The Bureau of Economic Analysis announced today that U.S. real GDP grew at a 2.6% annual rate in the second quarter. That is below the long-term historical average of 3.1%, but better than the 2.1% we’ve seen on average since the Great Recession ended in 2009.
Continue reading
Steve Kopits obsesses on the household survey based employment series for Wisconsin, despite our previous exchange on why reliance on this series for Kansas is a problem. But just to make matters concrete, lets look at a few vintages of the household series.
Today, we present a guest post written by Jeffrey Frankel, Harpel Professor at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, and formerly a member of the White House Council of Economic Advisers. A shorter version appeared in Project Syndicate.
Reader Jesse Livermore thinks he’s discovered Wisconsin is in actuality doing really well vis a vis Minnesota. He writes:
Wisconsin personal income growth dramatically outperformed Minnesota in Q1.
Well, I’ll just say the level is sometimes just as important as the first derivative. That’s why I plot time series, rather than just quoting a quarter’s worth of growth. Here is a comparison of personal income over the past few years.
Figure 1: Log nominal personal income for Minnesota (blue), Wisconsin (red), and US (black), all normalized to 2011Q1=0. Source: BEA, June 27, 2017, and author’s calculations.
On a per capita basis, cumulative Minnesota personal income growth remains 0.7 percent higher (log terms) than Wisconsin’s. It has been higher since 2011Q1.
My advice to anyone trying to assess relative economic performance: plot the time series.
And lags further behind its neighbor Minnesota. Wisconsin nonfarm payroll (NFP) employment is now below April 2017 peak. Finally, employment lags what would be predicted from the historical correlation of Wisconsin employment with national.
Well, I don’t think a few tariffs and quotas, plus “tweaking” Nafta, are going to do it. And blowing a hole in the Federal deficit ain’t likely to help.
Here’s the health coverage implications of President Trump’s proposal to repeal Obamacare, as assessed by the CBO:
Figure 1: Effects of H.R. 1628, THE Obamacare Repeal Reconciliation Act of 2017, on health insurance coverage of people under age 65, in millions, by calendar year. Source: CBO, Table 4.
So, at least for part of one day, the President was content to let an additional 32 million be uncovered by 2026.
At the invitation of the Italian Presidency of the Group of Seven (G7) in 2017, the Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI) conducted a research project on “Major Challenges for Global Macroeconomic Stability and the Role of the G7” together with a major policy think tank in each of the other G7 member countries:
On imported steel, that is
From Politico today:
STEEL REPORT COULD COME NEXT WEEK: Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross is expected as early as next week to give President Donald Trump a menu of options for restricting steel imports, senators said after a closed-door meeting with the Cabinet official Thursday afternoon.