Flashback: In 2000, Bill Clinton Said “A Recession Is Two Quarters In A Row Of Negative Growth”

If Trump was in office, Dems would be calling it a recession.

Fuck every Dem and fuck every cult member.

You people are seriously fucked in the head.
 
Every business program and economist has defined recession as "two consecutive quarters of GDP shrinking". This is a recession as it's been defined for the last 80 years. People can use whatever language they wish to slice the sausage to fit their agenda, this is the historic definition.

The question I have is that the U.S is going to spend $50B on semi conductor chip innovation and manufacturing but $400B+ on climate change. Am I missing the global priorities here?
 
Recession is when your neighbor loses his job

Depression is when you lose yours

And recovery is when Joe Biden loses his


The definition goes back further than Bill, and I don't remember him having a recession. Aside from him getting blowjobs from Monica in the Oval Office, his presidency was a sweet deal for everybody I know, with a Newt (a good conservative back at that time) helping balance the act, until he too, disgraced himself.
This is from Forbes:
In 1974, economist Julius Shiskin came up with a few rules of thumb to define a recession: The most popular was two consecutive quarters of declining GDP. A healthy economy expands over time, so two quarters in a row of contracting output suggests there are serious underlying problems, according to Shiskin. This definition of a recession became a common standard over the years
 
The definition goes back further than Bill, and I don't remember him having a recession. Aside from him getting blowjobs from Monica in the Oval Office, his presidency was a sweet deal for everybody I know, with a Newt (a good conservative back at that time) helping balance the act, until he too, disgraced himself.
This is from Forbes:
In 1974, economist Julius Shiskin came up with a few rules of thumb to define a recession: The most popular was two consecutive quarters of declining GDP. A healthy economy expands over time, so two quarters in a row of contracting output suggests there are serious underlying problems, according to Shiskin. This definition of a recession became a common standard over the years
I'm old. I thought I learned that it was two out of three, because there are "w" shaped recessions that can last longer. But Powell's comments yesterday really clearly pointed out why this is atypical. Mostly with jobs. Have we ever had a recession when jobs increased? They did last qtr.

So, while I understand the partisanship, and frankly I wished frogs and boils for Trump but that was not partisanship, just Trump. LOL

But the real thing is inflation. And that's consumer spending. And even that is not just one figure. The Fed can't do anything about food and energy .... because people will already "tighten their belts" on that.
 
I'm old. I thought I learned that it was two out of three, because there are "w" shaped recessions that can last longer. But Powell's comments yesterday really clearly pointed out why this is atypical. Mostly with jobs. Have we ever had a recession when jobs increased? They did last qtr.

So, while I understand the partisanship, and frankly I wished frogs and boils for Trump but that was not partisanship, just Trump. LOL

But the real thing is inflation. And that's consumer spending. And even that is not just one figure. The Fed can't do anything about food and energy .... because people will already "tighten their belts" on that.
It was college in the 80s last time I took Econ I & II, so, I'm with you on age. That definition was still being taught, though the grounding I got in Keynesian economics, is not, and we keep using the same solutions.
I kind of figure, employment will follow to an extent, depending on inflation and how deep the pockets of small business owners.
 
The definition goes back further than Bill, and I don't remember him having a recession. Aside from him getting blowjobs from Monica in the Oval Office, his presidency was a sweet deal for everybody I know, with a Newt (a good conservative back at that time) helping balance the act, until he too, disgraced himself.
This is from Forbes:
In 1974, economist Julius Shiskin came up with a few rules of thumb to define a recession: The most popular was two consecutive quarters of declining GDP. A healthy economy expands over time, so two quarters in a row of contracting output suggests there are serious underlying problems, according to Shiskin. This definition of a recession became a common standard over the years
clinton was the last democrat pragmatist.
 
If Trump was in office Trump RECESSION would be the fake news headline 24/7 with Dems running to the cameras demanding he resign.

The cult knows this, and does not care.

Money and power is all they want.

Why the dumb cultists who post here go along with the lies is beyond me. They are stupid as fuck.
 
It was college in the 80s last time I took Econ I & II, so, I'm with you on age. That definition was still being taught, though the grounding I got in Keynesian economics, is not, and we keep using the same solutions.
I kind of figure, employment will follow to an extent, depending on inflation and how deep the pockets of small business owners.
I don't think we'll see >10% unemployment like we saw in 1981. Hopefully not the 7.4 of 92

The fed can't do anything about energy or even construction costs or food. It can cause people to spend less, but this is not 1978 when we killed inflation by basically killing the economy. This recession is largely a result of killing the economy. But it seems to me the supply chains are getting better. Slowly.

The fed CAN stop people from buying on credit. I think the feds funds rate is at 2.5 and Powell said further increases should be smaller. That's still not historically high, but we'll still see it on credit cards. But like you said, there will be small biz loses

I'm not seeing anything to save the dems, even though it's not ALL their own making. I don't see the gop cutting taxes for the top 1% being very beneficial. It won't cause inflation, but it will blow up the deficits further.

Hopefully a year from now inflation will be moderating, and people can get back to hating republicans over roe and dobbs. Pitchforks and Torches!
 
Democrats are in denial.

They say teaching kids about sexual activities they want them to engage in as adults isn't grooming and 2 quarters of negative growth isn't a recession.

Anyone who takes Democrats seriously is a perv, a fool, a traitor, or all of the above.
 
I don't think we'll see >10% unemployment like we saw in 1981. Hopefully not the 7.4 of 92

The fed can't do anything about energy or even construction costs or food. It can cause people to spend less, but this is not 1978 when we killed inflation by basically killing the economy. This recession is largely a result of killing the economy. But it seems to me the supply chains are getting better. Slowly.

The fed CAN stop people from buying on credit. I think the feds funds rate is at 2.5 and Powell said further increases should be smaller. That's still not historically high, but we'll still see it on credit cards. But like you said, there will be small biz loses

I'm not seeing anything to save the dems, even though it's not ALL their own making. I don't see the gop cutting taxes for the top 1% being very beneficial. It won't cause inflation, but it will blow up the deficits further.

Hopefully a year from now inflation will be moderating, and people can get back to hating republicans over roe and dobbs. Pitchforks and Torches!
I hope you are correct. I really do not anticipate that kind of unemployment, but the Fed is tightening the money supply, trying to curb the inflation. This may or may not add to the problem.
 
The same people who only 2 years ago said a recession is 2 QTRS of GDP contraction are now saying it is NOT.

FUCK YOU LYING DIRTBAGS.



If there are other factors, WHAT ARE THE OTHER FACTORS AND WHAT ARE THOSE NUMBERS?
 
Democrats are in denial.

They say teaching kids about sexual activities they want them to engage in as adults isn't grooming and 2 quarters of negative growth isn't a recession.

Anyone who takes Democrats seriously is a perv, a fool, a traitor, or all of the above.
Another pure partisan heard from. In this discussion of whether two consecutive quarters of negative GDP movement always constitutes recession.
 
The same people who only 2 years ago said a recession is 2 QTRS of GDP contraction are now saying it is NOT.

FUCK YOU LYING DIRTBAGS.



If there are other factors, WHAT ARE THE OTHER FACTORS AND WHAT ARE THOSE NUMBERS?

If a Dem is in the White House, inflation is not inflation and recessions are not recessions. It's right there in the Dem propaganda handbook.
 
Every business program and economist has defined recession as "two consecutive quarters of GDP shrinking".
Nope. It involves more than just a measure of GDP. That would be like taking your body temperature to determine if you have cancer.

A recession is determined by the NBER, and there are many factors they take into account. For complicated reasons, they don't call a recession until long after it is over.

I know Trumptards are so partisan that they would like to see our economy tank, but it is the NBER which determines the facts.
 
Another pure partisan heard from. In this discussion of whether two consecutive quarters of negative GDP movement always constitutes recession.
The same people who are saying that democrats are not grooming kids in schools are the same people who are denying there is a recession.
 

Forum List

Back
Top