Snake Posted October 26, 2018 Share Posted October 26, 2018 Remember back in April, when the first GDP estimate was released (a gargantuan by comparison 0.1% hence revised to a depression equivalent -2.9%), we wrote: "If It Wasn't For Obamacare, Q1 GDP Would Be Negative." Well, now that GDP is not only negative, but the worst it has been in five years, we are once again proven right. But not only because GDP was indeed negative, but because the real reason for today's epic collapse in GDP was, you guessed it, Obamacare. Here is the chart we posted in April, showing the contribution of Obamacare, aka Healthcare Services spending. It was, in a word, an all time high. Turns out this number was based on.... nothing. Because as the next chart below shows, between the second and final revision of Q1 GDP something dramatic happened: instead of contributing $40 billion to real GDP in Q1, Obamacare magically ended up subtracting $6.4 billion from GDP. This, in turn, resulted in a collapse in Personal Consumption Expenditures as a percentage of GDP to just 0.7%, the lowest since 2009! Don't worry thought: this is actually great news! Because the brilliant propaganda minds at the Dept of Commerce figured out something banks also realized with the stub "kitchen sink" quarter in November 2008. Namely, since Q1 is a total loss in GDP terms, let's just remove Obamacare spending as a contributor to Q1 GDP and just shove it in Q2. Stated otherwise, some $40 billion in PCE that was supposed to boost Q1 GDP will now be added to Q2-Q4. And now, we all await as the US department of truth says, with a straight face, that in Q2 the US GDP "grew" by over 5% (no really: you'll see). Wed, 06/25/2014 - 09:23 https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-06-25/here-reason-total-collapse-q1-gdp Back in June, when we were looking at the final Q1 GDP print, we discovered something very surprising: after the BEA had first reported that absent for Obamacare, Q1 GDP would have been negative in its first Q1 GDP report, subsequent GDP prints imploded as a result of what is now believed to be the polar vortex. But the real surprise was that the Obamacare boost was, in the final print, revised massively lower to actually reduce GDP! This is how the unprecedented trimming of Obamacare's contribution to GDP looked like back then. Of course, even back then we knew what this means: payback is coming, and all the BEA is looking for is the right quarter in which to insert the "GDP boost". This is what we said verbatim: Don't worry thought: this is actually great news! Because the brilliant propaganda minds at the Dept of Commerce figured out something banks also realized with the stub "kitchen sink" quarter in November 2008. Namely, since Q1 is a total loss in GDP terms, let's just remove Obamacare spending as a contributor to Q1 GDP and just shove it in Q2. Stated otherwise, some $40 billion in PCE that was supposed to boost Q1 GDP will now be added to Q2-Q4. And now, we all await as the US department of truth says, with a straight face, that in Q2 the US GDP "grew" by over 5% (no really: you'll see). Well, we were wrong: it wasn't Q2. It was Q3, albeit precisely in the Q2-Q4 interval we expected. Fast forward to today when as every pundit is happy to report, the final estimate of Q3 GDP indeed rose by 5% (no really, just as we predicted), with a surge in personal consumption being the main driver of US growth in the June-September quarter. As noted before, between the second revision of the Q3 GDP number and its final print, Personal Consumption increased from 2.2% to 3.2% Q/Q, and ended up contributing 2.21% of the final 4.96% GDP amount, up from 1.51%. So what did Americans supposedly spend so much more on compared to the previous revision released one month ago? Was it cars? Furnishings? Housing and Utilities? Recreational Goods and RVs? Or maybe nondurable goods and financial services? Actually no. The answer, just as we predicted precisely 6 months ago is... well, just see for yourselves. In short, two-thirds of the "boost" to final Q3 personal consumption came from, drumroll, the same Obamacare which initially was supposed to boost Q1 GDP until the "polar vortex" crashed the number so badly, the BEA decided to pull it completely and leave this "growth dry powder" for another quarter. That quarter was Q3. Tue, 12/23/2014 - 23:45 https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-12-23/here-reason-surge-q3-gdp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted October 26, 2018 Share Posted October 26, 2018 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted October 26, 2018 Share Posted October 26, 2018 6 minutes ago, Snake said: Remember back in April, when the first GDP estimate was released (a gargantuan by comparison 0.1% hence revised to a depression equivalent -2.9%), we wrote: "If It Wasn't For Obamacare, Q1 GDP Would Be Negative." Well, now that GDP is not only negative, but the worst it has been in five years, we are once again proven right. But not only because GDP was indeed negative, but because the real reason for today's epic collapse in GDP was, you guessed it, Obamacare. Here is the chart we posted in April, showing the contribution of Obamacare, aka Healthcare Services spending. It was, in a word, an all time high. Turns out this number was based on.... nothing. Because as the next chart below shows, between the second and final revision of Q1 GDP something dramatic happened: instead of contributing $40 billion to real GDP in Q1, Obamacare magically ended up subtracting $6.4 billion from GDP. This, in turn, resulted in a collapse in Personal Consumption Expenditures as a percentage of GDP to just 0.7%, the lowest since 2009! Don't worry thought: this is actually great news! Because the brilliant propaganda minds at the Dept of Commerce figured out something banks also realized with the stub "kitchen sink" quarter in November 2008. Namely, since Q1 is a total loss in GDP terms, let's just remove Obamacare spending as a contributor to Q1 GDP and just shove it in Q2. Stated otherwise, some $40 billion in PCE that was supposed to boost Q1 GDP will now be added to Q2-Q4. And now, we all await as the US department of truth says, with a straight face, that in Q2 the US GDP "grew" by over 5% (no really: you'll see). Wed, 06/25/2014 - 09:23 https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-06-25/here-reason-total-collapse-q1-gdp Back in June, when we were looking at the final Q1 GDP print, we discovered something very surprising: after the BEA had first reported that absent for Obamacare, Q1 GDP would have been negative in its first Q1 GDP report, subsequent GDP prints imploded as a result of what is now believed to be the polar vortex. But the real surprise was that the Obamacare boost was, in the final print, revised massively lower to actually reduce GDP! This is how the unprecedented trimming of Obamacare's contribution to GDP looked like back then. Of course, even back then we knew what this means: payback is coming, and all the BEA is looking for is the right quarter in which to insert the "GDP boost". This is what we said verbatim: Don't worry thought: this is actually great news! Because the brilliant propaganda minds at the Dept of Commerce figured out something banks also realized with the stub "kitchen sink" quarter in November 2008. Namely, since Q1 is a total loss in GDP terms, let's just remove Obamacare spending as a contributor to Q1 GDP and just shove it in Q2. Stated otherwise, some $40 billion in PCE that was supposed to boost Q1 GDP will now be added to Q2-Q4. And now, we all await as the US department of truth says, with a straight face, that in Q2 the US GDP "grew" by over 5% (no really: you'll see). Well, we were wrong: it wasn't Q2. It was Q3, albeit precisely in the Q2-Q4 interval we expected. Fast forward to today when as every pundit is happy to report, the final estimate of Q3 GDP indeed rose by 5% (no really, just as we predicted), with a surge in personal consumption being the main driver of US growth in the June-September quarter. As noted before, between the second revision of the Q3 GDP number and its final print, Personal Consumption increased from 2.2% to 3.2% Q/Q, and ended up contributing 2.21% of the final 4.96% GDP amount, up from 1.51%. So what did Americans supposedly spend so much more on compared to the previous revision released one month ago? Was it cars? Furnishings? Housing and Utilities? Recreational Goods and RVs? Or maybe nondurable goods and financial services? Actually no. The answer, just as we predicted precisely 6 months ago is... well, just see for yourselves. In short, two-thirds of the "boost" to final Q3 personal consumption came from, drumroll, the same Obamacare which initially was supposed to boost Q1 GDP until the "polar vortex" crashed the number so badly, the BEA decided to pull it completely and leave this "growth dry powder" for another quarter. That quarter was Q3. Tue, 12/23/2014 - 23:45 https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-12-23/here-reason-surge-q3-gdp Fake news. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awful knawful Posted October 26, 2018 Share Posted October 26, 2018 Fuck reading all that! Short and simple! Like Snotty!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted October 26, 2018 Share Posted October 26, 2018 Well .......Snake posted it before and it was ignored and then these faggot ass retarded morons have to pipe up and throw up Obamas bullshit numbers again Snake Slinger and Freechy to the maximum macs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchy Posted October 26, 2018 Share Posted October 26, 2018 53 minutes ago, f7ben said: Well .......Snake posted it before and it was ignored and then these faggot ass retarded morons have to pipe up and throw up Obamas bullshit numbers again Snake Slinger and Freechy to the maximum macs what am I owned on? I never posted anything on the quarterly shell game that's played by every administration for optics but you guys somehow think was a trademark of obama and no one else Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted October 26, 2018 Share Posted October 26, 2018 2 minutes ago, frenchy said: what am I owned on? I never posted anything on the quarterly shell game that's played by every administration for optics but you guys somehow think was a trademark of obama and no one else To this extent? Shuffling money from losers to winners for soundbites??? Ahhh no. Try again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted October 26, 2018 Share Posted October 26, 2018 Snot is vary dumb 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchy Posted October 26, 2018 Share Posted October 26, 2018 1 minute ago, f7ben said: To this extent? Shuffling money from losers to winners for soundbites??? Ahhh no. Try again historically quarterly growth is pretty irrelevant, as quarterly growth can fluctuate greatly over a calendar year. I have no idea what the specifics were surrounding this particular incident but the numbers all come out in the wash at the end of a calendar year, you can't hide what they are, and the yearly numbers are what count. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted October 27, 2018 Author Share Posted October 27, 2018 14 hours ago, frenchy said: historically quarterly growth is pretty irrelevant, as quarterly growth can fluctuate greatly over a calendar year. I have no idea what the specifics were surrounding this particular incident but the numbers all come out in the wash at the end of a calendar year, you can't hide what they are, and the yearly numbers are what count. . Multiple examples of this must be readily available for viewing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted October 27, 2018 Share Posted October 27, 2018 14 hours ago, frenchy said: historically quarterly growth is pretty irrelevant, as quarterly growth can fluctuate greatly over a calendar year. I have no idea what the specifics were surrounding this particular incident but the numbers all come out in the wash at the end of a calendar year, you can't hide what they are, and the yearly numbers are what count. . Delete this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted October 27, 2018 Author Share Posted October 27, 2018 A near 5 point swing in the the 1st qtr estimate to the "actual" -2.9 is hardly a rounding error. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racer254 Posted October 27, 2018 Share Posted October 27, 2018 GRUBERED Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.