7.2% gdp growth--look at these numbers

swinney

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Oct-31-03 03:07 PM
Original message

7.2% gdp growth--look at these numbers

misleader.com/pdf/specialreport2_secrecy.pdf

Gene Sperling comments. good.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

patdem

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Oct-31-03 03:08 PM
Response to Original message

1. swinney...please put the www. before the link so it will be a link...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

BlueEyedSon

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Oct-31-03 03:11 PM
Response to Original message

2. Dunno what this has to do with GDP growth, but WOWIE!

Edited on Fri Oct-31-03 03:11 PM by BlueEyedSon

The birth of our need-to-know democracy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

stewert

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Oct-31-03 03:17 PM
Response to Original message

3. Link........

www.misleader.com/pdf/specialreport2_secrecy.pdf

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

NewYorkerfromMass

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Oct-31-03 03:18 PM
Response to Original message

4. I'm curious about local anecdotes re: the GDP numbers

any DU observations to support or refute the "recovery". NYC sure isn't doing very well.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Frodo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Oct-31-03 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #4

5. Actually

New York has seen the first uptick in coincident economic indicators since the month Bush was "selected".

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

junker

(403 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Oct-31-03 03:39 PM
Response to Original message

6. real number analysis here today

check out geo ure's site
he ran the numbers himself and it is no where near 7 per cent.

http://www.urbansurvival.com/week.htm

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

jafap

(654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Oct-31-03 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #6

7. kinda junky (sorry (twice))

He/she runs the numbers comparing 2002Q3 to 2003Q3, but the 7.2% is from Q2 to Q3 of this year, not a comparison to last year. So he/she needs to start over.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

EdGy

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Oct-31-03 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #6

8. look at the excel spreadsheet itself

yes, he's comparing to last year's figures. But even comparing to the previous quarter's figures things are very fishy.

He's right, there is no baseline, no data provided.

And the particular sector breakdown he does is VERY interesting and telling.

According to the numbers, national defense spending did not increase at all from last quarter???

All in all after looking over the spreadsheet tables my suspicions are very much confirmed. I think that, just as with WMD in Iraq and other examples of the Bushies fudging and faking data to make their political points, this too is BS...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Thu May 02nd 2024, 08:23 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.