Economy White House changes the definition of Recession

Jack V Savage said:
We're not in a recession, genius.
Click to expand...
bagdad-bob.jpg
 
Jack V Savage said:
We're not in a recession, genius. You do raise taxes if you want to fight inflation.
Click to expand...

Just like on Inflation, you are late to the party. Signs Are pointing to demand destruction as we speak. And we are most definitely in a Recession.

But you were so late to the inflation party. And you are now repeating the same mistake here in regards to a quickly slowing economy.

You are trying to cool down something that is already damn near frozen.
 
kahiljabroni said:
We're becoming more and more like the Soviet union every week. Dont want a recession? Just change the definition. Don't like the real inflation numbers? Just come up with new methodology to calculate it. Want to mandate a vaccine but its not a vaccine? Just change the definition of a vaccine.

We have our own Pravda in the form of the msm. They let their candidate hide in the basement completely unchallenged while they smeared Trump through the entire campaign. They used news stories like a weapon. Spread conspiracy after conspiracy.

Then we have 1984 style big tech covering him on their end. Black balling legitimate stories. Freezing accounts of anyone spreading the truth.

I almost forgot selective prosecution and show trials that are nothing more than campaign events on the public dime

The list goes on and on
Click to expand...
Holy shit bro! This post is incredible. You need to start a YouTube channel and start sharing your thoughts with the general public.
 
Jack V Savage said:
That's just plainly false. Most analysts defer to the NBER (Business Cycle Dating Committee, more specifically) on the issue, and their definition has never been that, and it hasn't changed. A more academic definition would be a period where we're below trend (like with a Hodrick-Prescott Filter).
Click to expand...
Has this changed in economics textbooks since 2013 when I graduated? That I do not know. But I know the actuaries, advisors, and CFPs in my company are operating under the assumption that we are in a relatively weak recession that will see a bounce back to positive sub 1% GDP growth in Q3, after which this conversation of semantics will be in vain.
 
Aluminati said:
Has this changed in economics textbooks since 2013 when I graduated? That I do not know. But I know the actuaries, advisors, and CFPs in my company are operating under the assumption that we are in a relatively weak recession that will see a bounce back to positive sub 1% GDP growth in Q3, after which this conversation of semantics will be in vain.
Click to expand...

It hasn't changed since 2013. We're in a tightening cycle and a big one so we're certainly facing higher than normal recession risk going forward. But there has been no change in the definition (and the WH doesn't have the power to change it anyway). That claim is indisputably false. This attempt to politicize everything and move away from the idea of objective reality is the scariest tendency of the modern right.
 
Last edited:
cottagecheesefan said:
Looking at the reason for the edits is pretty funny.

Click to expand...


The tweet is unavailable but they were funny comments for the reason for the change. Mostly talking shit at each other for the reason for the change. Huge nerd fight.

deadon said:
Well they changed it and locked it. Lol just like the " vaccines"
Click to expand...


So it had a definition for the US in it that said more factors than two consecutive quarters and then had a comment for the UK saying two consecutive quarters. Wikipedia reverted those back and locked because someone was trying to change the US line to only say two consecutive quarters. It was edited back and forth like 8 times before it was locked. You can't view the edit history while it's locked but I saw it at the time and posted about it as it happened earlier in the thread. Very very misleading to say they changed it to favor Biden or anything and seems like the right call to just keep the US line the same as it was.
 
Lead said:
The tweet is unavailable but they were funny comments for the reason for the change. Mostly talking shit at each other for the reason for the change. Huge nerd fight.



So it had a definition for the US in it that said more factors than two consecutive quarters and then had a comment for the UK saying two consecutive quarters. Wikipedia reverted those back and locked because someone was trying to change the US line to only say two consecutive quarters. It was edited back and forth like 8 times before it was locked. You can't view the edit history while it's locked but I saw it at the time and posted about it as it happened earlier in the thread. Very very misleading to say they changed it to favor Biden or anything and seems like the right call to just keep the US line the same as it was.
Click to expand...
 
Jack V Savage said:
It hasn't changed since 2013. We're in a tightening cycle and a big one so we're certainly facing higher than normal recession risk going forward. But there has been no change in the definition (and the WH doesn't have the power to change it anyway). That claim is indisputably false. This attempt to politicize everything and move away from the idea of objective reality is the scariest tendency of the modern right.
Click to expand...
What’s your job/profession I think it’s in finance ?
 
kahiljabroni said:
We're becoming more and more like the Soviet union every week. Dont want a recession? Just change the definition. Don't like the real inflation numbers? Just come up with new methodology to calculate it. Want to mandate a vaccine but its not a vaccine? Just change the definition of a vaccine.

We have our own Pravda in the form of the msm. They let their candidate hide in the basement completely unchallenged while they smeared Trump through the entire campaign. They used news stories like a weapon. Spread conspiracy after conspiracy.

Then we have 1984 style big tech covering him on their end. Black balling legitimate stories. Freezing accounts of anyone spreading the truth.

I almost forgot selective prosecution and show trials that are nothing more than campaign events on the public dime

The list goes on and on
Click to expand...
Holy mother fucking shit, drop that mic brotha. Truth just got laid down harder than the secretary of health’s woman-dick…
 
Bald1 said:
Would you be just as content if it was Trump's team playing this smoke and mirrors game?
Click to expand...
Were trump humpers this upset when trump change the hurricane path or had the official whitehouse transcript change what he said about Putin
 
cottagecheesefan said:
I love how the fact checker outlets like the AP are being very meticulous with their wording on this news, haha.

"Consecutive quarters of falling GDP constitute one informal, though not definitive, indicator of a recession."



As mentioned, their go to deflection is jobs. I also love how they say "well, certain pockets of Americans may feel they are in one". Yea, anyone who isn't some boomer watching CNN lol.

Click to expand...

They have to be clear cause they know there are too many dummies that are now expert economists as evidenced in this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,986
Messages
55,459,542
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top