| |
Reviewing the Crash of 2008 and the ensuing recession
How did it all come about? How do things now (under Obama) compare to
before? Why did we not see it coming?
We will review various graphs of economic data. We will discuss what
the graphs does show us, and what we can not see.
|
Draft: March 2010
|
| |
GDP
Since its common to think of a recession in terms of GDP, we'll
graph GDP first.
|
 |
The crash of 2008 is quite visible by the drop. But
with hindsight, the bubble from 2003 to 2008 is also visible. We can
notice that the crash only dropped us as low as the pre-bubble trend.
|
| Frequently growth trends tell us more than absolutes,
so we will look at GDP growth |
 |
For reference, we marked in average GDP growth under
Carter. This hints a a possible problem. In the first decade of the
century, GDP growth barely maintained the same level as under Carter.
|
|
Data Sources
|
| |
Employment & Incomes
| When we look at job growth the bubble is very apparent.
It peaks in early 2006 and declines thereafter. |
 |
For comparison we mark the average employment growth
under both Clinton and Carter (almost the same value.) This gives
us a hint about the economic crisis. Job growth never reached the
level it needed to. |
| The problem becomes even more
apparent when we look at incomes. By looking at the incomes of the
40th and 60th percentiles, we can see that middle class incomes were
declining for most of the Bush years. The bubble apparent in 2005
and 2006 barely returned incomes to their Clinton era levels. We can
also see that after the bubble burst, incomes did not fall as low
as the pre-bubble trend would have predicted. |
 |
|
| We can put employment and incomes
together to see how wealth has been reaching the middle class. Again
we see a decade of stagnation with just a slight bubble in 2005 through
2006. Again we see than in 2009 wealth to the middle class returned
to the same level projected by the 2000 to 2005 trend. |
 |
|
| We can put the information above together by asking
what share of the GDP were the middle class getting. For ease, we
will look at just 60th percentile group. This gives us more hints
about the bubble and crash. The share of the GDP going to the middle
class declined for 8 years. |
 |
At the onset of the bubble the share going to the middle
class decreased even faster. This acceleration occurred again just
before the bubble burst. |
| The above hint suggests that share of declining
share of income to the middle class might imply a bubble. From the
CPBB
graphs we see even stronger evidence that bubbles are most evident
in share of income data. Both the dot-com crash of 2000 and the housing
crash of 2008 are preceded by a rapid rise in ratio of income going
to the top 1%. We weak economy of the late 1980s through early 1990s
are also characterized by spikes in the ratio of earning going to
the top 1%. The CPBB graph hints that the best predictor of a bubble
is the ratio of income going to the top 1%. This number rises when
bubbles are forming. |
 |
|
Related pages at this site
Related pages at other sites
|
| |
Observations and Conclusions
- Neither GDP, Employment, nor Income trends clearly indicate the onset
of the bubble. But we hindsight we can identify the bubble in each trend.
- Each of these trends shows hints of a weak economy for the entire
first decade of the century.
- The first two years of the economy under Obama were higher performing
than either the pre-bubble Bush era trends, or the bubble burst trends
would project. Because the trends are higher than projected, we can
not blame the poor state of the economy on Obama.
|
|
| |
|
|