Contemporaneous U.S. data for mid‑2024 do not support classifying the macro environment as stagflation under the usual definition of high inflation plus stagnant/low growth and typically elevated unemployment.(en.wikipedia.org)

Growth: According to the BEA, real GDP grew at a 1.4% annual rate in Q1 2024 and then accelerated to a 3.0% annual rate in Q2 2024 (second estimate).(bea.gov)(bea.gov) That Q2 pace is solidly above most estimates of U.S. trend growth and not consistent with “stagnant” or “1–2%” growth as in the normalized prediction.

Inflation: CPI inflation was above the Fed’s 2% target but moderating: the 12‑month CPI increase was 3.3% in May 2024 and 3.0% in June 2024.(fraser.stlouisfed.org)(fraser.stlouisfed.org) The Fed’s preferred PCE measure showed Q2 2024 inflation around the mid‑2% range, with core PCE about 2.8–2.9% annualized.(bea.gov)(bea.gov) That is mildly elevated but not the kind of persistently high inflation usually associated with stagflation.

Unemployment: The unemployment rate in June 2024 was 4.1%, up from the lows of 2022–23 but still historically low and far from the high‑unemployment environment typically seen in stagflation episodes.(cnbc.com)

Putting this together, mid‑2024 featured moderate, above‑trend growth, easing but still‑above‑target inflation, and relatively low unemployment, which does not meet standard criteria for stagflation. The more specific normalized prediction that real GDP growth would remain in the 1–2% range through Q2 2024 is also contradicted by the actual ~3% growth reading. Therefore, Friedberg’s claim that “we have stagflation right now” is best judged as wrong.