03-02-2005 22:19									#31
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Yes, productivity growth of 4.4%, 4.4%, and 4.1%, respectively, is all Bush's fault.

	03-02-2005 22:20									#32
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by DanS The "pretty big" deficit has turned the corner, so the deficit isn't getting worse. (See NIPA Table 3.1, Line 39). But that doesn't make entertaining news.

That table is all well and good but what assumptions are they using to create it? I've read the same thing as Chegitz that if Bush gets his way on making tax cuts permanent and the spending he's asked for gets made then our deficits will explode. We haven't even factored in the Social Security debacle you've been so vocally supporting.

	03-02-2005 22:22									#33
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by DanS Yes, productivity growth of 4.4%, 4.4%, and 4.1%, respectively, is all Bush's fault.

Bush has little to do with any productivity growth but in the long term his deficits will have to be paid for by every man, woman, and child. Nice way to avoid the subject.

Lastly, I noticed you haven't anwsered El Freako's question about the way the increase is measured.

	03-02-2005 22:23									#34
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

The subject at hand is productivity. There was an attempted threadjack for the budget deficit by the anti-Bush crowd, which I rebuffed.

quote: That table is all well and good but what assumptions are they using to create it?

They used historic actual figures.

	03-02-2005 22:25									#35
	Got spare money?

No, The way I see it you went and posted a table to support your claim then when a simple question was asked about your table you changed the subject.

	03-02-2005 22:26									#36
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

If you want to talk deficit, then start your own damn thread.

	03-02-2005 22:26									#37
	Increase the size of your Attachments

In the left wing, economic growth is really bad. This is really bad news for the leftists on this forum, I think. But to the people this is great news, thumbs up to several of solid economic growth. I expect 2005 to be similiar.

	03-02-2005 22:27									#38
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

The long run looks great

The short run on the otherhand is very questionable. The output gap seems to be growing. That's not good, especially since we don't have any real control over it now.

	03-02-2005 22:28									#39
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by DanS If you want to talk deficit, then start your own damn thread.

So I take it you will not respond to posts about a graph you yourself posted?

	03-02-2005 22:29									#40
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Nope.

	03-02-2005 22:29									#41
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious The long run looks great

At least this commie isn't all negative.

	03-02-2005 22:29									#42
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin Bush's deficits mean that every American who borrows money (meaning just about everyone) pays a higher interest rate.

So let's not borrow money. ****em'

	03-02-2005 22:32									#43
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Kid, do you have a credit card? Own a house? How about a car?

	03-02-2005 22:35									#44
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin Kid, do you have a credit card? Own a house? How about a car?

I have a car but I own all of it. I can understand if you need to borrow to buy a house or a car, but you don't need to borrow on your credit card. The system now depends on people doing so, and we should fix the system by starving the beast.

	03-02-2005 22:36									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious and we should fix the system by starving the beast.

Killing economic growth?

	03-02-2005 22:37									#46
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Giancarlo Killing economic growth?

Kill unsustainable growth.

	03-02-2005 22:52									#47
	Full PM-box? Change here!

You will all notice the different figures quoted in DanS's first post.

Specifically the washington post says

quote: Productivity rose by 4.4 percent in both 2002 and 2003. When combined with the 4.1 percent increase last year

Now GDP rose by 4.4% in 2004, so if productivity rose by 4.1% that means that employment rose by 0.3% - however the article then goes on to say:

quote: For all of 2004, employment grew by 2.2 million workers

So if we know that employment grew by 2.2m and we also know it grew by 0.3% we can see what the level of employment is - 2.2m / 0.003 = 733m

Hang on, I thought there were less than 300m americans (and surely they don't all work) so something is wrong somewhere - specifically the 2.2m is from one series that makes employment look good and the 4.1% is from another that make productivity look good

	03-02-2005 23:16									#48
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

we're not robots. I can care less about productivity. I want quality of life.

	03-02-2005 23:17									#49
	Support Apolyton

el freako,

Something is still wrong with the way productivity is measured. It really can't be measured accurately these days, and unemployment is also difficult.

	03-02-2005 23:18									#50
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Productivity, the amount of output produced for each hour of work, is the key factor in boosting living standards because it allows companies to pay their workers more based on their increased efficiency without having to resort to raising the price of their products, which would increase inflation. Productivity rose by 4.4 percent in both 2002 and 2003. When combined with the 4.1 percent increase last year, the 4.3 percent average gain for those three years was the strongest burst in productivity since 1948 to 1951.

Did wages also grow by that amount? Did the ranks of the employed?

Really, what's the point of growing productivity if it doesn't actually net anything?

	03-02-2005 23:24									#51
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

ef: Wouldn't you agree that you were wrong and that I have never used the household survey to support my cheerleading? Let's be clear about this and then I will discuss your figures.

	03-02-2005 23:25									#52
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Productivity is the single biggest determining factor of the long-term living standard of a nation, so this sort of increase is fantastic news!

you know exactly why this productivity increased - because companies laid off so many workers, and made the others do the jobs of 3. these numbers cloud the issue. we didnt really experience this much growth in productivity. just wait until the economy starts to create more jobs, and you wil lsee a corresponding dip in productivity.

	03-02-2005 23:29									#53
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

LoA,

I think what you are talking about keeps productivity from falling, but it can't improve productivity much.

	03-02-2005 23:36									#54
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: I think what you are talking about keeps productivity from falling, but it can't improve productivity much.

productivity = output/ input. when inputs meansured in man hours goes down (less people are working, more unemployed), the equation goes up, becase output hasnt decreased by the proportional amount (if it did, then their finances would still be the same relative, and theyd still be losing money, so the firing woulda been pointless [in most cases])

since productivity only measures those who have a job, when there is massive unemployment as we saw with Bush II, productivity goes UP, even as the economy gets worse.

now, when productivity goes up, and we are in a boom phase (see clinton) thats something to crow about.

	03-02-2005 23:43									#55
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by DanS ef: Wouldn't you agree that you were wrong and that I have never used the household survey to support my cheerleading? Let's be clear about this and then I will discuss your figures.

Well I do remember checking your stated rises in employment against the site I linked to and they did match the times I checked them.

Maybe you could provide a link to the dataseries you are talking about and then we could progress from there?

	03-02-2005 23:45									#56
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia productivity = output/ input. when inputs meansured in man hours goes down (less people are working, more unemployed), the equation goes up, becase output hasnt decreased by the proportional amount (if it did, then their finances would still be the same relative, and theyd still be losing money, so the firing woulda been pointless [in most cases]) since productivity only measures those who have a job, when there is massive unemployment as we saw with Bush II, productivity goes UP, even as the economy gets worse.

But there is also a force against productivity growth because of falling revenues.

	03-02-2005 23:47									#57
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Well I do remember checking your stated rises in employment against the site I linked to and they did match the times I checked them.

Well then it was a coincidence, I made a one-time error, or you're remembering incorrectly.

All of the numbers that I and everybody else use (including WaPo in this article) are taken from Series B -- i.e., the establishment figures.

http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cesbtab1.htm

WaPo made one tiny error in its article regarding these figures, which we'll discuss.

	04-02-2005 00:19									#58
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

I think all this shows is that productivity isn't all that great for us after all.

	04-02-2005 00:22									#59
	Tired of ads?

I used to support the republican mindset. But no more. Just because big business is doing good, doesn't mean it's good for the country. or for me.

I quit my last job because I was overworked. Simple as that. We were always short handed, and they would not hire anyone.

	04-02-2005 00:27									#60
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Did wages also grow by that amount?

Hourly wages grew 4.2% in 2004, 4.1% in 2003, and 3.3% in 2002.

After subtracting inflation, hourly wages grew 1.5% in 2004, 1.7% in 2003, and 1.6% in 2002.