Difficulty of Economic Growth Forecasting and Data Revisions

.@BEA_News US GDP Growth data Q12015 illustrate both difficulty of forecasting & the multiple revisions data undergo...#IMF April #WEO better than Oct... Economic forecasts shd provide “broad trends, not specific numbers” Mr Donovan @UBS. ht @Went1955 @FT https://t.co/rVXNVVQUQI

— Satyen Baindur (@Satyen_Baindur) April 9, 2018

.@LounganiPrakash “Recessions are not rare,” echoed Prakash Loungani, a macro-economist at the #IMF. “What is rare is a recession that is forecast in advance.” Despite an increased amount of economic data..., “the ability to predict downturns remains dismal”, he told @FT

— Satyen Baindur (@Satyen_Baindur) April 9, 2018

How do Greenhouse Gas Emissions Scale with Real GDP Growth?

How do #GreenhouseGas #Emissions respond 2 ∆s in #RGDP? #IMF Working Paper 1856 looks @ #TopTwenty emitting countries, separates #Trend & #Cyclical components w a #HodrickPrescottFilter; finds *on average*, GHG emissions go up by 0.4X ∆RGDP (i.e. #TrendElasticity = 0.4) pic.twitter.com/YpeM0rUx5N

— Satyen Baindur (@Satyen_Baindur) March 15, 2018

Among #AEs in #Top20, avg #TrendElasticity =0; & 4 some AEs, GHGs *decrease* as RGDP↑ eg #UK #DE, esp recent years. In USA post-2005, GHGs _decrease_ w RGDP, #China GHGs ↑ slower than RGDP (though faster in post-2000 period), #India GHGs grow ~ as its RGDP via @LounganiPrakash

— Satyen Baindur (@Satyen_Baindur) March 15, 2018

Just to clarify - the #GHG/#RGDP #TrendElasticity for #China is < 1 both pre- and post-2000, but just a bit higher post-2000 (the dashed GHG curve bends toward the #RGDP line at year ~2000 in the picture above...)

— Satyen Baindur (@Satyen_Baindur) March 15, 2018