NP Rank:
Nominal GDP the primary metric for the performance of the nation
Nominal GDP
The primary metric for the performance of the nation from optimizing return on national resources is Gross Domestic Product (GDP). “Nominal GDP” is market value of GDP: the current market value of a country's gross domestic product.
Christina Romer, the former chair of the Obama administrations council of economic advisors is advocating the Ben Bernanke should set a “nominal GDP target.” My article enhances understanding about what this means.
“Bernanke should set a nominal GDP target, writes Christina Romer: "Mr. Bernanke needs to steal a page from the Volcker playbook. To forcefully tackle the unemployment problem, he needs to set a new policy framework -- in this case, to begin targeting the path of nominal gross domestic product. Nominal G.D.P. is just a technical term for the dollar value of everything we produce...Economic research showed years ago that targeting nominal G.D.P. has important advantages. But in the 1990s, many central banks adopted inflation targeting, a simpler alternative. As distress over the dismal state of the economy has grown, however, many economists have returned to the logic of targeting nominal G.D.P...It would be a powerful communication tool. By pledging to do whatever it takes to return nominal G.D.P. to its pre-crisis trajectory, the Fed could improve confidence and expectations of future growth."”
Here is a great reference to illustrate the meaning of nominal versus real.
“1. Nominal Interest Rates vs. Real Interest Rates
Suppose we buy a 1 year bond for face value that pays 6% at the end of the year. We pay $100 at the beginning of the year and get $106 at the end of the year. Thus the bond pays an interest rate of 6%. This 6% is the nominal interest rate, as we have not accounted for inflation. Whenever people speak of the interest rate they're talking about the nominal interest rate, unless they state otherwise.
Now suppose the inflation rate is 3% for that year. We can buy a basket of goods today and it will cost $100, or we can buy that basket next year and it will cost $103. If we buy the bond with a 6% nominal interest rate for $100, sell it after a year and get $106, buy a basket of goods for $103, we will have $3 left over. So after factoring in inflation, our $100 bond will earn us $3 in income; a real interest rate of 3%. The relationship between the nominal interest rate, inflation, and the real interest rate is described by the Fisher Equation:
Real Interest Rate = Nominal Interest Rate - Inflation
If inflation is positive, which it generally is, then the real interest rate is lower than the nominal interest rate. If we have deflation and the inflation rate is negative, then the real interest rate will be larger.
2. Nominal GDP Growth vs. Real GDP Growth
GDP, or Gross Domestic Product is the value of all the goods and services produced in a country. The Nominal Gross Domestic Product measures the value of all the goods and services produced expressed in current prices. On the other hand, Real Gross Domestic Product measures the value of all the goods and services produced expressed in the prices of some base year. An example:
Suppose in the year 2000, the economy of a country produced $100 billion worth of goods and services based on year 2000 prices. Since we're using 2000 as a basis year, the nominal and real GDP are the same. In the year 2001, the economy produced $110B worth of goods and services based on year 2001 prices. Those same goods and services are instead valued at $105B if year 2000 prices are used. Then:
Year 2000 Nominal GDP = $100B, Real GDP = $100B
Year 2001 Nominal GDP = $110B, Real GDP = $105B
Nominal GDP Growth Rate = 10%
Real GDP Growth Rate = 5%Once again, if inflation is positive, then the Nominal GDP and Nominal GDP Growth Rate will be less than their nominal counterparts. The difference between Nominal GDP and Real GDP is used to measure inflation in a statistic called The GDP Deflator.
3. Nominal Wages vs. Real Wages
These work in the same way as the nominal interest rate. So if your nominal wage is $50,000 in 2002 and $55,000 in 2003, but the price level has risen by 12%, then your $55,000 in 2003 buys what $49,107 would have in 2002, so your real wage has gone done. You can calculate a real wage in terms of some base year by the following:
Real Wage = Nominal Wage / 1 + % Increase in Prices Since Base Year
Where a 34% increase in prices since the base year is expressed as 0.34.”
We could have Herman Cain, I suppose. Yet, why isn’t he talking about something meaningful like this? Too busy covering up sexual harassment news.





Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (16)
at 07:14 on October 31st, 2011
"Christina Romer, the former chair of the Obama administrations council of economic advisors is advocating the Ben Bernanke should set a “nominal GDP target.” Stealing from Rick Perry's economic plan*.
Democrats have dropped to their default comfort zone and are casting aspersions on the character of Cain, spreading rumours that never stood up to the facts. Making assertions now that proved inefficient in a court of law back when... the 1990's. Way to nail down the facts liberal press. Cain must be more of a threat than I thought he could be to have liberals running to smear tactic so early in the game.
at 07:56 on October 31st, 2011
News flash. Liberal press investigative reporters have found a rock on property leased by Herman Cains grandfather that had the word "whitehead" painted on it. When asked to defend this overt act of racism Cain said he had no choice but to use even more white paint to cover the offending word. When pressed Cain had to admit that the word "head" had a different connotation in the 1990's.
at 08:03 on October 31st, 2011
We flushed out thirty-aught-six today. Remember that it was former VP Dick Cheney that shot his friend's face off and then didn't appologize.
at 08:20 on October 31st, 2011
What? Who's we? And what's Cheney got to do with this. God, you liberal victims will go to no end to manufacture the expectations you place on everyone but yourselves.
at 11:57 on October 31st, 2011
Face off
at 09:02 on October 31st, 2011
While monetary policy has in important role in stabilizing the natural and painful fluctations in the economy that would otherwise occur, I think it is less relevant to our overall well-being than other policies. Consider the fact that we had 2.5% read annualized GDP growth last quarter (more like 4.6% nominal). This means we are on track to produce 2.5% more goods and services over the course of the year. That's great. We're getting collectively richer. But population growth is at about 1%. Productivity growth is at about 1.5%. In effect, all of that new wealth gets "eaten up" by new babies and capital owners that appropriate the gains in productivity but do not need to hire anyone. The relevant question for me is - how do we translate the enormous gains in productivity and output into what really really want. What we really want is not "Nominal GDP Growth." It's not even "more jobs." What we want is security and leisure time. I want to move away from a a growth-dependent economy, and the discourse seeems to suggest we are embracing growth as an end in itself. We cannot and don't really want to grow forever... that really means more and more work.
at 12:00 on October 31st, 2011
Magnificent...This is why we need to develop a new model to replace the capitalism that is based on ever expanding markets and populations as if the resources are unlimited to sustain them.
at 10:26 on October 31st, 2011
Jim,
You are on a roll today! If you keep this up someone is gonna start shooting. (Step away from the computer sir.) Stealing Rick Perry's economic plan. LMAO. If you know anything about the NGDP debate, (you obviously don't), it has been advocated for the past 2 years by the likes of David Beckworth, Bill Woolsey, Scott Sumner and a host of conservative economists that write about this topic consistently. I'm not sure how you set a NGDP target, but I'm sure Rick Perry could shoot it full of holes, if given the chance.
at 12:01 on October 31st, 2011
I have my nephew by side and we'll kick ass.
at 12:11 on October 31st, 2011
If you knew what you were talking about you'd know that the NGDP debate can be traced back further than Sumner or even the 1997 Ben Bernanke and Frederic Mishkin debate. It was debated then whether targeting nominal GDP growth is better than targeting inflation. Both being concerns in attempting to manage short-run stabilization objectives. Economist John Taylor looked to NGDP when writing his 1985 book on the design of macroeconomic policy rules.
If you knew what you were talking about you's know that Perry's plan goes beyond NGDP as a measure of governments ability to counter inflationary reactions to growth. Perry is the one placing his name on it and who brought it into the Republican debate. And Perry set the idea of capping government spending at 18% of the GDP. That that it is gaining some traction from Wall Street and Economist now, has the liberals running to claim ownership. The usual hypocrisy. LOL.
at 12:12 on October 31st, 2011
Pretty soon you will recall Perry was Democrat. Perry is a Democrat plant.
at 12:33 on October 31st, 2011
I could careless if he is a Democrat or a Republican. What I care about is that he has a long and successful history managing a State that lies at the epicenter of Obama's open borders f@#$ the rule of law, f@#$ the Constitutionality of policy decisions, f@#$ Congress and the majority representation of the people attitude.
Actually, I'd love it if Perry was a Democrat. Then Democrats would have someone to rally behind and would give the blue dog and centrist Democrats some backbone to stand for something more than blind partisan defensive rhetoric one sees spewed here on NP. It would give me some personal hope that the country has a future beyond becoming the next Biafra/Somalia.
at 02:56 on November 1st, 2011
He has four Aces thirty aught six, oil, oil, oil, and oil.
at 07:55 on November 1st, 2011
You'd think every now and then you'd do some homework instead of always delivering stereotyped assumptions as fact.
Texas is home to 57 of the nations top fortune 500 companies giving the state a diversified economy. Texas leads nationally in agriculture with the most farms, leading the nation in cotton production, livestock production, and grows significant amounts of cereal crops and produce. Texas also has a large fishing industry.
Energy production is not limited to oil. Texas leads in natural gas production and produces one fourth of the nations supply. The state is a leader in renewable energy and produces the most wind power in the nation. The Roscoe wind farm was or is still the largest wind farm in the world.
Texas has a large tech based electronics industry including aeronautics. NASA(JSC), Lockheed-Martin and Bell-Textron.
Texas has three nationally recognized top-tier public research universities.
What's Virginia got? Besides being home to the nations largest pool of government "welfare recipients". More than one third of the workforce is service sector. It becomes understandable why you would be constantly demanding more and more from the taxpayer and for more and more government. With out it, government subsidies, the State of Virginia would devolve back to it's Confederate KKK hicksville inbreeding.
at 07:58 on November 2nd, 2011
That's a fair response. Lockheed and Bell are there -- two large defense contractors. Yep, and other Fortune 500 companies. That's all good.
What did Rick Perry have to do with that?
at 11:17 on November 2nd, 2011
Rick Perry has been elected to three full gubernatorial terms and is the longest continuous serving US governor to date. Obviously the majority of Texans don't support your low opinion of anything conservative. If Rick Perry was still a Democrat you'd be on your knees praying to his idol. Not Mitt Romney's. LOL.