Who said that?topthrill05 wrote:
So because Oil and Military contractors are doing fine we aren't in a recession? That doesn't even make sense.
And you don't want him in the office coz he's a dem, he's black or both?Lotta_Drool wrote:
Vote for Obama, I hear that he is for change. /stupidity
Last edited by Deadmonkiefart (2008-06-07 16:12:38)
Well, what I mean is, we've discussed the concept before that how the economy is doing depends on your perspective. I'm saying most people would say we're in a recession. People in the oil industry and military contractors are less likely to say that because they are doing well.FEOS wrote:
Recession is the entire economy, not individual industries.Turquoise wrote:
Most industries are experiencing a recession right now. Granted, the oil industry isn't and neither are military contractors.FEOS wrote:
Recession? Technically debatable, but perception is 9/10 of reality.
You must make a macroeconomic analysis in order to say there's a recession, you can't base your argument on individual cases.Turquoise wrote:
Well, what I mean is, we've discussed the concept before that how the economy is doing depends on your perspective. I'm saying most people would say we're in a recession. People in the oil industry and military contractors are less likely to say that because they are doing well.FEOS wrote:
Recession is the entire economy, not individual industries.Turquoise wrote:
Most industries are experiencing a recession right now. Granted, the oil industry isn't and neither are military contractors.
The problem with this is that there are different ways to suggest we're in a recession. The most common definition involves economic growth as measured by GDP.sergeriver wrote:
You must make a macroeconomic analysis in order to say there's a recession, you can't base your argument on individual cases.Turquoise wrote:
Well, what I mean is, we've discussed the concept before that how the economy is doing depends on your perspective. I'm saying most people would say we're in a recession. People in the oil industry and military contractors are less likely to say that because they are doing well.FEOS wrote:
Recession is the entire economy, not individual industries.
cockroaches will live like kings.Deadmonkiefart wrote:
After WWIII ?
As I said, perception is 9/10 of reality for most of the public.Turquoise wrote:
Well, what I mean is, we've discussed the concept before that how the economy is doing depends on your perspective. I'm saying most people would say we're in a recession. People in the oil industry and military contractors are less likely to say that because they are doing well.FEOS wrote:
Recession is the entire economy, not individual industries.Turquoise wrote:
Most industries are experiencing a recession right now. Granted, the oil industry isn't and neither are military contractors.
Nay, I believe it is pretty much taken as a fact that we are now in the late-beginnings of the recession.FEOS wrote:
As I said, perception is 9/10 of reality for most of the public.Turquoise wrote:
Well, what I mean is, we've discussed the concept before that how the economy is doing depends on your perspective. I'm saying most people would say we're in a recession. People in the oil industry and military contractors are less likely to say that because they are doing well.FEOS wrote:
Recession is the entire economy, not individual industries.
Further reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_crisis_of_2008Wiki wrote:
Since 2007, there had been speculation of a possible recession starting in late 2007 or early 2008. The United States housing market correction (a consequence of United States housing bubble) and subprime mortgage crisis had significantly contributed to anticipation of a possible recession.
While some economists were confident about a recession[27], others were not as easily convinced.[28] While some believed that the current slowdown would at best be a mild and brief recession,[29] there was always an anticipation that the economy may start recovering in the later part of 2008.[30]
The 2008 performance of the U.S. economy is difficult to predict due to the declining house prices and the subprime crisis, the full impact of which is still unclear.
U.S. employers shed 63,000 jobs in February 2008, the most in five years, supporting the view that the U.S. is falling into a recession. [31]. NBER's president, Harvard University economist Martin Feldstein, recently said on March 14, 2008 we are in a recession, though it was not an official NBER declaration[32]. He said the nation has entered a recession that could be the worst since World War II. The economists surveyed by Bloomberg News this month predicted the GDP growth will slow to 0.1 percent in January to March.
A TrimTabs report on April 1, 2008 suggested a possible ending of recession based on treasury withholding data in very near future[33].
Martin Feldstein, head of NBER said on March 7, 2007: I think that December/January was the peak and that we have been sliding into recession ever since then. I think it could go on longer last two recessions (which) lasted eight months peak to trough".[34]. However former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan said on April 6, 2008 that "There is more than a 50 percent chance the United States could go into recession." However Anatole Kaletsky has argued that recession unlikely if US economy gets through next two crucial months[35].
On April 29, 2008, several US states are declared by Moody’s to be in a recession, they are as follows: Rhode Island, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Florida, Tennessee, California, Nevada and Arizona. [36]
The US Economy grew in the first quarter by 0.6%, meaning that the US does not meet the classical definition of a recession and the Commerce Department says the US is "stuck in a rut". However a number of economists still believe the economy is in a recession.
Last edited by Thorax (2008-06-07 16:41:51)
Most economists would agree -- mostly because of our currency and various financial concerns like the mortgage crisis.Thorax wrote:
Nay, I believe it is pretty much taken as a fact that we are now in the late-beginnings of the recession.FEOS wrote:
As I said, perception is 9/10 of reality for most of the public.Turquoise wrote:
Well, what I mean is, we've discussed the concept before that how the economy is doing depends on your perspective. I'm saying most people would say we're in a recession. People in the oil industry and military contractors are less likely to say that because they are doing well.
Nay, as the discussion implies, there are varying definitions of recession.Thorax wrote:
Nay, I believe it is pretty much taken as a fact that we are now in the late-beginnings of the recession.FEOS wrote:
As I said, perception is 9/10 of reality for most of the public.Turquoise wrote:
Well, what I mean is, we've discussed the concept before that how the economy is doing depends on your perspective. I'm saying most people would say we're in a recession. People in the oil industry and military contractors are less likely to say that because they are doing well.
Yes, agreed. Basically what you and I are saying in different words is that this is now, and probably will be a minor reccesion. From what I've read that is also what most of the economists are saying too.Turquoise wrote:
Most economists would agree -- mostly because of our currency and various financial concerns like the mortgage crisis.Thorax wrote:
Nay, I believe it is pretty much taken as a fact that we are now in the late-beginnings of the recession.FEOS wrote:
As I said, perception is 9/10 of reality for most of the public.
An often obscured fact about our current economic state is that a large portion of people are underemployed rather than unemployed.
Well, like Bush says you must also think of it as a "rut". Well in my world, "rut" constitutes minor or beginning recession because in all likeliness that is what it will be.FEOS wrote:
Nay, as the discussion implies, there are varying definitions of recession.Thorax wrote:
Nay, I believe it is pretty much taken as a fact that we are now in the late-beginnings of the recession.FEOS wrote:
As I said, perception is 9/10 of reality for most of the public.
By the most well-known definition (two consecutive quarters of negative growth), we haven't gotten there yet. We haven't had a single quarter of negative growth yet, much less two in a row.
However, there are other definitions out there. The most rigorous doesn't tell you when the recession starts until well after it's over, unfortunately.
Last edited by Thorax (2008-06-07 16:45:40)
Agreed 100%.Turquoise wrote:
I would argue that the most popular definition should be altered to include unemployment, underemployment, currency value, trade balance, and federal debt as factors. That would be a much more comprehensive definition.
I don't remember a time that things were all fine and dandy. Although I was not alive when GW gave his farewell address, I'm sure it wasn't so great to be a African, and Indian, or a Mexican at that time. Hell, much less a Woman or a Homosexual.ATG wrote:
Interesting derail;Turquoise wrote:
As much as I bitch about things, I have to admit that life in America right now is far better than it was about 70 years ago. Times were far more tumultuous during the 60s and 70s as well.
Granted, I don't know about you, ATG, but I thought the 90s were our peak as a society.
What was the peak time of our society?
Do you base that on racial equality? Moral forthrightness? International integrity?
The 90's saw Waco here Genocide there. Doogie Hoswer was a hit television show. People were buying cable de-scramblers by the millions.
I would define the peak of our society as the moment when Gorge Washington gave his farewell address.
The current state of the dollar is more a consequence than a factor.Turquoise wrote:
The problem with this is that there are different ways to suggest we're in a recession. The most common definition involves economic growth as measured by GDP.sergeriver wrote:
You must make a macroeconomic analysis in order to say there's a recession, you can't base your argument on individual cases.Turquoise wrote:
Well, what I mean is, we've discussed the concept before that how the economy is doing depends on your perspective. I'm saying most people would say we're in a recession. People in the oil industry and military contractors are less likely to say that because they are doing well.
However, many suggest that total economic growth overlooks important factors like unemployment and underemployment. So, depending on which factors you favor and what perspective you're coming from, you could say we're in a recession or (through creative reasoning) we're not.
Again, I favor the notion that we are in a recession because of various factors including the current state of the dollar.
That depends on what you believe caused the fall. I believe the current devaluation of the dollar is the result of a long term mismanagement of debt by our government and by the banking industry. We were doing the damage to the dollar over a long period of time, but it's not until the dollar started taking a dive that our economy started slowing down.sergeriver wrote:
The current state of the dollar is more a consequence than a factor.Turquoise wrote:
The problem with this is that there are different ways to suggest we're in a recession. The most common definition involves economic growth as measured by GDP.sergeriver wrote:
You must make a macroeconomic analysis in order to say there's a recession, you can't base your argument on individual cases.
However, many suggest that total economic growth overlooks important factors like unemployment and underemployment. So, depending on which factors you favor and what perspective you're coming from, you could say we're in a recession or (through creative reasoning) we're not.
Again, I favor the notion that we are in a recession because of various factors including the current state of the dollar.
Agreed, but the dollar diving is a consequence of bad decisions. Then, of course, it contributed to make things worse. It's like a circle or the chicken and egg, as you mentioned before. There are many factors to consider, besides the value of the currency.Turquoise wrote:
That depends on what you believe caused the fall. I believe the current devaluation of the dollar is the result of a long term mismanagement of debt by our government and by the banking industry. We were doing the damage to the dollar over a long period of time, but it's not until the dollar started taking a dive that our economy started slowing down.sergeriver wrote:
The current state of the dollar is more a consequence than a factor.Turquoise wrote:
The problem with this is that there are different ways to suggest we're in a recession. The most common definition involves economic growth as measured by GDP.
However, many suggest that total economic growth overlooks important factors like unemployment and underemployment. So, depending on which factors you favor and what perspective you're coming from, you could say we're in a recession or (through creative reasoning) we're not.
Again, I favor the notion that we are in a recession because of various factors including the current state of the dollar.
It's kind of a chicken or the egg debate. I see the dollar as causing part of the economic downturn, but you're right that it could also be seen as the economy causing the dollar to fall.
I believe in the traditional definition of a recession as well. And we are in one, according to that definition. Source.FEOS wrote:
Nay, as the discussion implies, there are varying definitions of recession.Thorax wrote:
Nay, I believe it is pretty much taken as a fact that we are now in the late-beginnings of the recession.FEOS wrote:
As I said, perception is 9/10 of reality for most of the public.
By the most well-known definition (two consecutive quarters of negative growth), we haven't gotten there yet. We haven't had a single quarter of negative growth yet, much less two in a row.
However, there are other definitions out there. The most rigorous doesn't tell you when the recession starts until well after it's over, unfortunately.
According to your source, we've been in a recession since mid-2004. Without seeing the calculus behind it, I'm leery of just accepting a graph with no other explanation/context. And relying on a single source (John Williams' shadowstats) is questionable, as well. Where is his objective peer review?Phrozenbot wrote:
I believe in the traditional definition of a recession as well. And we are in one, according to that definition. Source.FEOS wrote:
Nay, as the discussion implies, there are varying definitions of recession.Thorax wrote:
Nay, I believe it is pretty much taken as a fact that we are now in the late-beginnings of the recession.
By the most well-known definition (two consecutive quarters of negative growth), we haven't gotten there yet. We haven't had a single quarter of negative growth yet, much less two in a row.
However, there are other definitions out there. The most rigorous doesn't tell you when the recession starts until well after it's over, unfortunately.
And before you say, "its not from the almighty US governments, so its cannots be true" consider reading about how the methodologies used purposely understate inflation and unemployment, and overstate GDP growth.
CPI, shadowstats
CPI, PIMCO
GDP, shadowstats
Unemployment, shadowstats
However, I'm not complaining that we are in a recession. It hasn't been terribly painful for most people, plus it's good for the economy to contract, that way we can start from a healthy base and go onto realistic economic growth. Although I think we have much worse problems ahead of us, as you already know
Yes I did. How do you think I realized it was one guy? And he clearly has an agenda, as well.Phrozenbot wrote:
There are many independent economists who believe government numbers to be phony as well. Did you care to read any of the links I posted before questioning how reputable Mr Williams is? The blue line is based on using older traditional methodologies like in 1980, before the government implemented new methodologies which *gasp* magically painted a prettier picture of the numbers.
Did the government show you the calculus behind their CPI numbers? You seem more than eager to accept them from the government, despite the real world painting a different picture. You don't think the government has a vested interest in painting a prettier picture of the economy? Politicians don't like angry citizens, and like getting reelected.
