Given Projected Population, Is the Administration’s Forecast Plausible?

If one uses a simple random walk with drift estimate over the 2022Q1-2025Q3 period, the answer is yes. However, given the Administration’s internment and removals program, the current projection of population suggests not.

I use a simple error correction model with (log) GDP as the left hand side variable, and GDP and population as an error correction term, estimated over the 1986Q4-2019Q4 ad 2021Q1-2025Q3 period (excluding the pandemic, and with data available to the Troika). I then use the CBO’s reported Census projection of over-16 population to forecast out (the long run elasticity of output with respect to population is 2.1).

Figure 1: GDP as reported (bold black), Administration FY2027 forecast (red square), ECM forecast using population (blue), +/- standard error band (gray lines), all in bn.Ch.2017$ SAAR. Source: BEA, OMB, author’s calculations.

The Administration’s path is within the +/- one standard error band through 2027Q4, so the forecast is in that sense plausible, based on sampling error. However, the Administration’s path does suggest something interesting about output per capita.

One can work out the implied GDP per capita (counting 16 year old and over):

Figure 2: Output per capita calculated as GDP divided by Census population (over 16yo) (bold black), and implied Administration output per capita (over 16yo) (red square), all in 000’s Ch.2017$, on log scale. Source: BEA, CBO, Administration, and author’s calculations.

The implied growth rate of GDP per capita is 2.9% in 2026, 2.5% in 2027, compared to the current estimate of 1.4% in 2025 (calculations in log differences). Note that these are output per +16yo capita, not output per person-hour in the nonfarm business sector. The only time one sees repeated consecutive instances of such growth is during the dot.com boom, ca 1998…

2 thoughts on “Given Projected Population, Is the Administration’s Forecast Plausible?

  1. Macroduck

    The distribution of population by age in the U.S. shows a bump in the 60-65 age range:

    https://www.populationpyramids.org/united-states

    That suggests a further period of high departure from the labor force due to retirement for the next 5 to 10 years. Repeating mysrlf, but here’s prime-age labor force participation agaist overall labor force participation:

    https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1Utdq

    The population bump in the 60-65 range makes a further drop in overall participation likely. That makes the +16yo category optimistic. In other words, for all that you suggest thr felon administration’s growth estimates are wxcessively rosy, they are even rosier than you give them credit for.

    Reply
  2. Macroduck

    OK, way off topic, and catty, but…it’s starting to look like the rapist-in-chief is ditching the women in his cabinet:

    https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/who-will-trump-fire-next-cabinet-shakeup-could-expand-source-tells-fox-news

    Two women down, and two of three mentioned in the article are also women. Notice that Hegseth isn’t mentioned; Tulsi Gabbard could end up as the sacrificial goat for the Iran mess – an incompetent female taking the fall rather than an incompetent male.

    Chavez-DeRemer, like Noem, is claimed to have had sex with the help. Also like Noem, Chavez-DeRemer is married, but her husband is accused of sexually assaulting two of her Labor Department staff, so maybe a bit of in-house kanoodling is not a firing offense in her case?

    Anyhow, it’s looking like the rapist-in-chief’s cabinet cleaning is mostly an anti-DEI thing.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *