000 jobs. But growth slipped back down to 1.4 percent, and job losses resumed. My purpose is not to denigrate the impressive estimated 7.2 percent growth rate for the third quarter of 2003. It is, rather, to stress the obvious: we've had our hopes dashed in the past, and it remains to be seen whether this is just another one-hit wonder. Full Article
	__________________ *Arrested Development* is coming back! Michael (to GOB): Get rid of the Seaward. Lucille: I’ll leave when I’m good and ready.

30th October 2003, 10:15 PM	#17
peptoabysmal Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 3,467	Quote: Originally posted by a_unique_person Dubya has just implemented one of the classic "Big Government" intervention kick starts of an economy from a Keynsian point of view. This is the sort of economic policy that Conservative Governments are supposed to loath, and the Lefties love. If the Democrats had done this, you would never see the end of newspaper headlines and lead stories on the disasterous state of debt. For Dubya, they will overlook it, or mention it in passing. However, jobs are still not doing too well, and the spending is all on useless things like bombs. Infrastructure would have been a better target. Either you missed the part of the story that this economic news is about consumer spending or you've gotten us confused with the Palestinians. Most American families don't budget for bombs. Anyway, I think you can credit most of this quarter's upturn in consumer spending directly to me. I just bought a new Dodge truck that cost more than my first house (no joke!).

30th October 2003, 10:44 PM	#18
fishbob Seasonally Disaffected Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Chilly Undieville Posts: 5,667	Quote: 7.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter I reserve the right to consider this data over a longer period of time. Maybe a running average over 3 or 4 quarters. Could be an anomaly, could be the start better economic times. It may be cause for hope, but it seems a little early to be certain. I am not going to go out and buy a boat just yet.
	__________________ When you believe in things you don't understand, then you suffer . . . " - Stevie Wonder "Stupidity - a callow indifference to facts or data" - Stuart Firestein -neuroscientist. I hate bigots.

31st October 2003, 10:21 AM	#19
shanek by Charles M. Schulz Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 15,990	Those who are reluctant to credit Bush with the economic recovery are wise to do so, as can be seen in the thread discussing a basic Macroeconomics course: http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showt...threadid=28574 From the course lectures: Quote: The bottom line is, generally speaking, increases in the standard of living over long periods of time in any particular country are not related to social institutions, the rise of unions, the nature of government, or whether there are Democrats, Republicans, conservatives or liberals in charge. The truth is, the source of income growth in the long run is related to improvements in the productivity of labor. It's also important to understand what " 7.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter" means: Quote: We have to set some limit on a time period for our measurement. So typically in the United States, we measure GDP every quarter...But we report it each quarter at an annual rate...We report them by converting quarterly GDP to an annual basis. So if GDP in the quarter were actually $2 trillion, then we'd multiply it by four and report GDP at an annual rate of $8 trillion. So this 7.2% is the amount the economy would grow in a year if this same rate of growth occured in the three following quarters.
	__________________ "James Randi is awesome!" —Ian Bernard, primary host of Free Talk Live "It really does take people like Penn & Teller or James Randi to be able to see through these deceptions, and so those are perhaps the people we should be paying the most attention to." —Harry Browne, 4/10/2004 I know there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere, but I don't know what it is.

31st October 2003, 10:32 AM	#20
Tricky Briefly immortal Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Group W bench Posts: 42,371	How long before that record deficit disappears?

31st October 2003, 11:44 AM	#21
dsm Muse Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Silicon Valley Posts: 970	Quote: Originally posted by Tricky How long before that record deficit disappears? What record deficit?? Ah, it's just a problem with accounting...
	__________________ DSM

31st October 2003, 11:51 AM	#22
dsm Muse Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Silicon Valley Posts: 970	Quote: Originally posted by fishbob I am not going to go out and buy a boat just yet. Probably a good policy... Does anyone see anything happening in the economy that will be driving future economic growth (like the Internet did in the 90s)? Can mere productivity gains actually drive an expansion?
	__________________ DSM

31st October 2003, 11:58 AM	#23
Grammatron Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 5,446	Quote: Originally posted by dsm Probably a good policy... Does anyone see anything happening in the economy that will be driving future economic growth (like the Internet did in the 90s)? Can mere productivity gains actually drive an expansion? I think the next big drive and subsequent bubble explosion will be the wireless communications and content delivery. Where people will be able to do their work on their cell phone. Of course I could be wrong.
Grammatron Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 5,446

31st October 2003, 12:06 PM	#24
shanek by Charles M. Schulz Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 15,990	Quote: Originally posted by dsm *Does anyone see anything happening in the economy that will be driving future economic growth (like the Internet did in the 90s)? Can mere productivity gains* actually drive an expansion?** Actually, productivity gains are pretty much the only thing that really can expand the economy. The Internet caused the growth that it did because it's a new technology which was very good at increasing productivity in pretty much every aspect of most every business across the board. So really, the question your asking is if there's anything in the future that will allow a dramatic increase in productivity like the Internet did. If you ask me, we haven't even reached the full potential of the Internet yet; not even close.
	__________________ "James Randi is awesome!" —Ian Bernard, primary host of Free Talk Live "It really does take people like Penn & Teller or James Randi to be able to see through these deceptions, and so those are perhaps the people we should be paying the most attention to." —Harry Browne, 4/10/2004 I know there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere, but I don't know what it is.

31st October 2003, 01:31 PM	#25
dsm Muse Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Silicon Valley Posts: 970	Quote: Originally posted by shanek Actually, productivity gains are pretty much the only thing that really can expand the economy. The Internet caused the growth that it did because it's a new technology which was very good at increasing productivity in pretty much every aspect of most every business across the board. So really, the question your asking is if there's anything in the future that will allow a dramatic increase in productivity like the Internet did. If you ask me, we haven't even reached the full potential of the Internet yet; not even close. I'm not sure I agree with this -- it seems too one-sided. Sure, the Internet increased the productivity of the general worker, but the increased amount of work (in the form of Internet jobs) that needed to be done absorbed that increase in productivity (at least for a time). The perception of the general population (beginning with the early adopters and finally the mainstream) was that the Internet could provide them with more of what they wanted (entertainment, shopping, information, and so on) and that, in turn, drove the Internet economy. So, while I see productivity increases as an enabler of growth, I don't see it as a driver.
	__________________ DSM

1st November 2003, 10:31 AM	#26
shanek by Charles M. Schulz Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 15,990	Quote: Originally posted by dsm I'm not sure I agree with this -- it seems too one-sided. Sure, the Internet increased the productivity of the general worker, but the increased amount of work (in the form of Internet jobs) that needed to be done absorbed that increase in productivity (at least for a time). Actually, that isn't how it works. No one would have started up those internet jobs if they hadn't figured on getting a return on their investment. People are willing to pay a certain amount to a person to work a job because they feel the gain from their work is worth more than that amount. Productivity is really the only thing that can drive growth. How can you grow if you can't produce more?
	__________________ "James Randi is awesome!" —Ian Bernard, primary host of Free Talk Live "It really does take people like Penn & Teller or James Randi to be able to see through these deceptions, and so those are perhaps the people we should be paying the most attention to." —Harry Browne, 4/10/2004 I know there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere, but I don't know what it is.

1st November 2003, 11:49 AM	#27
dsm Muse Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Silicon Valley Posts: 970	Quote: Originally posted by shanek Productivity is really the only thing that can drive growth. How can you grow if you can't produce more? I don't know -- this still seems a little "chicken and egg"-ish. Without productivity to enable sustained growth, the economy isn't going to go very far. However, without the push of a vision about where the economy (or some portion thereof) could go, there is no driver to create the enhanced productivity to use in growing the economy. As Grammatron suggested, wireless communication may be the next big thing, but I tend to think it already hit, bubbled, burst, and is now going through a slow steady uptick. I would like to see the Internet hit again as I still think there is much that it could do. However, the information economy is not well-established in the minds of the average person yet, so there is much to do before people will view it as worthy of paying for.
	__________________ DSM

1st November 2003, 01:43 PM	#28
shanek by Charles M. Schulz Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 15,990	Quote: Originally posted by dsm I don't know -- this still seems a little "chicken and egg"-ish. Without productivity to enable sustained growth, the economy isn't going to go very far. However, without the push of a vision about where the economy (or some portion thereof) could go, there is no driver to create the enhanced productivity to use in growing the economy. As Grammatron suggested, wireless communication may be the next big thing, but I tend to think it already hit, bubbled, burst, and is now going through a slow steady uptick. I would like to see the Internet hit again as I still think there is much that it could do. However, the information economy is not well-established in the minds of the average person yet, so there is much to do before people will view it as worthy of paying for. Just because you don't know what effect a particular innovation, invention, or other piece of technology will have does not invalidate the overall effect of technology in its constant increase in the amount of an economy's total output.
	__________________ "James Randi is awesome!" —Ian Bernard, primary host of Free Talk Live "It really does take people like Penn & Teller or James Randi to be able to see through these deceptions, and so those are perhaps the people we should be paying the most attention to." —Harry Browne, 4/10/2004 I know there is a lesson to be learned here somewhere, but I don't know what it is.