Very strong +0.8% growth in Q3

[longfingernails]

Labour doommongering shown to be baseless, yet again.

Well, a) 0.8% is not really "very strong" growth, and b) the crippling economic policies announced recently by the coalition have yet to have an effect in the real economy.

I predict a double dip recession as the result of the coalition assault on aggregate demand, and will be reviving this thread just to say "I told you so" in 3-6 months.

It actually just said that it's gone down 'slow economic growth' and a double dip recession is predicted
it'll be in the news tomorrow as that was an online forecast

0.8% is a slowing of growth
'twas 1.2% in the previous quarter.

if 0.8% is above inflation, then its better than nothing. If it isn't, then it actually represents a shrink in the economy.

i dunno. MY DH has had quite a few job interviews (after a whole load of nothing during the year) so there may be something in it - the optimism isn't just a political creation.

It's slowed.

The growth so far this year has already beaten the budget forecasts - unless there is a severe downturn in Q4.

That seems like a pretty good result to me.

Remember, the BBC were predicting the end of the world. Some of them were even speculating feverishly about "double dips".

Oh - and I remember armies of Labour supporters before the election warning that £6n of in year spending cuts would lead to the apocalypse. If I didn't have so much work, I would go back through the Politics threads in May, and name and shame! [hgrin]

To watch commie Beeboids announce big growth numbers through gritted teeth is a sight for sore eyes! [hgrin] [hgrin] [hgrin]

It appears to be the biggest q3 growth in 10 years.

Old Guardian article with historical growth chart

Apparently the news was so good it made Vince smile .

"commie Beeboids"

Are you for real? Because you seem to be some kind of hideous parody.

sprogger I work in the eeeeeeeeeeeevil private sector [hwink].

sprogger I am not claiming that the CSR had any effect on these numbers (though anticipation of it might have done). I am not even claiming that the emergency budget has had much effect yet.

I am claiming that the £6n immediate cuts that the coalition announced as soon as they took office - and which Labour said would destroy the recovery - have not happened.

I am also claiming that all the Labour politicians, BBC journalists, and Guardian types who went around this past week saying this week's forecasts could show a double-dip have been shown, rather hilariously, to be wrong!

Sorry - in that second paragraph, obviously the cuts have happened - you know what I mean!

Those are the July-September numbers. The trouble is that we have no way of comparing how those numbers would look if Labour had been elected on a ticket of 'don't do anything two years'. My feeling is that investment would have deserted the country and that we'd be back in recession already.

It's too early to say how the CSR will affect the economy.

Fact is that a massive reduction in fiscal demand, alongside the massive reduction in demand from consumers as a result of the numerous cuts, mostly from the poorer end of society who have been long known to be the highest spenders in the economy (as opposed to middle classes and up who save) as well as increased unemployment will have the effect of putting us into a double dip recession. How else can such a gigantic reduction in national demand be played out? Will the magic pixies from Tory lalaland come and stimulate the economy?

Why so much focus on the fiscal, dizietsma?

Why not the monetary?

One thing we can definitely say is that real interest are far, far, far lower now than when Labour were kicked out. Gilt yields are at historic lows.

Lefties love fiscal policy because it gives them an excuse to interfere, announce big government schemes and programmes, and pretend they are in control.

It is monetary policy that we need to watch. Gilt yields, foreign exchange rates, interest rates. Whether a diversity co-ordinator is sacked from some quango or not won't make much difference.

Argh real interest rates.

You forget who creates demand. Low interest rates don't mean shit if there's no demand. That diversity co-ordinator is a consumer who will no longer be spending, alongside half a million others predicted from the cuts. So where is your demand coming from?

Why do we need to watch monetary policy? Explain your reasoning.

Well, the idea is that the private sector will more than compensate - as this set of data shows it is doing. And private sector growth is driven to a large extent by monetary policy.

Also, the half-a-million figure is over 4 years, with most probably coming from recruitment freezes and voluntary redundancy.

Most of the cuts won't bite till 2012 too.

Labour made a big mistake spinning the CSR as a sudden end of the world. The cuts will be slow, measured and staggered. By pretending they will all come at once, Labour has failed to play the expectations game.

But still private sector growth will only happen if demand for that growth exists. So I ask again, where is the demand coming from?

The unemployment is only a small part of the story though, isn't it? And just because the half a million lost comes from recruitment freezes and voluntary redundancy doesn't magically mean that the demand created by those jobs will remain, does it? It will still be lost.

It's also large cuts in benefits and tax credits. The increase in VAT. The estimated three quaters of a million made homeless.

Labour were, IMO, underselling the effect of these cuts.

@dizietsma. The poorer end of society are the biggest spenders?... Maybe as a proportion of their income but not in absolute terms, surely? At the moment, with savings attracting really poor rates of interest anyone who still has spare money (and there are quite a lot of them about) is more inclined to invest in things like home-improvement, rather than watch their money lose value in a savings account.

*quarters