Global Economic Intersection
Advertisement
  • Home
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Investments
    • Invest in Amazon $250
  • Cryptocurrency
    • Best Bitcoin Accounts
    • Bitcoin Robot
      • Quantum AI
      • Bitcoin Era
      • Bitcoin Aussie System
      • Bitcoin Profit
      • Bitcoin Code
      • eKrona Cryptocurrency
      • Bitcoin Up
      • Bitcoin Prime
      • Yuan Pay Group
      • Immediate Profit
      • BitQH
      • Bitcoin Loophole
      • Crypto Boom
      • Bitcoin Treasure
      • Bitcoin Lucro
      • Bitcoin System
      • Oil Profit
      • The News Spy
      • Bitcoin Buyer
      • Bitcoin Inform
      • Immediate Edge
      • Bitcoin Evolution
      • Cryptohopper
      • Ethereum Trader
      • BitQL
      • Quantum Code
      • Bitcoin Revolution
      • British Trade Platform
      • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Reddit
    • Celebrities
      • Dr. Chris Brown Bitcoin
      • Teeka Tiwari Bitcoin
      • Russell Brand Bitcoin
      • Holly Willoughby Bitcoin
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Investments
    • Invest in Amazon $250
  • Cryptocurrency
    • Best Bitcoin Accounts
    • Bitcoin Robot
      • Quantum AI
      • Bitcoin Era
      • Bitcoin Aussie System
      • Bitcoin Profit
      • Bitcoin Code
      • eKrona Cryptocurrency
      • Bitcoin Up
      • Bitcoin Prime
      • Yuan Pay Group
      • Immediate Profit
      • BitQH
      • Bitcoin Loophole
      • Crypto Boom
      • Bitcoin Treasure
      • Bitcoin Lucro
      • Bitcoin System
      • Oil Profit
      • The News Spy
      • Bitcoin Buyer
      • Bitcoin Inform
      • Immediate Edge
      • Bitcoin Evolution
      • Cryptohopper
      • Ethereum Trader
      • BitQL
      • Quantum Code
      • Bitcoin Revolution
      • British Trade Platform
      • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Reddit
    • Celebrities
      • Dr. Chris Brown Bitcoin
      • Teeka Tiwari Bitcoin
      • Russell Brand Bitcoin
      • Holly Willoughby Bitcoin
No Result
View All Result
Global Economic Intersection
No Result
View All Result

GDP Growth Collapses

admin by admin
May 1, 2014
in Uncategorized
0
0
SHARES
0
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

1Q/2014 Growth A Mere 0.11% Annual Rate

by Rick Davis, Consumer Metrics Institute

In their first estimate of the US GDP for the first quarter of 2014, the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) reported that the economy was growing at an anemic 0.11% annualized rate. When compared to prior quarters, the new measurement is down over 2.5% from the 2.64% growth rate reported for the 4th quarter of 2013, and it is now more than 4% lower than the 4.19% reported for the 3rd quarter of 2013 – indicating that the deceleration in the growth rate first noticed last quarter has both continued and sharply intensified.

Commercial activity was especially hard hit: exports led the collapse, and commercial investments and inventories also weakening significantly. Fixed investments in both equipment and residential construction contracted sharply. Government spending also contracted, primarily in Federal defense spending and state and local governmental infrastructure investment.

Consumer spending for services provided the only significant growth, with outlays for non-discretionary healthcare, housing, utilities and financial services all increasing. Spending on consumer goods was essentially flat even though household savings rates dropped once again.

Real annualized per-capita disposable income grew by $112 during the first quarter (although it is still $204 per year lower than it was during the fourth quarter of 2012), while the household savings rate shrank again to 4.1% (down -0.8% from the 4.9% in the prior quarter and down -2.5% from the fourth quarter of 2012). The reduced savings rate was an budgetary necessity – given that spending on non-discretionary services (including healthcare) increased substantially faster than disposable income.

And lastly, for this report the BEA assumed annualized net aggregate inflation of 1.30%. During the first quarter (i.e., from January through March) the growth rate of the seasonally adjusted CPI-U index published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) was a full half percent higher at a 1.80% (annualized) rate, and the price index reported by the Billion Prices Project (BPP – which arguably reflected the real experiences of American households while recording sharply increasing consumer prices during the first quarter) was over two and a half percent higher at 3.91%. Under reported inflation will result in overly optimistic growth data, and if the BEA’s numbers were corrected for inflation using the BLS CPI-U the economy would be reported to be contracting at a -0.38% annualized rate. And if we were to use the BPP data to adjust for inflation the first quarter’s contraction rate would have been a staggering -2.50%.

Among the notable items in the report:

  • The contribution of consumer expenditures for goods to the headline number decreased to an essentially flat 0.08% (down a substantial -0.58% from the 0.66% contribution in the prior quarter).
  • The contribution made by consumer services spending increased sharply to 1.96% (up 0.39% from the 1.57% in the prior quarter). The increased spending was primarily for non-discretionary healthcare, housing, utilities and financial services.
  • Commercial private fixed investments contracted, reducing the headline number by -0.44% (after having adding 0.43% during the prior quarter). The contraction was led by reduced outlays for IT equipment, transportation equipment and residential construction.
  • Inventories are now reported to be contracting sharply – subtracting -0.57% from the headline growth rate (down -0.55% from the prior quarter). The first three three quarters of 2013 had seen substantial inventory growth that had boosted the reported annualized growth rate by an average of 1%. We might expect a corresponding multi-quarter contraction to “normalize” inventory levels.
  • Reduced governmental spending removed an aggregate -0.09% from the headline number. The Federal government “shutdown” is now in the prior reporting quarter (i.e., 4Q-2013), and a modest bounce-back in Federal non-defense spending added 0.2% to headline number that was more than offset by contracting defense spending and shrinking state and local infrastructure investments.
  • Exports swung dramatically from adding 1.23% to the overall growth rate in 4Q-2013 to subtracting -1.07% from the headline number in the new report (a swing of -2.30%). Export growth had been one of the bright spots of 2013 – even as the economies of many of our trading partners softened. That source of growth appears to have abruptly ended.
  • Weakening demand for imports actually added 0.24% from the headline number (after subtracting -0.24% in the prior quarter – representing nearly a full half percent improvement). However, weakening demand for imports is not necessarily a good economic omen.
  • The annualized growth rate for the “real final sales of domestic product” dropped sharply to 0.68% (down nearly 2% from the 2.66% in the prior quarter). This is the BEA’s “bottom line” measurement of the economy – and it remains stronger than the headline number because of the contraction in inventories.
  • And as mentioned above, real per-capita annual disposable income grew by $112 during the quarter (a 1.22% annualized rate). But that number is still down a material -$204 per year from the fourth quarter of 2012 (before the FICA rates normalized) and it is up only about 1% in total ($382 per year) since the second quarter of 2008 – some 23 quarters ago.

The Numbers

As a quick reminder, the classic definition of the GDP can be summarized with the following equation:

GDP = private consumption + gross private investment + government spending + (exports – imports)

or, as it is commonly expressed in algebraic shorthand:

GDP = C + I + G + (X-M)

In the new report the values for that equation (total dollars, percentage of the total GDP, and contribution to the final percentage growth number) are as follows:

GDP Components Table

Click to enlarge

The quarter-to-quarter changes in the contributions that various components make to the overall GDP can be best understood from the table below, which breaks out the component contributions in more detail and over time. In the table below we have split the “C” component into goods and services, split the “I” component into fixed investment and inventories, separated exports from imports, added a line for the BEA’s “Real Final Sales of Domestic Product” and listed the quarters in columns with the most current to the left:

Quarterly Changes in % Contributions to GDP

Click to enlarge

Summary and Commentary

There are a number of disturbing items in this report:

  • Even at first glance this is not a good report. Although the headline number itself says “stagnation,” in the context of earlier reports it shows an economy in dynamic transition from lackluster growth towards outright contraction. The overall headline number is down 2.5% from the prior quarter and down 4% from the next earlier quarter. These are significant changes, with the prior quarter’s trend extended and the downward slope intensifying.
  • Private commercial investment dropped substantially, led by reduced outlays for residential construction, transportation equipment and IT infrastructure.
  • The year-long 2013 cycle of inventory building has come to an end. Over an extended time period inventories are mostly a cyclical zero-sum game, with excessive growth or contraction over any period being corrected (i.e., reversed) during a subsequent period. Moving forward we should expect that inventories will continue their cyclical contraction, with negative consequences to the headline number.
  • Collapsing exports are likely confirming a weakening global economy. If so, exports are unlikely to provide the same kind of growth boost that they have provided during 2013, when they grew at about twice their historic rate.
  • A positive contribution to the headline growth rate from imports is historically an inverse growth indicator, since it is usually a consequence of reduced domestic demand (e.g., positive import contributions were particularly notable during 2008 and early 2009, and again during the overall weak 4Q-2012).
  • The Federal government’s “shutdown” subtracted roughly 1% from the fourth quarter’s reported growth rate. Since it is likely that some part of the reduced spending was actually only deferred (rather than foregone), we had expected a sharp “bounce-back” in Federal spending in 1Q-2014. While that did occur to some extent in the non-defense portions of the Federal budget, it was offset by ongoing cutbacks in defense spending and shrinking state and local expenditures on infrastructure.
  • Although real household income improved somewhat (at a respectable real 1.22% annualized rate), it is still below levels seen in the fourth quarter of 2012. It bears repeating that total aggregate real per-capita income growth since the second quarter of 2008 has been just 1.04% – an average annualized growth rate of just 0.19% during the entire “recovery.” The household savings rate is down over 2.5% since the fourth quarter of 2012, and it remains well below the historical long term savings rate.
  • The growth in consumer spending was caused by increased household costs for non-discretionary services – healthcare, housing, utilities and financial services (e.g., rising interest rates). Spending on goods remained essentially flat, with the “growth” in consumer services spending coming once again mostly out of savings – which is unsustainable over the long haul.
  • Most of the increasing spending on services was channeled/transferred to large-cap corporate America. Discretionary spending at shops on “Main Street” America – the quickest source of economic growth or new jobs – is under renewed (and probably unrelenting) pressure.
  • The headline growth rate is likely enhanced by an understatement of inflation. Even using BLS data to “deflate” the nominal data results in a contracting headline number, while using data from the BPP to deflate the data results in an eye-opening -2.5% contraction rate.

Enjoy this (barely) positive headline number while it lasts. Even if it survives the next two months of revisions, the economic momentum signaled by the past two quarters will likely carry the headline number into the red in the very near future.


Previous Post

Newitz in 2010: Google and Verizon Could Kill the Internet in Five Years

Next Post

China PMI Little Changed, Exports Contract

Related Posts

Lab-Grown Meat Draws Closer To American Dinner Plates
Business

Lab-Grown Meat Draws Closer To American Dinner Plates

by John Wanguba
January 26, 2023
New Suppliers Scramble To Plug Into Electric Vehicle Market
Business

New Suppliers Scramble To Plug Into Electric Vehicle Market

by John Wanguba
January 26, 2023
Coinbase Fined $3.6 Million In The Netherlands
Business

Coinbase Fined $3.6 Million In The Netherlands

by John Wanguba
January 26, 2023
Consumer Reports Encourage Dark Chocolate Producers To Minimize Lead, Cadmium Levels
Business

Consumer Reports Encourage Dark Chocolate Producers To Minimize Lead, Cadmium Levels

by John Wanguba
January 26, 2023
Bloomberg To Pay $5M Fine To Settle SEC Charges Linked To Fixed-Income Valuations
Business

Bloomberg To Pay $5M Fine To Settle SEC Charges Linked To Fixed-Income Valuations

by John Wanguba
January 26, 2023
Next Post

China PMI Little Changed, Exports Contract

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Browse by Category

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized

Browse by Tags

adoption altcoins banking banks Binance Bitcoin Bitcoin adoption Bitcoin market Bitcoin mining blockchain BTC business China crypto crypto adoption cryptocurrency crypto exchange crypto market crypto regulation decentralized finance DeFi Elon Musk ETH Ethereum Europe finance FTX inflation investment market analysis markets Metaverse mining NFT nonfungible tokens oil market price analysis recession regulation Russia technology Tesla the UK the US Twitter

Archives

  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • August 2010
  • August 2009

Categories

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized
Global Economic Intersection

After nearly 11 years of 24/7/365 operation, Global Economic Intersection co-founders Steven Hansen and John Lounsbury are retiring. The new owner, a global media company in London, is in the process of completing the set-up of Global Economic Intersection files in their system and publishing platform. The official website ownership transfer took place on 24 August.

Categories

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized

Recent Posts

  • Lab-Grown Meat Draws Closer To American Dinner Plates
  • New Suppliers Scramble To Plug Into Electric Vehicle Market
  • Coinbase Fined $3.6 Million In The Netherlands

© Copyright 2021 EconIntersect - Economic news, analysis and opinion.

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Contact Us
  • Bitcoin Robot
    • Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Code
    • Quantum AI
    • eKrona Cryptocurrency
    • Bitcoin Up
    • Bitcoin Prime
    • Yuan Pay Group
    • Immediate Profit
    • BitIQ
    • Bitcoin Loophole
    • Crypto Boom
    • Bitcoin Era
    • Bitcoin Treasure
    • Bitcoin Lucro
    • Bitcoin System
    • Oil Profit
    • The News Spy
    • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Trader
  • Bitcoin Reddit

© Copyright 2021 EconIntersect - Economic news, analysis and opinion.

en English
ar Arabicbg Bulgarianda Danishnl Dutchen Englishfi Finnishfr Frenchde Germanel Greekit Italianja Japaneselv Latvianno Norwegianpl Polishpt Portuguesero Romanianes Spanishsv Swedish