The Phreakonomist’s Weblog

Finance ex Machina

  • Former Marine turned buy-side equity analyst parsing reality from wikiality

  • Twitter Updates

    • Happy Birthday everyone. You know who you are. 2 days ago
    • Was Larry David ever funny at some point? Can't tell if its bad acting or bad writing by Woody Allen. 4 days ago
    • Has anyone checked whether Pelosi is a V or not? She does seem rather reptilian... 4 days ago
    • picked up a case from Newport Vineyards. 4 days ago
    • loving Jon Stewart's Glenn Beck impression! 5 days ago
    • Primary dealers will do large reverse repos with Fed in exchange 4 lower Tier 1 capital requirements. Here we go again... 5 days ago
    • Can we agree to a moratorium on the use of the term "bourgeois" for a solid decade or so? 6 days ago
    • Remember remember the 5th of November the gunpowder treason & plot. I know of no reason y the gunpowder treason should ever b 4got. 6 days ago
    • I need an 80's band power chord sound effect for my market monitor on days like this! Nice to have TEL out of the index. 1 week ago
  • Categories

Real or Not?

Posted by 史蒂芬 on 25 April 2009

One note from today’s data on deflation. The headline in the Wall Street Journal says China grew at 6.1% last quarter. That doesn’t sound bad. But what was not in the story is that nominal growth was just 3.7%. The other 2.4% was because of deflation. To get real (after-inflation) growth you subtract inflation and/or add deflation. Growth in China is slowing down more than the headlines suggest.

Since when does real GDP growth count only in an inflationary environment? If economic activity remains constant in a deflationary environment, real GDP should be flat not negative.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>