the GDP isn't right either.
There is an internationally agreed upon method of measuring GDP. Did you know this?
International standards
The international standard for measuring GDP is contained in the book System of National Accounts (1993), which was prepared by representatives of the International Monetary Fund, European Union, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, United Nations and World Bank. The publication is normally referred to as SNA93, to distinguish it from the previous edition published in 1968 (called SNA68).
SNA93 sets out a set of rules and procedures for the measurement of national accounts. The standards are designed to be flexible, to allow for differences in local statistical needs and conditions.
A bit of backing of that:
tax-news.com
findarticles.com
National measurement
Within each country GDP is normally measured by a national government statistical agency, as private sector organisations normally do not have access to the information required (especially information on expenditure and production by governments).
....................................
United States: Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA).
..................................................
The components of GDP
Each of the variables C, I, G and NX (where GDP = C + I + G + NX as above):
(Note: * GDP is sometimes also referred to as Y in reference to a GDP graph)
* C is private consumption in the economy. This includes most personal expenditures of households such as food, rent, medical expenses and so on but does not include new housing.
* I is defined as business investments in capital. Examples of investment by a business include construction of a new mine, purchase of software, or purchase of machinery and equipment for a factory. Spending by households on new houses is also included in Investment. Unlike its general meaning, 'Investment' in GDP is meant very specifically as non-financial product purchases. Buying financial products is classed as 'saving' , as opposed to investment. The distinction is (in theory) clear: if money is converted into goods or services, it is investment; but, if you buy a bond or a share, this transfer payment is excluded from the GDP sum. Although such purchases would be called investments in normal speech, from the total-economy point of view, this is simply swapping of deeds, and not part of the real economy or the GDP formula.
* G is the sum of government expenditures on final goods and services. It includes salaries of public servants, purchase of weapons for the military, and any investment expenditure by a government. It does not include any transfer payments, such as social security or unemployment benefits.
* X is gross exports. GDP captures the amount a country produces, including goods and services produced for overseas consumption, therefore exports are added.
* M is gross imports. Imports are subtracted since imported goods will be included in the terms G, I, or C, and must be deducted to avoid counting foreign supply as domestic.
* NX are "net exports" in the economy: gross exports - gross imports. There is a fixed relation: NX = X - M.
It is important to understand the meaning of each variable precisely in order to:
* Read national accounts.
* Understand Keynesian or neo-classical macroeconomics.
[edit] Examples of GDP component variables
Examples of C, I, G, & NX: If you spend money to renovate your hotel so that occupancy rates increase, that is private investment, but if you buy shares in a consortium to do the same thing it is saving. The former is included when measuring GDP (in I), the latter is not. However, when the consortium conducted its own expenditure on renovation, that expenditure would be included in GDP.
If the hotel is your private home your renovation spending would be measured as Consumption, but if a government agency is converting the hotel into an office for civil servants the renovation spending would be measured as part of public sector spending (G).
If the renovation involves the purchase of a chandelier from abroad, that spending would also be counted as an increase in imports, so that NX would fall and the total GDP is unaffected by the purchase. (This highlights the fact that GDP is intended to measure domestic production rather than total consumption or spending. Spending is really a convenient means of estimating production.)
If you are paid to manufacture the chandelier to hang in a foreign hotel the situation would be reversed, and the payment you receive would be counted in NX (positively, as an export). Again, we see that GDP is attempting to measure production through the means of expenditure; if the chandelier you produced had been bought domestically it would have been included in the GDP figures (in C or I) when purchased by a consumer or a business, but because it was exported it is necessary to 'correct' the amount consumed domestically to give the amount produced domestically. (As in Gross Domestic Product.)
[edit] The GDP income account
Another way of measuring GDP is to measure the total income payable in the GDP income accounts. This should provide the same figure as the expenditure method described above.
The formula for GDP measured using the income approach, called GDP(I), is:
GDP = Compensation of employees + Gross operating surplus + Gross mixed income + Taxes less subsidies on production and imports
* Compensation of employees (COE) measures the total remuneration to employees for work done. It includes wages and salaries, as well as employer contributions to social security and other such programs.
* Gross operating surplus (GOS) is the surplus due to owners of incorporated businesses. Often called profits, although only a subset of total costs are subtracted from gross output to calculate GOS.
* Gross mixed income (GMI) is the same measure as GOS, but for unincorporated businesses. This often includes most small businesses.
The sum of COE, GOS and GMI is called total factor income, and measures the value of GDP at factor (basic) prices.The difference between basic prices and final prices (those used in the expenditure calculation) is the total taxes and subsidies that the Government has levied or paid on that production. So adding taxes less subsidies on production and imports converts GDP at factor cost to GDP(I).
Another formula can be written as this:
GDP = R + I + P + SA + W
where R = rents
I = interests
P = profits
SA = statistical adjustments (corporate income taxes, dividends, undistributed corporate profits)
W = wages
...................................................
Criticisms and limitations
Differences between GDP per capita and median household income in selected developed nations.
Differences between GDP per capita and median household income in selected developed nations.
GDP is widely used by economists to follow how the economy is moving, as its variations are relatively quickly identified. However, its value as an indicator for the standard of living is considered to be limited. An alternative for this purpose is the United Nations' Human Development Index in which the GDP is a contributing factor in its calculation. Criticisms of how the GDP is used include:
* One main problem in estimating GDP growth over time is that the purchasing power of money varies in different proportion for different goods, so when the GDP figure is deflated over time, GDP growth can vary greatly depending on the basket of goods used and the relative proportions used to deflate the GDP figure. For example, in the past 80 years the GDP per capita of the United States if measured by purchasing power of potatoes, did not grow significantly. But if it is measured by the purchasing power of eggs, it grew several times.
* Official GDP estimates may not take into account the black market, where the money spent is not registered, and the non-monetary economy, where no money comes into play at all, resulting in inaccurate or abnormally low GDP figures. For example, in countries with major business transactions occurring informally, portions of local economy are not easily registered. Bartering may be more prominent than the use of money, even extending to services (I helped you build your house ten years ago, so now you help me).
* This mainstream economic analysis ignores externalities such as the environment, subsistence production and domestic work. The current system counts oil spills and wars as contributors to economic growth, while child-rearing and housekeeping are deemed valueless. The work of New Zealand economist, Marilyn Waring, has highlighted that if a concerted attempt to factor in unpaid work were made, then it would in part, undo the injustices of unpaid (and in some cases, slave) labour, and also provide the political transparency and accountability necessary for democracy. Also, when GDP is used as a measure of success over time, the amount of housework that was done 50 years ago compared to the present time is much greater. Thus, comparing GDP over time cannot take into account the changes in society and lifestyle.
* It ignores volunteer, unpaid work. For example, Linux contributes nothing to GDP, but it was estimated that it would have cost more than a billion US dollars for a commercial company to develop. Wikipedia, an open-source online encyclopedia, is another good example.
* Very often different calculations of GDP are confused among each other. For cross-border comparisons one should especially regard whether it is calculated by purchasing power parity (PPP) method or current exchange rate method. Using the latter method to compare living standards is problematic, since it does not always reflect the real wealth of the citizens, ie. how much they are able purchase locally in relation to their income (see Penn effect).
* Cross-border comparisons of GDP can be inaccurate as they do not take into account local differences in the quality of goods, even when adjusted for purchasing power parity. This type of adjustment to an exchange rate is controversial because of the difficulties of finding comparable baskets of goods to compare purchasing power across countries. For instance, people in country A may consume the same number of locally produced apples as in country B, but apples in country A are of a more tasty variety. This difference in material well being will not show up in GDP statistics. This is especially true for goods that are not traded globally, such as housing.
* GDP counts work that produces no net change or that results from repairing harm. For example, rebuilding after a natural disaster or war may produce a considerable amount of economic activity and thus boost GDP, but it would have been far better if the disaster had never occurred in the first place. The economic value of health care is another classic example—it may raise GDP if many people are sick and they are receiving expensive treatment, but it is not a desirable situation. Alternative economic measures, such as the standard of living or discretionary income per capita better measure the human utility of economic activity. See uneconomic growth.
* Quality of life—human happiness—is determined by many other things than physical goods and services. Even the alternative economic measures of standard of living and discretionary income do not take these factors into account.
* Cross border trade within companies distorts the GDP and is done frequently to escape high taxation. Examples include the German Ebay that evades German tax by doing business in Switzerland, and American companies that have founded holdings in Ireland to "buy" their own products for cheap from their continental factories (without shipping) and selling them for profit via Ireland - thereby reducing their taxes and increasing Irish GDP.[citation needed]
* People may buy cheap, low-durability goods over and over again, or they may buy high-durability goods less often. It is possible that the monetary value of the items sold in the first case is higher than that in the second case, in which case a higher GDP is simply the result of greater inefficiency and waste. (This is not always the case; durable goods are often more difficult to produce than flimsy goods, and consumers have a financial incentive to find the cheapest long-term option. With goods that are undergoing rapid change, such as in fashion or high technology, the short lifespan may increase customer satisfaction by allowing them to have newer products.)
* GDP does not measure the sustainability of growth. A country may achieve a temporarily high GDP by over-exploiting natural resources or by misallocating investment. For example, the large deposits of phosphates gave the people of Nauru one of the highest per capita incomes on earth, but since 1989 their standard of living has declined sharply as the supply has run out. Oil-rich states can sustain high GDPs without industrializing, but this high level would no longer be sustainable if the oil runs out. Economies experiencing an economic bubble, such as a housing bubble or stock bubble, or a low private-saving rate tend to appear to grow faster due to higher consumption, mortgaging their futures for present growth. Economic growth at the expense of environmental degradation can end up costing dearly to clean up; GDP does not account for this.
* As a measure of actual sale prices, GDP does not capture the economic surplus between the price paid and subjective value received, and can therefore underestimate aggregate utility.
* The annual growth of real GDP is adjusted by using the "GDP deflator", which tends to underestimate the objective differences in the quality of manufactured output over time. (The deflator is explicitly based on subjective experience when measuring such things as the consumer benefit received from computer-power improvements since the early 1980s). Therefore the GDP figure may underestimate the degree to which improving technology and quality-level are increasing the real standard of living.
* GDP does not take disparity in incomes between the rich and poor into account. See income inequality metrics for discussion of a variety of complementary economic measures.
* GDP is often incorrectly used in (often unscientific and unrealistic) comparisons where net national worth (or national wealth) would be a more correct point of reference. For example, "person X could buy country Y, because his/her wealth is more than the GDP of that country". Net national worth is often equal to several years cumulative GDP [1] [2].
The limits of GDP (or GNP, a slightly different notion) can be summed up in the words of two critics. Robert Kennedy said[3]:
The gross national product includes air pollution and advertising for cigarettes and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and jails for the people who break them. GNP includes the destruction of the redwoods and the death of Lake Superior. It grows with the production of napalm, and missiles and nuclear warheads... it does not allow for the health of our families, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play. It is indifferent to the decency of our factories and the safety of our streets alike. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, or the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.
The second critic, Simon Kuznets the inventor of the GDP, in his very first report to the US Congress in 1934 said[4]:
...the welfare of a nation [can] scarcely be inferred from a measure of national income...
In 1962, Kuznets stated[5]:
Distinctions must be kept in mind between quantity and quality of growth, between costs and returns, and between the short and long run. Goals for more growth should specify more growth of what and for what.
Some economists have attempted to create a replacement for GDP called the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI), which attempts to address many of the above criticisms. Many nations calculate a national wealth, a sum of all assets in a nation, but this again does not account for future obligations such as environmental degradation, asset bubbles, and debt. Other nations such as Bhutan have advocated gross national happiness as a standard of living. (Bhutan claims to be the world's happiest nation.)
en.wikipedia.org
It overcounts offshored goods that are being "managed" from here as created here. this has been pointed out in various financial pubs like Business Week when interviewing supply chain experts from Accenture and others.
Cites?
We had 4% GDP in the 90s and for an economy of this size a 4% growth rate means we couldn't count the money fast enough. Now the feds tell us we are .6% below our GDP in the 90s? Except we are running the largest deficits ever with about 1/3 the job creation as then and no wage growth.
1. A and B do the same thing in the same way. A is right. B is wrong. Can you explain this?
2. GDP does NOT measure and was never meant to measure international trade balance or government budget balance. That is why they are measured separately. If they were the same as GDP, their separate measurement would not exist.
I actually think the new treasury secretary Hank Paulson is one individual in charge that actually has the capacity to understand this...
Uh, it's a simple concept. If what you claim is correct, I hardly think it's because the flaw wasn't understood previously. It may be that it is, but then it has to be seen as intentional distortion, most likely for political reasons. But those reasons are obviously hardly limited at party boundaries; both a Republican administration and a Democratic administration made the same "misunderstanding". Remember Clinton crowing about how well the economy was doing? Maybe we weren't getting rich so fast that "we couldn't count the money fast enough."
as opposed to the other losers hired to manage the economy from the Bush administration, thank god. Paulson is not the typical untalented Bush lackey "yes man". I wonder if republicans forced Bush into hiring a grown up with the deficit mess he created.
I see the welt left when you didn't realize you should duck before the bubble burst is still there. Think of the money you lost as tuition paid to understand markets
Oh. Did you notice, with the losers hired to manage the economy from the Bush administration, the US markets just recently hit new highs? Feel better now? |
