The "Double Dip" that never was ...
Official economic figures going back six years were revised yesterday. Most of the changes were not that dramatic, but the one of the headlines on every news bulletin I heard was that the "double dip" recession apparently didn't happen after all. Hence today's "quote of the day" from Stephanie Flanders, economics editor of BBC Radio 4, who also referred, half seriously, to the second dip as the "recession that never was."
According to the new figures the recession which took place towards the end of the term in office of the last Labour government was even more severe than was thought at the time.
The figures for the first quarter of 2012 have also been revised from a drop of 0.1% to being flat, e.g. neither growing or shrinking.
As the official definition of a recession is two consecutive quarters of negative growth, this means that what had been the second quarter of the supposed "double dip" is now offically flat rather than pretty flat but marginally negative, which in turn implies that the recession of late 2011 and early 2012 technically never happened. We no longer officially had a double dip recession.
My purpose in posting this to respond to some very confusing statements on the television and radio. It is not, and never was, to suggest that, because a very marginal revision to economic numbers has technically eliminated the "double dip" recession which had previously been recorded, that the economic difficulties the country has been facing have been somehow revised away. They have not.
The changes in the figures do not alter the fact that it is still taking a very long time, and has been a very slow and painful process, to recover from the terrible recession which took place during Gordon Brown's premiership.
The economy is now showing distinct signs of growth, but there is still a lot to do: we need to keep putting downward pressure on the deficit and helping businesses to grow, creating income and jobs. There is no room whatever for complacency.
According to the new figures the recession which took place towards the end of the term in office of the last Labour government was even more severe than was thought at the time.
The figures for the first quarter of 2012 have also been revised from a drop of 0.1% to being flat, e.g. neither growing or shrinking.
As the official definition of a recession is two consecutive quarters of negative growth, this means that what had been the second quarter of the supposed "double dip" is now offically flat rather than pretty flat but marginally negative, which in turn implies that the recession of late 2011 and early 2012 technically never happened. We no longer officially had a double dip recession.
My purpose in posting this to respond to some very confusing statements on the television and radio. It is not, and never was, to suggest that, because a very marginal revision to economic numbers has technically eliminated the "double dip" recession which had previously been recorded, that the economic difficulties the country has been facing have been somehow revised away. They have not.
The changes in the figures do not alter the fact that it is still taking a very long time, and has been a very slow and painful process, to recover from the terrible recession which took place during Gordon Brown's premiership.
The economy is now showing distinct signs of growth, but there is still a lot to do: we need to keep putting downward pressure on the deficit and helping businesses to grow, creating income and jobs. There is no room whatever for complacency.
Comments
There is the problem see, the taxation is far too high.
If I had been trying to score points I would hardly have admitted that growth had been flat last year or that it is taking a very long time and has been a slow and painful process, to recover from the recession.
Jim - don't dispute what you say about tax, but Britain can't afford any significant tax cuts until we have eliminated the deficit and started to pay back some of the mountain of debt which has built up over the last decade - and which is still, unfortunately, though at a lower rate, building up.
Tim - if I was trying to score points I wouldn't have written that either.
On your comment to me Chris, You are right that Britain can not afford any tax cuts at the moment, though the reason for this is the Government are still spending too much, and wasting a lot of that.
So I would say Britain can not afford to keep this wasteful form of Government, then we have more than enough to start paying off the national debt, rather than adding to it each year.
You, on the other hand, are a twit and a hypocrite.
Since you don't have the guts to say who you are it is impossible to know whether you do anything useful with your life, but anyone who puts anonymous posts on the internet accusing other people of point scoring opens themselves to the charge of the pot calling the kettle black.
Jim - yes, there is undoubtedly still wasteful spending which must be eliminated and I agree that to get the country onto a sustainable track there will have to be more cuts both before and after the next election.
And I predict that, whoever wins that next election, unless it is someone totally insane, there will be further cuts.