Team Obama says that real GDP in 2013 will be 15.6 percent above real GDP in 2008. (That number comes from compounding their predicted growth rates for these five years.) So, Paul, are you willing to wager that the economy will meet or exceed this benchmark? I am not much of a gambler, but that is a bet I would be happy to take the other side of (even as I hope to lose, for the sake of the economy).
My question - how have the numbers come in so far, who is winning (at the current pace) and what GDP growth would we need to see to flip the result? It's all hypothetical since Prof. Krugman never stepped up.
Time does not permit just now, but if someone wants to poke at this we can surely vex someone with the result.
BACK ON THE CHAINED GANG: We are trying to keep it real in the comments. GDP in current dollars has been:
Total growth so far: 5.6% (1.8% per annum)
Growth needed over last 8 quarters: 4.6% per annum; a Krugman victory might be in sight, if the bet wasn't based on real GDP.
However, measured in chained 2005 dollars we see this from the BEA:
Total growth so far: 1.2% (0.4% per annum)
Real growth needed over last 8 quarters: 6.9% per annum
Obviously, the first quarter of 2012 is in the bag, and it won't be 6.9%.
Mankiw is on a glide path to a "real" victory, which is a bummer for all of us. Especially since Krugman is quicker to toss around words like "evil" and "obtuseness" than to actually put up and shut up.