Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ken H; LS
If my memory serves me right, the public (us guys) were not informed that there was actually negative growth in 01 until July-Aug of 02, about 12 months later.
17 posted on 10/31/2002 5:41:56 PM PST by imawit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: imawit; Ken H; LS
There's revision information contained in the GDP News release from the BEA. It's about a quarter of the way down the page.

According to the press release, what the BEA categorizes as the "final" numbers for Q3 have a 66% probablity of being within -0.6 to +0.9 points of the number in the release (3.1%), and a 90% probablity of being within -1.0 to +1.3 points.

So, using the 90% confidence numbers, the 3.1% number could actually be as low as 2.1% or as high as 4.4%.

21 posted on 10/31/2002 5:53:01 PM PST by d101302
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: imawit
Yeah, but we also weren't told that the growth of one of those quarters was BETTER than originally posted, either.
23 posted on 10/31/2002 5:56:00 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson