First of all, look at the logic of this report.
flyfei last edited by
First of all, according to the logic of this report, the contribution of consumption expenditure to economic growth in the first half of the year is still 78.5%. Obviously, the contribution rate of consumption expenditure in the second half of the year has shrunk. Is it not convincing enough to continue to fool people with this data?
Secondly, the data itself does not show that the economic development has achieved "brilliant results". From the perspective of historical cycle, in the past 40 years, consumption has contributed the most to GDP in most of the time, accounting for more than 90% in 90 years. According to this logic, we will be "consumption-driven" in 90 years.
Thirdly, the contribution rate of investment, export and consumption to economic growth is one thing that goes from one thing to another, and if growth occurs, it will decrease. The contribution of this round of consumer spending to growth is clearly the result of shrinking investment and exports.
Fourthly, the "consumption" in this data refers to the final consumption expenditure, not the resident consumption. The final consumption expenditure includes the resident consumption expenditure and the public consumption expenditure, the latter mainly refers to the government's "public service" expenditure. According to the data compiled by Suning Institute of Finance, the growth differentiation between resident consumption expenditure and public consumption expenditure has been obvious in recent years.
Fifth, after eliminating public consumption expenditure, the situation of residents'consumption is not optimistic, and the growth rate of per capita disposable income has been declining continuously.
Finally, most economic data are indicators, not vanes.