A Contrast

It was reported today that the US economy grew by 1.9% last quarter. Without context, how many Americans know whether that is good or bad? The word grow sounds great, but 1.9% is a worryingly low number. The New York Times apparently decided it was terrible:

"The economy grew less than expected from April to June despite a huge booster shot of tax rebates, the government reported on Thursday, dimming the outlook for a quick recovery."

In fact, check out their hilariously slanted headline: "G.D.P. Grows at Tepid 1.9% Pace Despite Stimulus"

So the newspaper of record has apparently decided that this news is bad, although it is actually about the same as the average growth rate in the EU over the past five years. It is far from bad news, but actually astoundingly good news. Here is how the Economist put it:

"The American economy has often defied predictions of its demise. It has done so again. Official figures published on Thursday July 31st show that America’s GDP rose at an annualised rate of 1.9% in the second quarter. This would a respectable enough growth rate at the best of times. That this was achieved despite the considerable handicaps of a badly damaged banking system, a big jump in oil prices and the ongoing housing bust, makes it remarkable."

Now, how can two different set of reporters read the same set of facts, yet present them in entirely different ways? The only answer is that each has a motive to present them in different ways (in theology, we might call this isegesis).

Why does the New York Times want to kill your spirit and make you depressed? Excellent question...probably because having fulminated for years against the broken policies of the Bush regime, they have trouble seeing him escape without at least having driven our country into recession. Now, I'm no Bush apologist myself, but golly, a recession would be bad for more people than just GW.

Why does the Economist seem so cheerful? Partly because they are unquenchable optimists (you should read their recent leader on high oil prices, actually, here's a link: http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11454989)

But also, they love the American model of capitalism (so much so that they have tried to rename it Anglo-American capitialism). They recognize its faults, but the sheer resilience of an economy that refuses to go into recession despite every possible reason to is astounding.

I will impartially judge between the two presentations. Growth of 1.9% is amazing. We're not out of the woods yet.