Here is a 1Q13 quote from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office "In the absence of sequestration, CBO estimates, U.S. GDP growth would be about 0.6 percentage points faster during this calendar year, and the equivalent of about 750,000 more full-time jobs would be created or retained by the fourth quarter."
I would tend to take their estimates regarding the effects of sequestration over yours until you show your extensive economic credentials to support your opinion!
7 days!? Is that the best you've got? Seven Days!?
If hearing the teeth-nashing of well-payed government employees about the whopping "seven more days" of deferred payment (yes, you read that right, they will eventually get their money) is all I've got to endure in order to assure that my great, great grandchildren aren't still paying off our $16.X TRILLION in debt, I'll take it all day.
But poking fun at your reply isn't really the point. The point was that IC Insight's analysis was just too convenient and simplistic to be taken seriously. They should have done a more thorough job. Or, with all due respect, perhaps you should have recognized their shirking and probed for more detail, or done them the favor of omitting their "reasoning".
One should remember that semiconductors are not stand alone entities, they must go into an electronic system to be of any use. Moreover, considering that worldwide electronic system sales represent only about 2% of worldwide GDP, it really isn't "the other way around."
I suggest you visit the following web site that lists agency by agency the thousands of furloughs that are part of sequestration. www.govexec.com/management/2013/05/furlough-watch-potential-agency-agency-impacts-sequestration/61535/
It may be all smoke and mirrors as far as the budget goes, but these people will face 7 or more days of unpaid time off over the rest of the year. All of which will have a negative impact on the U.S. economy.
This is the one that bugs me: "The firm blamed... the beginning of budget sequestration, which has led to large and widespread cuts to government spending..."
First lets establish the definition of "cut" in government-speak. To you, me and Merriam-Webster a "budget cut" is spending less money than last year. But to them it is the reduction in the expected rate of growth. So when Senator Blowhard says that we are suffering from a 3% cut, what he is actually saying is that the wanted 10% but only got 7%. It's called "Baseline Budgeting" and every tax-payer in the world should know it. How utterly disappointing it is that IC Insight wouldn't dig deeper.
Second, this year's budget is NOT smaller than last year's. It is about on par - a mear $15 billion as I recall. (Of course, that's enough to buy the salaries of this readership for generations, but to those who spend our money it's a rounding error.)
Third, as a resident of the MD-VA area, I can assure you that there are NO signs of spending cuts around here. In fact it's just the opposite.
I think IC Insights could have done a better job with their analysis.
Hi Dylan (again) - for a better explanation of the O-S-D segment see IC Insights Research Bulletin (dated March 13th, 2013) at the following URL = http://www.icinsights.com/news/bulletins/Seven-OptoSensorDiscrete-Products-Achieved-Record-Sales-In-2012/
Hi Dylan - IC Insights latest sales growth update pertains to the IC market only, not the overall semiconductor market growth as you state above. IC Insights particularly states:
"As a result of weaker GDP growth in the U.S. and negative growth among the Eurozone countries, which, together account for about 43% of global GDP, 'IC Insights has lowered its 2013 IC market growth' forecast one percentage point to 5%," not the (overall) semiconductor market growth you invoke.
Consequently, the Opto-Sensor-Discrete, O-S-D, product segment's 2013 sales growth is not included, reflected in the 5% sales growth expectation discussed above.
Regards, Mike C.
"Global GDP woes dragging on chip growth"
isn't it the other way around.. ie GDP projections are bad because most industries, including semi industry can't keep growing. oh well, that depends on who you talk to .
Replay available now: A handful of emerging network technologies are competing to be the preferred wide-area connection for the Internet of Things. All claim lower costs and power use than cellular but none have wide deployment yet. Listen in as proponents of leading contenders make their case to be the metro or national IoT network of the future. Rick Merritt, EE Times Silicon Valley Bureau Chief, moderators this discussion. Join in and ask his guests questions.