GDP was down at a 6.2% annualized rate in the last quarter of 2008 (revised figure). Earlier I criticized the Minneapolis Fed for a peculiar way of presenting data comparing recessions. I've been impressed, however, with how they have responded since I (and others) raised this issue. First, they quickly clarified what they were doing. Second, today they have added a very nice javascript which lets you compare output and employment during this recession to as many others as you like with a few clicks. Check it out.
Conventions for expression of rates of change in financial writing are horrible. Sometimes we throw in the word “annualized” or the mysterious “APR” but often we leave it out — see the big text of any bank advertisment for a CD rate. Lots of statments end up highly ambiguous if not outright wrong.
Just take a cue from real scientists and use proper units. GDP fell 6.2%/a in the fourth quarter. Problem solved.
隔熱紙
Just take a cue from real scientists and use proper units. GDP fell 6.2%/a in the fourth quarter. Problem solved
I couldn’t help but notice, if you click on all of the recession options so that all trend lines are visible, mentally flip it right to left/left to right, it looks very similar to the NOAA hurricane storm track predictions as the systems move from the Caribbean through the Gulf of Mexico.
Comments on this entry are closed.