Recession? Who says?

[WuWei]

@JimmyC

I personally do not have an opinion on what is the correct definition, but there is no consensus - and much disagreement - that the sole requirement is 2 quarters.

There is a consensus. Don’t try the switch.

[WuWei]

@GrandWazoo

@JimmyC

I personally do not have an opinion on what is the correct definition, but there is no consensus - and much disagreement - that the sole requirement is 2 quarters.

I agree with the money people who say you can throw out the book on this one. I have never seen this scenario where consumer confidence is down multiple months, inflation is way up, but unemployment is at a record low. And add to that the market fluctuations across multiple markets doesn’t seem to have much effect across the board.

Looks like underemployment to me.

[WuWei]

@FreeAndClear

@Supreme_War_Pig

@GWH

It’s not a recession, just a prelude to steadily slow growth.

Ooh, there you go.

Growth so slow that when a Republican becomes president that same slow growth will be an economic boom!

A republican is not President.

[WuWei]

He’s President.

[WuWei]

@FreeAndClear

@JimmyC

@FreeAndClear

That’s the general definition. There is zero need to try to spin it. Just work on getting out of it.

Do some googling. It’s the general definition among laymen, but for those who “officially” define recessions, such as the NBER, two quarters negative growth does not in and of itself mean that there is a recession. There are other factors they look at. I’m not trying to say the current financial situation is great or that we are not in recession, but the OP was about the WHEC “redefining” recession and mocking them by saying ““Depends on what the definition of the word “is” is.”. There is more nuance involved here.

The only thing of import or relevance is the layman definition. Everything else is unnecessary pedantry by this admin

Exactly, in no small part because it impacts “laymen” and we are paying for it.

[SixFoot]

@FreeAndClear

The only thing of import or relevance is the layman definition. Everything else is unnecessary pedantry by this admin

You’re not ra(D)ical enough anymore now that the Tweet Meanie is on hiatus.

[biggestal99]

@FreeAndClear

Growth so slow that when a Republican becomes president that same slow growth will be an economic boom!

i remember the republicans doing the same in late 2019, when the economy was slowing down. doesnt bode well for the occupant of the white house.

Allan

[JimmyC]

@FreeAndClear

The only thing of import or relevance is the layman definition. Everything else is unnecessary pedantry by this admin

If we go by layman definitions then Joe Biden is to blame for the global rise in inflation and gas prices. So, yes, I don’t blame the administration for pushing back and make their case. I’m not going to put much stock in what the admin says because they are obviously biased and going to spin to their advantage, but they are not the only ones who are saying this. So, their argument that two quarters of recession doesn’t necessarily mean there is a recession, while self-serving, is defensible - they are not changing the definition of recession. And again, I am not making an argument that we are or are not in a recession.

Sharing insights elevates their impact

Recession may not come after all, economists say

The economy is creaking, but likely isn't in a recession

Why it is too early to say the world economy is in recession

[WuWei]

I would have looked at The Evonomist, but it’s behind a paywall.

ABC and NBC?

[FreeAndClear]

You are confusing layman and partisanship. I am not saying that you are making the argument.

It is not defensible to try to explain recession to the public - that it’s not really a recession until some other metric is met. It’s silliness. Work on getting us out. Full stop.

[JimmyC]

Can’t they do both at the same time?

[FreeAndClear]

@JimmyC

Can’t they do both at the same time?

Why is the first necessary? The recession fears are already permeating the economy. Layoffs are being discussed, market is dropping - read Barrons, Fortune etc. The recession fears are starting to have effect. Trying to redefine it to allay those fears is going to have the effect of trying to make it seem like there is more concern about optics rather than the recession itself…

[JimmyC]

@WuWei

I would have looked at The Evonomist, but it’s behind a paywall.

ABC and NBC?

it is not them making those claims.

One economist, Jeremy Schwartz of Credit Suisse, said it’s more likely that the economy will avoid a recession right now than undergo one.

The positive signs have fueled caution about the rush to pessimism. “While sentiment has shifted, little of the data I see tells me the U.S. is on the cusp of a recession,” Citigroup CEO Jane Fraser said during the company’s earnings call on Friday.

Safely navigating that predicament over the coming years – without triggering a recession – will require an unlikely but possible series of events, Aneta Markowska, chief economist at New York City-based financial services company Jefferies, told ABC News…

“There’s a consensus view right now that a recession is imminent – that, I think, is premature,” Markowska said.

“We have an economy that’s already overheated, like a plane that has overshot the runway, which makes it incredibly difficult to land it softly. There’s certainly a scenario for how we could achieve that. But I think that scenario involves a lot of things going very, very well.”

[WuWei]

@biggestal99

@FreeAndClear

Growth so slow that when a Republican becomes president that same slow growth will be an economic boom!

i remember the republicans doing the same in late 2019, when the economy was slowing down. doesnt bode well for the occupant of the white house.

Allan

What?

[Gaius]

Inflation hurts too.

Powell: “We’re seeing real declines in food consumption.”

Powell speech: Households are in very strong shape

[DougBH]

@Supreme_War_Pig

@JimmyC

Where does it say that the only criteria for a recession is 2 quarters of negative growth?

It’s weird. It’s not like a law or anything, it’s basically just a convention.

It is a convention, and for good reason. If a recession is undefined then will any President ever reside over a recession? And notice when the Democrats came up with this idea, they didn’t replace it with some other objective criteria. They replaced it with well, you have to look at a whole lot of other subjective stuff that we are not going to tell you what it is.
Now, imagine there were two such quarters under Trump and his people came up with this. I’m not sure whether the outrage or the ridicule would be greater. And it would be by the same media that are now saying: well, now, he just may have an argument….

[FreeAndClear]

we don’t have to imagine. There were two such quarters under President Trump.

It’s of course irrelevant because of when they were but there two quarters in a row of negative growth under President Trump

[DougBH]

@FreeAndClear

we don’t have to imagine. There were two such quarters under President Trump.

It’s of course irrelevant because of when they were but there two quarters in a row of negative growth under President Trump

Yes…Covid of course…and it cost him the Presidency most likely. Now imagine if he had said “that’s not a recession because a recession is not two quarters of negative growth”. How do you think that would have gone over?

[FreeAndClear]

Let’s not play imagine what trump would have said. That’s not a game either one of us will win

I am not disagreeing with you that redefining recession is the absolutely silliest way of going about this. It truly is silly.

[WuWei]

@FreeAndClear

we don’t have to imagine. There were two such quarters under President Trump.

It’s of course irrelevant because of when they were but there two quarters in a row of negative growth under President Trump

When?