Re: Re: Those questionable productivity numbers

[Peter Dorman <dormanp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Right.  I'm wondering if he (or anyone else) is providing updates to data
released since his book went to press.  It would be great to have an ongoing
series of "shadow indices".

Peter

Max Sawicky wrote:

> It's probably in his 'Getting Prices Right' book.
> I've heard him talk about it, so I know he's on
> top of it.
>
> max
>
> Has Dean Baker or anyone else done a detailed analysis of the impact of
> "quality" adjustments to the last few years' productivity and output data?
> It would be nice to have some sensitivity analysis...
>
> Peter
>
> Michael Perelman wrote:
>
> > Even worse, I think that the ability to measure productivity in general
> > is pretty weak.
> >
> > Doug Henwood wrote:
> >
> > > There are loads of anomalies in the productivity stats. Nondurable
> > > manufacturing productivity is flat; it's all concentrated in
> > > durables, and within durables, in high-tech production. Service
> > > productivity has picked up a bit, but not that profoundly. Looking at
> > > the aggregate number is very misleading.
> > >
> > > Doug
> >
> > --
> > Michael Perelman
> > Economics Department
> > California State University
> > Chico, CA 95929
> >
> > Tel. 530-898-5321
> > E-Mail michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx