Just how bad is the outlook for the US’ economy? Unfortunately, you cannot tell from the forecasts.
These days, it is common to read forecasts predicting that the US economy will grow at a 3 percent annual rate in the coming year, but just what does that mean?
The forecaster is not saying that he or she is confident that growth will be exactly 3 percent. Every forecaster recognizes that the actual growth rate may be higher or lower than the number that he states. There is a distribution of possible growth rates, and the forecaster is telling us just one of the outcomes that he can contemplate.
If a forecaster tells us that he “expects” a growth rate of 3 percent, does that mean that he thinks that it is as likely to be above 3 percent as it is to be below 3 percent — the “median,” as he sees it, of the distribution of possible growth rates? Or could it mean that he thinks the most likely growth rate will be close to 3 percent (the “modal” value), even though he may believe that it is much more likely to be less than that value than to be greater?
Many forecasters currently believe that there is a significant probability that the economy will slump during the next 12 months — a “double dip” in the expansion process. It is possible for them to hold that view and still forecast 2 percent growth for the next 12 months as the most likely outcome or the “median” of their probability distribution.
Any decisionmaker who depends on forecasts — a businessman, an investor or a government official — needs to know the probability of very low or very high growth rates, as well as the median forecast. However, that information remains hidden.
Some surveys of forecasts report the distribution of the forecasts of the different individuals being surveyed. We might read that the average forecast of 20 different forecasters is 2.8 percent, with the five highest forecasts above 3.2 percent and the five lowest forecasts below 2.5 percent. While that is useful information, it does not say anything about the extent to which each forecaster believes that growth might turn out to be less than 1 percent, or even less than zero.
Recent US data has clearly raised the probability that the economy will run out of steam and decline during the next 12 months. The key reason for increased pessimism is that the government stimulus programs that raised spending since the summer of last year are now coming to an end. As they have wound down, spending has declined.
The government programs failed to provide the “pump-priming” role that was intended. They provided an early spark, but it looks like the spark did not catch. For example, a tax subsidy for car purchases caused GDP to rise in the third quarter of last year, with more than two-thirds of the increase attributable to motor-vehicle production. However, now that the subsidies have ended the level of both sales and production has declined. A recent survey of consumers reported the lowest level of intended car buying in more than 40 years.
Although annual GDP growth was 3 percent in the first quarter of this year, almost all of it reflected inventory accumulation — some of which, no doubt, was unwanted build-up caused by disappointing sales. When inventory accumulation is excluded, first-quarter growth of “final sales” was just 0.8 percent in annual terms — and 0.2 percent compared to the fourth quarter of last year.
The second quarter benefited from a surge in home purchases, as individuals rushed to take advantage of the tax subsidy for home buyers that expired in April. But what will happen in the third quarter and beyond now that that program has ended?
While it would be rash to forecast a double dip as the most likely outcome for the economy during the rest of this year, many of us are raising the odds that we attribute to such a downturn. Unfortunately, those forecasts of what might happen remain hidden.
Martin Feldstein is a professor of economics at Harvard and was chairman of former US president Ronald Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisers and former president of the National Bureau for Economic Research.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS