Sentences with phrase «about gdp growth»

«In practice, the Fed cares a lot about GDP growth.

Not exact matches

While Canada's economy as a whole struggles to move forward — GDP growth is expected to hit around 2.3 % this year — the country's fourth most populous province will grow at about 3.7 %, according to the Royal Bank of Canada.

As a report from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) observes, «Uncertainty about future exchange rates and GDP growth reduces flows into equities.»

KERNEN: But the one thing most are bringing up — and then I want to tell you about — if you didn't see the Jamie Dimon and the Lloyd Blankfein interview, I want to just tell you what they said about the potential for GDP growth...

Chinese Premier Li Keqiang said China 2017 GDP growth was expected to be about 6.9 percent, with foreign exchange reserves rising.

A sharp sell off in the equity market «exerts a significant drag on world growth» in the period that follows, according to Deutsche Bank, with real GDP reduced by about 0.5 percentage points.

There are two main reasons for the commodity pullback, says de los Reyes: China's GDP growth has slowed from about 11 % a year to single digits, and supply has finally caught up with demand.

In recent years, China single - handedly accounted for about 15 per cent of global GDP and half of global growth — namely by sucking up the world's supplies of raw materials and using them to build everything from high - speed railways to forests of apartment towers to house its 1.3 billion people.

There is, of course, a great deal of skepticism about the 7 % real GDP growth rate that China has reported, but we should remember that in the first quarter, nominal GDP growth was much lower, 5.8 %.

I'm looking for GDP growth at about 1 %, probably even lower at times.

We estimate that the oil price shock, on its own, took about 1 1/4 percentage points off GDP growth in the first half of the year.

Private sector economists have now revised down their forecasts of real GDP growth for 2015 by about 0.6 - percentage point.

Private sector economists have now revised down their forecasts of real GDP growth for 2015 by about 0.6 - percentage points, while the IMF cut its from 2.2 % to just 1.5 %.

At longer horizons, the 6.3 % growth rate that we've assumed for nominal GDP over the coming years will begin to bail investors out given enough time, and as a result, our projection for 10 - year S&P 500 nominal total returns peeks its head up above zero, at about 2.4 % annually from current levels.

With strong investment growth and an expected improvement in exports, our forecast for the economy overall is that annual GDP growth will pick up modestly during 2006 to about 3 1/4 per cent.

It is only when credit growth begins to decelerate much more rapidly than nominal GDP growth that we can begin to talk hopefully about China's moving in the right direction, and it is only when credit growth falls permanently below the growth rate of the economy's debt - servicing capacity that China will have adjusted.

Right now the fund, which has tended to short larger stocks, is cautious about the switch from small and mid-cap stocks to large caps as «investors chase safer growth options as expectations of higher global GDP growth is priced in».

... China has targets of GDP growth around 7.5 percent and a consumer price index (CPI) increase of about 3.5 percent in 2014, with 10 million more urban jobs to keep the urban unemployment rate at a maximum of 4.6 percent.

The job market is particularly solid, and real US GDP growth continues to wiggle about its long - term 2 % trend.

While there is a strong correlation between growth in gross domestic investment and growth in real GDP, the slope of that relationship is only about 0.2, meaning that even if the growth rate of real gross domestic investment was driven from the recent growth trend of zero all the way back to the previous post-war growth rate of 3.5 %, the overall impact on real GDP growth would only be about 0.7 % annually, placing the level of U.S. real GDP about 2.8 % higher 4 years from today than it would otherwise be.

Healthcare prices have risen by about 6 - 8 % annually since 1970, almost double the baseline GDP growth rate.

While the assumptions about the future unemployment rate may be affected by policy, the fact is that slower U.S. population growth, coupled with an aging population, place substantial limits on labor force growth, which will leave U.S. GDP growth almost entirely dependent on changes in productivity.

What I like about the model I have described above is that it doesn't allow analysts to hide their implicit assumptions about credit growth, GDP growth, and the relationship between the two.

The speed with which China's GDP growth slows in 2013 will tell us a lot about how determined Beijing is to rebalance the economy in such a way that growth is driven more by higher household income and consumption and less by investment funded by rising government and government - related debt.

Now, my understanding of your position is that you made that original prediction based on the belief that the PRC would be instituting reforms to deleverage aggressively and transfer wealth to the consumer (such that the incorrect prediction was more that you were overly optimistic about the PRC's willingness to head off these systematic risks) and that your current prognosis of ~ 3 % GDP growth has an entirely separate causative element; that is to say, your previous prediction was based on the idea the PRC would be enacting reforms to ward off systematic risks, whereas your current estimation of GDP growth is instead based on the drag produced by these very systematic risks the PRC has failed to deal with.

This, along with weaker U.S. GDP growth, is why NXP shares are down about 1 % year - to - date while all three major indexes have moved higher.

In the last two years as the bull argument has been pummeled into reality by the surge in debt, the persistent failure of consumption growth to close the gap with GDP growth, and the sharp slowdown in overall growth, the mood abroad has turned increasingly bearish, to the point that many people are speaking about a China collapse and the horrible implications this will have for the rest of the world.

At a 4.1 % unemployment rate and labor force growth now down to about 0.5 %, the baseline expectation for real GDP growth in the coming years is approaching just 1 % (0.5 % labor force growth plus productivity growth of about 0.5 % annually).

For example, annualized real GDP (gross domestic product) growth has averaged only about 2.2 percent since the end of the recession in 2009.

Although there is considerable uncertainty around the outlook, the Bank is projecting real GDP growth will slow to about 1 1/2 per cent and the output gap to widen in the first half of 2015.

There is no shortage of economists predicting China GDP growth rates for 2017 from a top - down perspective, but what about looking at matters from a bottom - up approach?

For all the talk about «Euroboom», about one quarter of euro area GDP growth in 2017 was driven by net trade.

Recent growth in the U.S. GDP came from stronger exports when just about the whole world is in a big slowdown.

-LRB-...) For all the talk about «Euroboom», about one quarter of euro area GDP growth in 2017 was driven by net trade.

Conditions in the euro area remain disappointing, though they are probably consistent with modest growth in GDP in the first quarter of 2004, about the same as in the two previous quarters.

While this indicates a slowing in the pace of growth during 2004, as a share of GDP investment is estimated to have risen to around 45 per cent in 2004, which is the highest level on record and about as high an investment share as has been seen anywhere in the world.

Despite the fact that all the central banks have been woefully wrong about nearly every single forecast they have made on GDP growth, inflation and labor markets for decades, they enjoy an aura of infallibility which would be the envy of any medieval Pope because they succeeded in doing what governments by themselves were unable to do in 2008 - 9, namely stop and reverse the financial crisis.

«The nice thing about my business and my universe is I can carve out some great ideas, where you have great earnings growth, strong GDP growth, and not have to worry so much about what the Fed lift - off is going to do»..

Because public sentiment about future economic conditions drives stock prices, the market frequently rises even before broader economic measures, such as gross domestic product (GDP) growth, begin to tick up.

Last year, for example, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that fiscal headwinds slowed the pace of real GDP growth in 2013 by about 1-1/2 percentage points relative to what it would have been otherwise.

After only modest growth initially following the 2001 global recession, international trade in goods and services has rebounded strongly of late, increasing by about 10 per cent in 2004, or approximately double the rate of growth in world GDP (Graph A1).

In 1985/86, for example, non-farm GDP did not grow at all for a period of about a year before growth resumed and falls in unemployment recommenced.

In addition, a growing number of commentators, including senior representatives of some institutional investors, have expressed concern about the impact of hedge fund activism, and associated increased debt and cuts in capital spending, on long - term corporate health, innovation, job creation and GDP growth.»

However, during September some global institutions voiced concerns about the speed at which China has accumulated debt — which has risen from 147 % of GDP in 2008 to 255 % in March of this year according to the Bank for International Settlements — could hamper the country's ability to maintain its current level of growth.

The US GDP growth of about 2 % is neither great nor a disaster.

Applying a 1.5 multiplier to account for the total destimulating effects as those dollars are saved, not spent, this means a reduction of about one percentage point in real GDP growth, from 3.6 % per annum in the 1982 - 2000 years to 2.6 %.

I should note that in each of these models, we're assuming a long - term growth rate for cyclically - adjusted earnings, revenues, dividends, nominal GDP and so forth of about 6.3 % annually.

And over the past 12 months, we've seen average monthly job growth at 168,000, which is about what you'd expect given that kind of GDP growth.

He is interest in GDP growth and unemployment rate, which is what he should be worrying about because that is his job!!

Without getting into a great deal of song and dance about a side topic, I'll just say that I believe our GDP growth would explode as companies rushed to establish operational headquarters in the US, and the changes in the individual income tax codes would have a chilling effect on both the Wall Street money churners (people would be rewarded for going long with their investments instead of shuffling money around to chase pennies) and the out - of - control executive compensation at the expense of the long - term health of the company.