- Aug 18, 2001
- 4,260
- 0
- 0
Holy sh.... How'd they manage such high growth that year?That would mark the strongest growth since a 7.4 percent gain in 1984,
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Is it in inflation adjusted constant dollars?
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Is it in inflation adjusted constant dollars?
It measure % growth, not dollar growth.
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Is it in inflation adjusted constant dollars?
It measure % growth, not dollar growth.
Yeah, but % growth in what? Total dollar GDP figure, or inflation adjusted GDP figure.
Originally posted by: zephyrprime
Holy sh.... How'd they manage such high growth that year?That would mark the strongest growth since a 7.4 percent gain in 1984,
"Real gross domestic product -- the output of goods and services produced by labor and property located in the United States -- increased at an annual rate of 8.2 percent in the third quarter of 2003, according to preliminary estimates released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis."Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
This morning, we released our revised numbers:
GDP Revised Upward
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Is it in inflation adjusted constant dollars?
It measure % growth, not dollar growth.
Yeah, but % growth in what? Total dollar GDP figure, or inflation adjusted GDP figure.
Originally posted by: zephyrprime
Holy sh.... How'd they manage such high growth that year?That would mark the strongest growth since a 7.4 percent gain in 1984,
Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet
That's a poll and forecast. Call me when it happens.
Well then I suppose that settles it; changes in nominal GDP mean nothing(it could all be inflation after all), this needs to be in real GDP to have any meaning.Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Is it in inflation adjusted constant dollars?
It measure % growth, not dollar growth.
Yeah, but % growth in what? Total dollar GDP figure, or inflation adjusted GDP figure.
% of total dollar gdp. This is really not a figure that works out in dollars.
4% growth today would dwarf 4% growth 20 years.
Originally posted by: ViRGE
Well then I suppose that settles it; changes in nominal GDP mean nothing(it could all be inflation after all), this needs to be in real GDP to have any meaning.
GDP figures reported out of BEA ARE in terms of 'Real' GDP, not nominal. Further, changes in nominal GDP are equally important, so to say "changes in nominal GDP mean nothing" is absurd.
Originally posted by: ViRGE
Well then I suppose that settles it; changes in nominal GDP mean nothing(it could all be inflation after all), this needs to be in real GDP to have any meaning.Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Is it in inflation adjusted constant dollars?
It measure % growth, not dollar growth.
Yeah, but % growth in what? Total dollar GDP figure, or inflation adjusted GDP figure.
% of total dollar gdp. This is really not a figure that works out in dollars.
4% growth today would dwarf 4% growth 20 years.
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
GDP figures reported out of BEA ARE in terms of 'Real' GDP, not nominal. Further, changes in nominal GDP are equally important, so to say "changes in nominal GDP mean nothing" is absurd.
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Time to roll back the tax cuts and get into fiscally responsible mode. We got stimulus kicking in till 2010 for a recession that ended in 2003.
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Time to roll back the tax cuts and get into fiscally responsible mode. We got stimulus kicking in till 2010 for a recession that ended in 2003.
I thought the recession ended in 2001?
