On Jan 2, 5:46*pm, Ed Huntress wrote:


The chart may be accurate, but it is misleading. *Really ought to be
graphed on semilog paper. *You can change the scale to semilog.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2...rt_type=line&s[1][id]=GDPC1&log_scales=Left

I don't see that much difference in the shape, Dan. Whether on a
linear or a logarithmic scale, the trends look about the same. If
you're concerned about differences in the rates of growth at widely
different periods, then I could see where you might prefer it. But the
point here is that growth in GDP is again climbing, and at rates
similar to what is "normal" in our economy. For example, the rate is
about the same as it was 2000 - 2008.

What is the "misleading" part?

--
Ed Huntress

The part that I think is misleading is that it looks like the growth
in GDP was much less back in about 1950 when in fact it is a tad lower
now. Not a big deal, but it is better to use a graph that shows rate
of change rather than a chart that shows absolute magnitude.
Especially when you are talking about the rate of change.

If you poke around on that site, you will see an option to show the
rate of growth in percentages. Which would be neat to look at. But I
can not get that to work.

The economy is growing and at a rate similar to " normal ". What
seems to be a bit different is that we seemed to have a bit of no
growth between the end of the recession and before going to the "
normal " rate.

I am pretty optimistic about the economy. With the housing market as
it is, it is surprising that the growth is back to normal. Which to
me says a lot of the economy must be doing real well to have the GDP
growth looking normal.

Dan