Thanks. Next step is to go beyond the tweet and find me possibly academic or peer reviewed economic papers or some standardized term for what a "recession" is. Start with wiki or something. I really really hope this isn't the extent of your intellectual curiosity. "I found a random tweet that agrees with my preconceived biases and therefore need to not look any further".
Here's an idea. Instead of formulating a opinion and then specifically hunting for bits of information from biased sources like the NY Post that comfortably massages your preconceived opinion, just pretend you are starting from scratch with no preconceived biases. I suggest looking for content that existed before the Biden presidency. That will give a better idea of whether the articles or tweets you are posting now are nothing more than post-hoc rationalization. Like find an established source from like 2010 or something or 2015 where they define what a recession is.
Here's your own liberally biased source defining the textbook definition of a recession in 2010.... https://www.cnbc.com/id/43563081 Since you seem to disagree with 50+ year precedent of what a recession has been defined by... what's your definition of a recession?
The rule of "two consecutive quarters" comes from this article and this guy: POINTS OP VIEW https://nyti.ms/1PtVtQx He's the former Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Julius Shiskin. The rule of "two consecutive quarters" is merely ONE criteria of many other criteria that must be met from the man himself who established the modern criteria for what a recession is. Those other criteria are: In terms of duration—declines in real G.N.P. for 2 consecutive quarters; a decline in industrial production over a six‐month period. In terms of depth—A 1.5 per cent decline in teal G.N.P.; a 15 per cent decline non-agricultural employment; a wo‐point rise in unemployment to a level of at least 6 percent. In terms of diffusion—A decline in non-agricultural employment in more than 75 per cent of industries, as measured over six‐month spans, for 6 months or longer.
LOL. Just like the CDC tried to redefine what a vaccine actually is. Either 1) these people are surreally detached from truth and reality, or 2) they are openly and aggressively trying to gaslight everyone. A great many people are not buying it whichever it is.
This is why intellectual curiosity is important. Notice the difference between how I obtained the criteria and how you did. You just tried to find the most recent articles about the topic from biased perspectives and I merely just found the root source for who coined the actual criteria we use today.
A simple "you're right, i'm wrong" would have sufficed As we can clearly now see from your own source that Pedo Peter is trying to redefine what a recession is.
Are you saying there is a new agreed upon definition of "recession" that only looks at duration and ignores depth and diffusion? So are you saying over time, what constitutes a recession has eliminated analysis of depth and diffusion by economists? If so can you explain why they now look at only duration of that is the case while ignoring other variables like depth?
Yup I think the disconnect between us and a poster like @waytookrzy079 is he finds articles and tweets that specifically only look at the first criteria and just stop there. Obviously right wing bad faith sources are going to ignore the rest of the criteria to propagate their narrative. @waytookrzy079 is just a mere victim of that type of propaganda which I call "propaganda by omission"
It's ok. People fail to wake up to reality simply cuz the truth is too difficult to accept. The realization that they were lied to and fell for it is not something people will openly admit to, and they'd rather double down and defend their position. I was stubborn at one point too. Glad I took the red pill when I did and can see "the matrix" for what is it.
Yes the article from 1974. The author of that article basically started the more standardized definition we use today.
That quote is also stating that layman have the simplistic definition who h is t robust and accurate enough and that experts have a more defined nuanced definition that accounts for more factors.
You don't own businesses so you don't understand why we care about the economy. You're just talking about it on the internet. Some of us are watching a moron who barely knows where he is collapse everything You're addicted to being broke and depending on people like myself to generate jobs and put money in the economy
I employ people so I am at trying to help our economy. If you're doing the same then props but as business owners we need to support each other
