As we come
closer to Election Day in the USA we will hear and read a lot of things about
the US economy. The blue team will brag about their victories over incomes, employment, and poverty. The red team will say the economy plods and weaves like a drunk on Kirkwood Avenue at 2 am. As
you know I love data and so I decided to play around with some familiar information.
It is impossible to summarize all economic data in a small space so I decided
to focus on recent changes in real GDP and its components.
I stick to the facts today. I think the facts tell a clear story about slowing economic growth and one that deserves a policy discussion. But that discussion will have to wait. I already used up today's word count.
GDP is a
measure of the nation’s output of goods and services. Real GDP means that we
are measuring output in constant prices –meaning that price change is not part
of the change in real GDP. If real GDP increases it is totally because output or
quantity produced changed. We like to analyze output because it usually has a strong association
with things like employment, incomes, and sales of Jack Daniels.
GDP is output. It does not tell you about financial wealth. Of course if we
are wealthier we often buy more goods and services but GDP does not directly measure
wealth. It does not measure poverty and it does not measure distribution of
income.
I wanted to
examine near-term changes in real GDP so I did the following. For real GDP and
each of its major components I looked at the annualized* percentage change over
the past two quarters, past four quarters, and past eight quarters. By doing
that I could get an idea as to whether things are improving, worsening, or
staying the same.
For
example, in the past two quarters real GDP grew by an annualized 1%. That was
slower than the 1.2% it grew over the last four quarters and was less than half
of the 2.1% annualized rate it grew in the last two years. These calculations suggest that things are clearly worsening. In 2016 the US economy is growing
considerably slower than in the past year or two. And by the way – even the
2.1% rate two-year rate is not a strong growth rate for the USA.
Rather than
speculate on a lot of causes of this slowdown, I decided to focus today on the
components of real GDP. Recall that the Product Account approach to measuring
real GDP focuses on the buyers of the output. The standard approach sees four
buyers of US produced goods and services – domestic consumers, business firms, (federal,
state, and local) governments, and foreign buyers. If real GDP is slowing it is
because one or more of these buyers have slowed their purchases of US goods and
services.
So I looked
at consumers first. Households spent an annualized 4.5% more than two quarters
ago on goods and services. Compared to the 1% overall GDP growth number for the past half-year, that’s
a very strong rate. Way to go consumers! But even consumer spending has been
slowing. Over the past two years it grew by an annualized 6.2%; it grew by
4.8% over the past year; and then 4.5% over the past half year.
Consumers desire for newly-built residences also flamed out. What we call Residential Construction declined
by -0.2% in the past two quarters. Residential Construction grew by 5.7% in the past four
quarters; by 8.5% over the past two years.
What about
business spending? Business firms buy newly produced structures, equipment,
and intellectual property. Here the news is ugly. Equipment spending was
down by almost -7% in the last two quarters. That was a major decline from the
-1.9% in the last year and the 0.7% annual rate of the past two years. Buying
of new plant and other business structures shows a slightly different but
dismal pattern of contraction. For example, spending on Structures was down by an
annualized -4.3% in the past half year; -7.1% in four quarters; down -5.2% annualized
in the past eight quarters. The only positive story for business spending was for intellectual property purchases – growing at about 5%
over the past two years.
If you like
numbers instead of growth rates – business spending was up by about $30 billion
dollars since the second quarter of 2014. During that same time period personal
consumer spending was up $674 billion. Business spending on plant and equipment is the main way we expand both productivity and productive capacity.
US exports are goods and services we sell to foreigners. The story there is not encouraging and falls in line with a slowdown theme -- declining by -0.2%/-1.3% in the last two/one years respectively. Exports leveled with 0.2% growth in the two past quarters.
Let’s turn
to some of the government buying numbers**. There is nothing particularly
interesting coming out of federal versus state and local government spending. All government
spending has slowed in the past year and past six months. More interesting is
the breakdown of federal spending between defense and non-defense. In the past
6 months, defense spending slowed by -3.1% after contracting by -0.8% in the
past year and by -1.5% in the past two years. Non-defense spending, in sharp
contrast, grew by 2.3% over the past six months; 2.9% over the past year, and
3.3% annualized in the past two years.
I know there
are a lot of things to discuss with respect to the economy and national policy.
But the recent real GDP figures are very clear.
· The economy is slowing.
· The strongest growth sectors have
been household spending on goods, services, and houses, – though even
that strong growth is declining over the past two years.
· Also contributing to positive
economic growth was non-defense federal government spending on goods and services.
· The weakest sectors showing significant
contractions are business spending on plant and equipment and defense spending.
*All the figures
in this post have been annualized. Whenever you compare different time periods
you need to find a way to make them comparable. By annualizing, for example a
half-year change, you are calculating how much real GDP would have grown in
four quarters if it continued at the same pace as over the two quarters. When
you annualize a two year change – you are showing how much it grew, on average,
per year.
** The government figures quoted here reflect only government purchases of goods and services. Much of what the government spends is for transfers and net interest. That information is found in the government budgeting figures but are not a direct part of the components of GDP.
** The government figures quoted here reflect only government purchases of goods and services. Much of what the government spends is for transfers and net interest. That information is found in the government budgeting figures but are not a direct part of the components of GDP.
Scary stuff, Prof, and we still have a month and a half to Halloween.
ReplyDeleteSo is there anything the current administration can fall back on positively (in relation to the economy)? Seems Hillary is left holding a big basket of dismal.
ReplyDeleteIt depends on who you talk to. There are plenty of things that have improved since 2008 most notably employment and the unemployment rate. The data I cited suggests, however, that all is not well and could be getting worse. As far as Hillary is concerned -- she is free to choose her policies. But so far they seem totally out of line with anything I would support.
DeleteDear LSD. I'm nominating you for Trumps economy czar . . . . you 'splain stuff better than any of the econ talk'n heads on TV.
ReplyDeleteThanks Tuna -- that's why you are known for your great taste! Unfortunately I prefer being a Monday morning QB!
Delete