Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm no expert, so I may some some stuff that is dumb. The last discussion was about uk using a different methodology. Have we changed again? I'm trying to get my head around why a 18 month yo number has changed. " Better data. The uk applied an ad hoc deflator. I can't off the top of my head remember the figures. The oecd asked all g7 economies to revisit their gdp deflator only 3 did. Of those ( these are made up numbers) France for example did a deflator of 2 in June 22 Usa 3. The uk 6. For some reason the uk doubled the revision are deflator. Since then they've asked supermarkets and service sector for prices of things used and have a clearer picture of inflation impact. They decoded their use kf a deflator of 6(remember just a made up number as I can't recall the actuals) was far too high. They've now reverted back to one close to France. Still notable Italy,Japan,Canada,the e.u and gemrsny never revisted these. We know they why they refuse to based on their current gdp numbers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm no expert, so I may some some stuff that is dumb. The last discussion was about uk using a different methodology. Have we changed again? I'm trying to get my head around why a 18 month yo number has changed. Better data. The uk applied an ad hoc deflator. I can't off the top of my head remember the figures. The oecd asked all g7 economies to revisit their gdp deflator only 3 did. Of those ( these are made up numbers) France for example did a deflator of 2 in June 22 Usa 3. The uk 6. For some reason the uk doubled the revision are deflator. Since then they've asked supermarkets and service sector for prices of things used and have a clearer picture of inflation impact. They decoded their use kf a deflator of 6(remember just a made up number as I can't recall the actuals) was far too high. They've now reverted back to one close to France. Still notable Italy,Japan,Canada,the e.u and gemrsny never revisted these. We know they why they refuse to based on their current gdp numbers." 
So a more accurate method, albeit the we somehow got a fairly inaccurate result the first time around.
Will it always push the deflator in one direction? Eg will the old deflators always be higher than the new deflation? (I may have n't directions wrong, so in other words will every country using the old deflator see their gdpnreduced when moving to the new?) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm no expert, so I may some some stuff that is dumb. The last discussion was about uk using a different methodology. Have we changed again? I'm trying to get my head around why a 18 month yo number has changed. Better data. The uk applied an ad hoc deflator. I can't off the top of my head remember the figures. The oecd asked all g7 economies to revisit their gdp deflator only 3 did. Of those ( these are made up numbers) France for example did a deflator of 2 in June 22 Usa 3. The uk 6. For some reason the uk doubled the revision are deflator. Since then they've asked supermarkets and service sector for prices of things used and have a clearer picture of inflation impact. They decoded their use kf a deflator of 6(remember just a made up number as I can't recall the actuals) was far too high. They've now reverted back to one close to France. Still notable Italy,Japan,Canada,the e.u and gemrsny never revisted these. We know they why they refuse to based on their current gdp numbers.
So a more accurate method, albeit the we somehow got a fairly inaccurate result the first time around.
Will it always push the deflator in one direction? Eg will the old deflators always be higher than the new deflation? (I may have n't directions wrong, so in other words will every country using the old deflator see their gdpnreduced when moving to the new?)"The deflator is calculated with each countries inflation. So no countries should really have the same deflator. Though some have decided that increase inflation didn't happen from 2021 and 2022 ( those countries that haven't re issued their gdp) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm no expert, so I may some some stuff that is dumb. The last discussion was about uk using a different methodology. Have we changed again? I'm trying to get my head around why a 18 month yo number has changed. Better data. The uk applied an ad hoc deflator. I can't off the top of my head remember the figures. The oecd asked all g7 economies to revisit their gdp deflator only 3 did. Of those ( these are made up numbers) France for example did a deflator of 2 in June 22 Usa 3. The uk 6. For some reason the uk doubled the revision are deflator. Since then they've asked supermarkets and service sector for prices of things used and have a clearer picture of inflation impact. They decoded their use kf a deflator of 6(remember just a made up number as I can't recall the actuals) was far too high. They've now reverted back to one close to France. Still notable Italy,Japan,Canada,the e.u and gemrsny never revisted these. We know they why they refuse to based on their current gdp numbers.
So a more accurate method, albeit the we somehow got a fairly inaccurate result the first time around.
Will it always push the deflator in one direction? Eg will the old deflators always be higher than the new deflation? (I may have n't directions wrong, so in other words will every country using the old deflator see their gdpnreduced when moving to the new?)
The deflator is calculated with each countries inflation.
So no countries should really have the same deflator.
Though some have decided that increase inflation didn't happen from 2021 and 2022 ( those countries that haven't re issued their gdp)"totally get they won't be the same. Trying to work out if every country not using the new method will see a decrease if they did. Or will it work in some countries favour? (I'm gonna guess not as other wise they probably would be using it!!) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm no expert, so I may some some stuff that is dumb. The last discussion was about uk using a different methodology. Have we changed again? I'm trying to get my head around why a 18 month yo number has changed. Better data. The uk applied an ad hoc deflator. I can't off the top of my head remember the figures. The oecd asked all g7 economies to revisit their gdp deflator only 3 did. Of those ( these are made up numbers) France for example did a deflator of 2 in June 22 Usa 3. The uk 6. For some reason the uk doubled the revision are deflator. Since then they've asked supermarkets and service sector for prices of things used and have a clearer picture of inflation impact. They decoded their use kf a deflator of 6(remember just a made up number as I can't recall the actuals) was far too high. They've now reverted back to one close to France. Still notable Italy,Japan,Canada,the e.u and gemrsny never revisted these. We know they why they refuse to based on their current gdp numbers.
So a more accurate method, albeit the we somehow got a fairly inaccurate result the first time around.
Will it always push the deflator in one direction? Eg will the old deflators always be higher than the new deflation? (I may have n't directions wrong, so in other words will every country using the old deflator see their gdpnreduced when moving to the new?)
The deflator is calculated with each countries inflation.
So no countries should really have the same deflator.
Though some have decided that increase inflation didn't happen from 2021 and 2022 ( those countries that haven't re issued their gdp)totally get they won't be the same. Trying to work out if every country not using the new method will see a decrease if they did.
Or will it work in some countries favour?
(I'm gonna guess not as other wise they probably would be using it!!)"They would all be worse off as their deflators don't take into account anywhere near enough inflation. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Your reminder I told every one in here a year ago, quoting 4% and saying the uk hadn't recovered from pre covid levels of gdp it was a nonesense die to the blue book adjustment in June 22. They have revisited that adjustment and reverted it. The uk recovered in q4 21 Upward revisions to annual volume GDP growth in 2020 and 2021 mean that GDP is now estimated to be 0.6% above pre-coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic levels in Quarter 4 (Oct to Dec) 2021; previously this was estimated as 1.2% below." It still surprises me that all countries don't use the same method when doing their GDP figures. It just allows people to cherry pick when trying to compare as we have seen | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Your reminder I told every one in here a year ago, quoting 4% and saying the uk hadn't recovered from pre covid levels of gdp it was a nonesense die to the blue book adjustment in June 22. They have revisited that adjustment and reverted it. The uk recovered in q4 21 Upward revisions to annual volume GDP growth in 2020 and 2021 mean that GDP is now estimated to be 0.6% above pre-coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic levels in Quarter 4 (Oct to Dec) 2021; previously this was estimated as 1.2% below. It still surprises me that all countries don't use the same method when doing their GDP figures. It just allows people to cherry pick when trying to compare as we have seen" Well every country used its own data. For example. The uk is difficult regarding its nhs figures because its such a large complex machine there is no " direct cost" of using an mri for example. But in places like gemrany where often medical aid can be done privately alongside a national one. And insurance guarantees a meaureable cost of using an mri simply by billing. It's easier to cost such a transaction. In covid. The uk pretty much stopped all use of such thing as x rays and scans. However the nhs still xonsumed money. How do you now measure how much to deflate all the new costs vs the old ones? Sure miss and xray use went down. But the nhs cost an extreme amount more. Do you deflate it? Do you not use a deflator at all? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Your reminder I told every one in here a year ago, quoting 4% and saying the uk hadn't recovered from pre covid levels of gdp it was a nonesense die to the blue book adjustment in June 22. They have revisited that adjustment and reverted it. The uk recovered in q4 21 Upward revisions to annual volume GDP growth in 2020 and 2021 mean that GDP is now estimated to be 0.6% above pre-coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic levels in Quarter 4 (Oct to Dec) 2021; previously this was estimated as 1.2% below. It still surprises me that all countries don't use the same method when doing their GDP figures. It just allows people to cherry pick when trying to compare as we have seen Well every country used its own data. For example. The uk is difficult regarding its nhs figures because its such a large complex machine there is no " direct cost" of using an mri for example. But in places like gemrany where often medical aid can be done privately alongside a national one. And insurance guarantees a meaureable cost of using an mri simply by billing. It's easier to cost such a transaction. In covid. The uk pretty much stopped all use of such thing as x rays and scans. However the nhs still xonsumed money. How do you now measure how much to deflate all the new costs vs the old ones? Sure miss and xray use went down. But the nhs cost an extreme amount more. Do you deflate it? Do you not use a deflator at all? " why can't you use the cost of the nhs as the gdp? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Your reminder I told every one in here a year ago, quoting 4% and saying the uk hadn't recovered from pre covid levels of gdp it was a nonesense die to the blue book adjustment in June 22. They have revisited that adjustment and reverted it. The uk recovered in q4 21 Upward revisions to annual volume GDP growth in 2020 and 2021 mean that GDP is now estimated to be 0.6% above pre-coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic levels in Quarter 4 (Oct to Dec) 2021; previously this was estimated as 1.2% below. It still surprises me that all countries don't use the same method when doing their GDP figures. It just allows people to cherry pick when trying to compare as we have seen Well every country used its own data. For example. The uk is difficult regarding its nhs figures because its such a large complex machine there is no " direct cost" of using an mri for example. But in places like gemrany where often medical aid can be done privately alongside a national one. And insurance guarantees a meaureable cost of using an mri simply by billing. It's easier to cost such a transaction. In covid. The uk pretty much stopped all use of such thing as x rays and scans. However the nhs still xonsumed money. How do you now measure how much to deflate all the new costs vs the old ones? Sure miss and xray use went down. But the nhs cost an extreme amount more. Do you deflate it? Do you not use a deflator at all? why can't you use the cost of the nhs as the gdp? " You do. It's a LOT more difficult measuring the cost of uk nhs than those of countries more prone to using private healthcare. There's a set charge in private ehelathcare for using a machine. There isn't one in the nhs | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Your reminder I told every one in here a year ago, quoting 4% and saying the uk hadn't recovered from pre covid levels of gdp it was a nonesense die to the blue book adjustment in June 22. They have revisited that adjustment and reverted it. The uk recovered in q4 21 Upward revisions to annual volume GDP growth in 2020 and 2021 mean that GDP is now estimated to be 0.6% above pre-coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic levels in Quarter 4 (Oct to Dec) 2021; previously this was estimated as 1.2% below. It still surprises me that all countries don't use the same method when doing their GDP figures. It just allows people to cherry pick when trying to compare as we have seen Well every country used its own data. For example. The uk is difficult regarding its nhs figures because its such a large complex machine there is no " direct cost" of using an mri for example. But in places like gemrany where often medical aid can be done privately alongside a national one. And insurance guarantees a meaureable cost of using an mri simply by billing. It's easier to cost such a transaction. In covid. The uk pretty much stopped all use of such thing as x rays and scans. However the nhs still xonsumed money. How do you now measure how much to deflate all the new costs vs the old ones? Sure miss and xray use went down. But the nhs cost an extreme amount more. Do you deflate it? Do you not use a deflator at all? " It certainly seems complicated but the bottom line seems to be positive news for the UK. The BBC were saying that instead of being an outlier, the UK was in line with other European countries. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Your reminder I told every one in here a year ago, quoting 4% and saying the uk hadn't recovered from pre covid levels of gdp it was a nonesense die to the blue book adjustment in June 22. They have revisited that adjustment and reverted it. The uk recovered in q4 21 Upward revisions to annual volume GDP growth in 2020 and 2021 mean that GDP is now estimated to be 0.6% above pre-coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic levels in Quarter 4 (Oct to Dec) 2021; previously this was estimated as 1.2% below. It still surprises me that all countries don't use the same method when doing their GDP figures. It just allows people to cherry pick when trying to compare as we have seen Well every country used its own data. For example. The uk is difficult regarding its nhs figures because its such a large complex machine there is no " direct cost" of using an mri for example. But in places like gemrany where often medical aid can be done privately alongside a national one. And insurance guarantees a meaureable cost of using an mri simply by billing. It's easier to cost such a transaction. In covid. The uk pretty much stopped all use of such thing as x rays and scans. However the nhs still xonsumed money. How do you now measure how much to deflate all the new costs vs the old ones? Sure miss and xray use went down. But the nhs cost an extreme amount more. Do you deflate it? Do you not use a deflator at all? why can't you use the cost of the nhs as the gdp? You do. It's a LOT more difficult measuring the cost of uk nhs than those of countries more prone to using private healthcare. There's a set charge in private ehelathcare for using a machine. There isn't one in the nhs" but the nhs is apid for by HMG from taxes? Doesn't HMT know? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The oecd has tried making a uniform. Approach which is commendable. But quite frankly. Other countries don't want to follow suit. Because it would likely mean a drop in their figures." Each country and every politician uses the figures that suit their agenda. If you believe all that you read then that is your choice but the figures released to the public are what the government wants to be released to the public. This is not only a UK quirk as it happens everywhere. Politicians and governments lie - shocking isn't it! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Your reminder I told every one in here a year ago, quoting 4% and saying the uk hadn't recovered from pre covid levels of gdp it was a nonesense die to the blue book adjustment in June 22. They have revisited that adjustment and reverted it. The uk recovered in q4 21 Upward revisions to annual volume GDP growth in 2020 and 2021 mean that GDP is now estimated to be 0.6% above pre-coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic levels in Quarter 4 (Oct to Dec) 2021; previously this was estimated as 1.2% below. It still surprises me that all countries don't use the same method when doing their GDP figures. It just allows people to cherry pick when trying to compare as we have seen Well every country used its own data. For example. The uk is difficult regarding its nhs figures because its such a large complex machine there is no " direct cost" of using an mri for example. But in places like gemrany where often medical aid can be done privately alongside a national one. And insurance guarantees a meaureable cost of using an mri simply by billing. It's easier to cost such a transaction. In covid. The uk pretty much stopped all use of such thing as x rays and scans. However the nhs still xonsumed money. How do you now measure how much to deflate all the new costs vs the old ones? Sure miss and xray use went down. But the nhs cost an extreme amount more. Do you deflate it? Do you not use a deflator at all? why can't you use the cost of the nhs as the gdp? You do. It's a LOT more difficult measuring the cost of uk nhs than those of countries more prone to using private healthcare. There's a set charge in private ehelathcare for using a machine. There isn't one in the nhsbut the nhs is apid for by HMG from taxes? Doesn't HMT know? " I dont know how else to explain this to you. The nhs doesn't measure the cost of individual transactions. The use of an mri doesn't have a "bill" if I go to bupa they would charge me £700 for a mri. The nhs does ot do this. But other health systems like Germany, France and USA do have individual breakdowns. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Let's not also forget my company has 9 months to file accounts after the year end s there is always going to be a delay in the real figers.." There is some truth to this. But ultimately they do quarterly filings for stick movements and sales etc. It's just some companies are slow on tbe data. On a quarterly by quarter maybe 40% return figures. At a previous employer I had to.submit stock holdings to the ONS they were just pretty much made up numbers until year end. I remember once 14 trucks turning up at our HQ with stock we'd lost in manilla in 2014  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Your reminder I told every one in here a year ago, quoting 4% and saying the uk hadn't recovered from pre covid levels of gdp it was a nonesense die to the blue book adjustment in June 22. They have revisited that adjustment and reverted it. The uk recovered in q4 21 Upward revisions to annual volume GDP growth in 2020 and 2021 mean that GDP is now estimated to be 0.6% above pre-coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic levels in Quarter 4 (Oct to Dec) 2021; previously this was estimated as 1.2% below. It still surprises me that all countries don't use the same method when doing their GDP figures. It just allows people to cherry pick when trying to compare as we have seen Well every country used its own data. For example. The uk is difficult regarding its nhs figures because its such a large complex machine there is no " direct cost" of using an mri for example. But in places like gemrany where often medical aid can be done privately alongside a national one. And insurance guarantees a meaureable cost of using an mri simply by billing. It's easier to cost such a transaction. In covid. The uk pretty much stopped all use of such thing as x rays and scans. However the nhs still xonsumed money. How do you now measure how much to deflate all the new costs vs the old ones? Sure miss and xray use went down. But the nhs cost an extreme amount more. Do you deflate it? Do you not use a deflator at all? why can't you use the cost of the nhs as the gdp? You do. It's a LOT more difficult measuring the cost of uk nhs than those of countries more prone to using private healthcare. There's a set charge in private ehelathcare for using a machine. There isn't one in the nhsbut the nhs is apid for by HMG from taxes? Doesn't HMT know? I dont know how else to explain this to you. The nhs doesn't measure the cost of individual transactions. The use of an mri doesn't have a "bill" if I go to bupa they would charge me £700 for a mri. The nhs does ot do this. But other health systems like Germany, France and USA do have individual breakdowns. " I get that. There aren't a million different innvpises for a million different transactions to a million different people. Because its all covered by the government. But let's say the NHS budget is 150bn. We know this because it's in the overall budget. Why can't that because for nhs gdp? It's like the nhs has one customer and one invoice. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
