The final numbers they use for the calculations are transparent.
But - like the employment numbers - the exact numbers and exact calculation procedures they use to come up with those numbers at every level are often not available to the public. They are secret.
I mean think...if these numbers were available to the public, then the public could figure them out. Yet, the 'experts' - even those from major banks with gigantic resources - are always guessing. Even after the numbers are released, it is impossible for people to find the exact calculation process for every number...which is essential to confirm the validity of each and every number and the weight that each and very number carries.
The exact tabulations of the GDP - down to the absolute smallest detail - are NOT transparent. Yet, they should be.
2)They make assumptions...hardly scientific.
'When BEA calculates the advance estimate, we don’t yet have complete source data, with the largest gaps in data for the third month of the quarter. In particular, the advance estimate lacks complete source data on inventories, trade, and consumer spending on services. Therefore, we must make assumptions for these missing pieces based in part on past trends. As part of this process, we publish a detailed technical note that lays out the assumptions we made for a particular estimate. We also publish detailed materials on the standardized procedures and methods used in the various vintages of the GDP estimates.'
Don't make assumptions you ding dongs...just provide what you know and say you don't know the rest.
But no, they have to play the stats god and guess anyway.
3) what is the point of releasing a number that you know is not accurate because all of the required data inputs are not available?
Everyone with an unbiased brain in their head knew the BEA would have to revise the Q1 number WAY down fom it's first report of +0.1%.
Yet these ding dongs at the BEA post them as 'the' numbers (pending revision).
Why not just not post the number until the final revision?
Because of politics.
IMO, the BEA is (like the BLS) little more then a bunch of bureaucrats who do what they are told from above.
And if 'above' tells them to legally make the numbers seem good...they do just that.
They don't flat out lie, but they use 'creative' math and tabulation techniques to fudge the numbers in the direction their bosses request.
You believe otherwise...I really don't much care...your bias is already well documented (no offense).
Whereas my bias is for facts...no matter what they are.
We are done here, for now.
Last edited by DA60; 07-30-14 at 09:59 AM.
'What kind of sick and twisted toy factory is this?'
'We are all the sum of our tears. Too little and the ground is not fertile, and nothing can grow there. Too much, the best of us is washed away.'
"Better to be dead and cool, than alive and uncool."
WSJ: U.S. Second-Quarter GDP Expands at 4.0% Rate - WSJ
GDP growth exceeded expectations for Q2.
• Personal consumption is up
• Private inventory is up
• Business spending is up
• This month's rebound supports the idea that Q1 was down because of one-time factors (like bad weather)
• Imports increased (this is actually a good sign)
We should also note that:
• Consumer confidence is at its highest point since 2007
• The number of people who believe that "jobs are plentiful" is at its highest point since 2008, and confidence in availability of employment is rising
• Unemployment is getting back to normal levels
There are obviously still some challenges; the biggest is probably stagnant wages, including some erosion in low-income wages. However, as employment continues to improve, wages may also pick back up.
And of course that's conspiratorial nonsense. BEA reports numbers regardless of what kind of impact they have politically. The obvious answer is the need to balance timeliness with accuracy. My "bias" is reasonableness, which of course would seem biased to someone who views opponents of conspiracy theories as "nonbelievers".Why not just not post the number until the final revision?
Because of politics.
"I do not claim that every incident in the history of empire can be explained in directly economic terms. Economic interests are filtered through a political process, policies are implemented by a complex state apparatus, and the whole system generates its own momentum."
Great job everybody.
"Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough."
Moderator's Warning: Threads merged.
This isn't to say that pure socialism is good - it's not. What is best, as evinced by ALL the first-world democracies on the planet, is an economy that is balanced between capitalism and socialism, neither too much nor too little of either one.
“To do evil, a human being must first of all believe that what he’s doing is good" - Solzhenitsyn
"...with the terrorists, you have to take out their families." - Donald Trump