Recession ends in US as GDP grows 3.5% in 3rd quarter

..... we don't need no stinkin' jobs. All that matters is that stock market.

It's all down to GDP, as it should be.

GDP is a very poor, broad indicator that skips many important things.

What GDP indicates is how much more the people at the top will be getting. The minimum necessary amount of that growth will be spent to keep the people in line. It does not improve the state of the country in the least. The growth does not extend beyond the top 5 or 10 percent.

HOWEVER, when GDP shrinks, the losses come straight from the poor. The rich are the last hit and least affected, except a few unlucky ones caught out of a chair when the music stopped.

You want good things, but that's irrelevant.

A recession ends when GDP grows. Period. Nothing else. What you want to measure is socially equitable participation in a growing economy. Completely separate thing.

Ahhhhhh .... that says it all .......

:eyes:




I

Am

Gobsmacked

By

The

Gross

Insensitivity

You (and a remarkable number of others around here)

Exhibit.

It's relevant to many things, but not that. I am gobsmacked you cannot understand that.

But that's okay. You carry on.

GDP does not matter if changes in GDP do not affect the vast majority. A non-negative change in GDP is good, but increases past zero are not worth particularly much.

The obsession with GDP and the formally defined "recession" is apparent in all news outlets. Unemployment gets far less coverage. Yet for most people, the economy does not get any better until employment grows.

The coverage of the stock market and GDP as if they were the totality of our economy is disgusting. They are largely useless measures which should see little coverage, perhaps in the editorials of economists. It is oversimplification and it hurts people's understanding of the state of the economy.

and yes we need the stock market to recover as well...

Otherwise, we'll still have millions upon millions unemployed or underemployed. With the costs of everything still rising, this presents a very real problem and burden upon any sustainable growth.

an increase in jobs. GDP only really measures consumption which even those without jobs have to do if they're going to keep from starving. But if you think that just because by the textbook definition of a recession we're no longer in one that it means good things for the economy you either woefully or willfully ignorant.

Wrong.

The "P" in GDP stands for "Production". The indicator measures the total "Production" of goods and services, NOT the consumption of them.

A significant percentage of industrial production in this country is exported.

We import more than we export. That brings DOWN GDP. In addition, consumption (And it's final use not intermediate use as in raw materials for manufacturing) is demand. If something is produced and it sits on the shelf it doesn't contribute to GDP.

You are wrong.

but the fact is, you said;

The second half of that sentence is arguably only partially correct (If I'm out of work, I might do away with my Cable TV and Internet service as well as numerous other items, so I don't "have to" consume as much and I'm frankly not likely to) but the first part is NOT correct.

GDP measures production. If an item is produced and sits on a shelf or in a warehouse, which, BTW, is an increasingly smaller percentage of produced goods in this "Just-in-time" delivery economy, It's still PRODUCED and raw materials were paid for to produce it and wages were paid to employees to make it.

Please explain why you think that if Caterpillar (as a random example) made 25 more bulldozers this quarter than they did last quarter, that fact is negated by the trade deficit.

Edited for sentence structure and clarity

textbook. I'm certainly not going to take your definition over it.

I figure I have another two months or so before things start getting really bad for the rucky family.

Hang in there.

So that would be likely summer 2010. Now that is unemployment peak. Unemployment will still remain high for at LEAST a year after that.

My guess unemployment peaks Summmer 2010 around 10% to 11%
over next year (summer 2011) it drops maybe 1%-2%.
over next year (summer 2012) it drops another 2%-3%.
Full employment will likely take 2.5 to 3 years from unemployment peak.

This is based on previous recessions and biased towards longer recovery due to the severity of this recession.

Thanks!

It is certainly possible GDP growth fails and nothing will kill jobs faster than a double dip recession.

Many economist now consider the double recessions of Jan 1980 - July 1980 and July 1981-Nov 1982 to be one large recession with a failed recovery in the middle.

So positive GDP growth doesn't guarantee jobs gains however continued negative GDP growth does guarantee job losses.

Otherwise recession is only over for the wall street fat cats

I fully expect the holiday hiring to give us some good numbers for the quarter, but it still won't be what we need to spur real growth and sustainability. The media will be in full-on spin mode with those numbers, but will largely be silent in the first quarter of next year, when those jobs have evaporated and the process starts again.

...6 months ago.

Bush fucked up this country pretty bad. We should all be happy that it's not worse. I mean, what the fuck!!

We were on the brink, maybe further. Jobs will come, they lag. Spring/Summer of '10. If they are up-ticking by then(which I fully expect them to be) we are screwed.

everything. took 8 yrs and lots of fuck up to get here. gonna take a hell of a lot more than 8 yrs getting out.

really started with clinton, nafta, and deregulation

and a lot of the problems we have now are directly tied to his "optimistic" horse-pucky the media gave him credit for creating.

The idiots who believed it, forget that he was just playing "the role of a lifetime", and that GHWB was behind the scenes, running the show.

Reagan took the helm of California's government when things were still good here, and after 8 years of his reign, California was headed down hill, and has never really recovered. The bootstrap/quasi-libertarian crap we are suffering from was refined by the Reagan era.Imagine where the republicans would be today had they not have St. Ronnie as their front-man, all those years ago,..

Goldwater was roundly thumped and sent packing, Nixon resigned in disgrace, Ford was defined as a clumsy, ineffective boob... Reagan was their Hail-Mary pass, and we have been defined by that administration ever since.

clinton took it a huge step forward implementing what reagan started.

bush escalated beyond belief.

would think at a poitn we would say.... whoa, really fucked us up here. look take another look. not seeing it though

But of course you will focus on a pretty number at the top and smile.

regardless of numbers, we won't get out of recession

A recession is two or more quarters where GDP declines. Period. Nothing more, nothing less.

So when GDP turns positive for a qtr then a recession has ended.

Nobody is saying it is rainbows and puppy dogs.

End recession =/= no economic issues.


Just like being poor doesn't mean you are bankrupt. Bankruptcy is a technical term it is when you file for bankruptcy protection from your creditors. Not having money doesn't make you bankrupt. Not having a job doesn't make it a recession.

Nobody is saying "our problems are over" at all.

Beneath the big headline was this:


"Last quarter, the economy grew by the largest amount since the summer of 2007, but there are signs that things are still getting worse."

(Just a few signs, you understand..........)

Nothing ususual or alarming that unemployment is still rising.

Unemployment WILL RISE. It will RISE for 6-9 months. There is likely NOTHING anyone can do to prevent that. It will peak somewhere north of 10% (10.5% to 11.0% is likely). Once unemployment peaks (Summer 2010 ish) the recovery will be very slow. It likely will take 1-2 years before unemployment is <8%. It will take another 2 years or so before we are at full employment = 5% unemployment.

Anyone thinking this will change faster than that simply has unrealistic expectations.

...and the over-packed shelters. And under the bridges, or in the cars.

'But Rush says Obama will destroy the economy and he's a commie and....'

Personal incomes fell and GDP went up.

Personal Incomes fell as well as disposable presonal income. Cash for clunkers accounts for a good portion of this and that isn't going to be around in the 4th quarter.

Motor vehicle output added 1.66 percentage points to the third-quarter change in real GDP after
adding 0.19 percentage point to the second-quarter change. Final sales of computers subtracted 0.11
percentage point from the third-quarter change in real GDP after subtracting 0.04 percentage point from
the second-quarter change.



The price index for gross domestic purchases, which measures prices paid by U.S. residents,
increased 1.6 percent in the third quarter, compared with an increase of 0.5 percent in the second.

Current-dollar personal income decreased $15.5 billion (0.5 percent) in the third quarter, in
contrast to an increase of $19.1 billion (0.6 percent) in the second.

Disposable personal income decreased $20.4 billion (0.7 percent) in the third quarter, in contrast
to an increase of $138.2 billion (5.2 percent) in the second. Real disposable personal income decreased
3.4 percent, in contrast to an increase of 3.8 percent.
Personal outlays increased $148.2 billion (5.8 percent

GDP is a leading indicator meaning it is necessary for changes in GDP to show before other important numbers (like unemployment & personal income) do.

It still will probably be at least 6 months before those other numbers start moving positively but this is good news nonetheless as it's prerequisite for economic recovery.

Which is fine, but you better have the private sector moving when that spending expires.

a recession never really ends for the unemployed until they get a decent payiing job.

It is a measure of a person's ignorance if they think this is a reason to be pissed off.

The inability of some to fathom that jobs can't come back unless the recession ends is evidence some don't have a clue about economics.

We all want jobs to come back, but some of us realize that pissing on every piece of good news is idiotic.

and let me know what you think of it. Not just the number, the whole report

Unemployment will likely rise until Summer 2010 (based on previous recessions).

As unemployment rises and people run out of benefits they lose that source of income. Unemployment insurance is a source of personal income so.

1) Full income -> unemployment insurance = reduction in personal income.
2) Unemployment insurance -> nothing = further reduction in personal income.

So there isn't anything SHOCKING about the report.

The recession ended. A recession is a technical term just like Bankruptcy, Marriage or a Contract.

It has a very specific definition:
2 consecutive qtrs of negative GDP growth. We have three Q4-2008, Q1-2009, Q2-2009.

A recession ends when GDP turns positive which happened in Q3-2009.

No recession DOES NOT mean no problems with the economy however history books will record the recession of 2008/2009 having lasted from Q4-2008 to Q2-2009.

There is inflation:

The price index for gross domestic purchases, which measures prices paid by U.S. residents,
increased 1.6 percent in the third quarter, compared with an increase of 0.5 percent in the second.
Excluding food and energy prices, the price index for gross domestic purchases increased 0.5 percent in
the third quarter, compared with an increase of 0.8 percent in the second.

Than you had Cash for Clunkers

Real personal consumption expenditures increased 3.4 percent in the third quarter, in contrast to
a decrease of 0.9 percent in the second. Durable goods increased 22.3 percent, in contrast to a decrease
of 5.6 percent. The third-quarter increase largely reflected motor vehicle purchases under the Consumer
Assistance to Recycle and Save Act of 2009 (popularly called, “Cash for Clunkers” Program).
Nondurable goods increased 2.0 percent in the third quarter, in contrast to a decrease of 1.9 percent in
the second. Services increased 1.2 percent, compared with an increase of 0.2 percent.

The 3.4 precent increas you have to factor in that inflation was taking place at the same time.

This is somewhat good news, things appear to slowing down here in the crash of commercial real estate investment.

Real nonresidential fixed investment decreased 2.5 percent in the third quarter, compared with a
decrease of 9.6 percent in the second. Nonresidential structures decreased 9.0 percent, compared with a
decrease of 17.3 percent.


Good sign should increase in the fourth quarter due to Windows 7

Equipment and software increased 1.1 percent, in contrast to a decrease of 4.9
percent. Real residential fixed investment increased 23.4 percent, in contrast to a decrease of 23.3
percent.

That is good news

Real exports of goods and services increased 14.7 percent in the third quarter, in contrast to a
decrease of 4.1 percent in the second. Real imports of goods and services increased 16.4 percent, in
contrast to a decrease of 14.7 percent.

There is your stimulus spending

Real federal government consumption expenditures and gross investment increased 7.9 percent
in the third quarter, compared with an increase of 11.4 percent in the second. National defense increased
8.4 percent, compared with an increase of 14.0 percent. Nondefense increased 6.8 percent, compared
with an increase of 6.1 percent. Real state and local government consumption expenditures and gross

This can be good or bad depending on the fourth quarter

The change in real private inventories added 0.94 percentage point to the third-quarter change in
real GDP after subtracting 1.42 percentage points from the second-quarter change. Private businesses
decreased inventories $130.8 billion in the third quarter, following decreases of $160.2 billion in the
second quarter and $113.9 billion in the first.
investment decreased 1.1 percent, in contrast to an increase of 3.9 percent

So the uptick in spending came at the expense of saving. Could be a good thing or a bad thing depends on how you look at it.

Current-dollar personal income decreased $15.5 billion (0.5 percent) in the third quarter, in
contrast to an increase of $19.1 billion (0.6 percent) in the second.
Personal current taxes increased $4.8 billion in the third quarter, in contrast to a decrease of
$119.1 billion in the second. The quarterly pattern of taxes reflected a much smaller decrease in federal
withheld income taxes in the third quarter, based on the quarterly pattern of wages and salaries and a
leveling off of the effects on withholding rates from the Making Work Pay Credit provision of the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. (For more information, see the Technical Note.)
Disposable personal income decreased $20.4 billion (0.7 percent) in the third quarter, in contrast
to an increase of $138.2 billion (5.2 percent) in the second. Real disposable personal income decreased
3.4 percent, in contrast to an increase of 3.8 percent.
Personal outlays increased $148.2 billion (5.8 percent) in the third quarter, compared with an
increase of $8.2 billion (0.3 percent) in the second. Personal saving -- disposable personal income less
personal outlays -- was $364.6 billion in the third quarter, compared with $533.1 billion in the second.
The personal saving rate -- saving as a percentage of disposable personal income -- was 3.3 percent in
the third quarter, compared with 4.9 percent in the second. For a comparison of personal saving in
BEA’s national income and product accounts with personal saving in the Federal Reserve Board’s flow
of funds accounts and data on changes in net worth

It is virtually impossible to keep an economy at 0.00% inflation. Deflation is far more devastating than inflation. Given that most countries consider low and stable inflation to be an acceptable outcome in the real world.

1.6% inflation is great because it means we are moving away from risk of deflation however it is still low enough to not damage the recovery economy and/or require fed to raise interest rates (which will slow recovery).

Our monetary policy during this period guarentees it. What the Fed can do to prevent out of control inflation will be a question mark. A decent amount of cash injection was done into institutions that aren't controlled by the federal reserve with the other central bankers and will require coordination to correct it.

There are good signs in that report, there are bad signs in that report.

I'm nervous about celebrating when a third of the GDP growth can be attributed to a program designed to push demand forward and there is a large increase in government spending which is unsustainable.
Hopefully Keynes is right and the government can spark demand in the private sector.

The Fed will likely need to apply amazing pressure to constrain inflation.

This will be very unpopular with both business and the consumer. It will also be unpopular with the govt (due to re-eleciton issues) so there will be a lot of political pressure.

If the Fed is unable/unwilling and not independent enough to use powerful leverage (like raising short term interest rates to 4%, 6%, 7%, or higher if needed) then we will have runaway inflation.

Can the fed do it? We will see.

They spread a half a trillion dollars around to the world central banks. Contracting that, may be a problem.

It really is a question of political will (Fed should be independent but we live in real world) and ability to withstand public pressure (people won't be happy if a new car loan for example is 9.7% when they have gotten use to loans have that rate).

The fed has the technical tools to force interest rates high enough to kill inflation.

However as one extreme example in 1981 the Fed briefly jacked fed funds rate to 19% to cripple inflation. It was the right move but not popular with business, consumer, or govt. It worked and broke the back of inflation and we say a nearly 2 decade period of controlled regular inflation in the 3%-4% range.

Can the fed do it today? Well that is THE question isn't it.

and accept the consequences than I think Bernake does or Greenspan did.

Probably why I'm not that happy about his reappointment.

We shall see though.

We are probably not bottomed out on unemployment yet. I'd love for it to be true that we've hit the worst unemployment, but that could easily not come until next summer. I have been hoping it would bottom out in November, but it appears that won't come true.

The economy cannot be turned around in a hurry. There are some huge events looming in 2010 for commercial loan refinancings. I'm seeing some of the projects in trouble around here. There are real estate deals dead in the water all over. I'm talking about buildings under construction being stopped, because the anchor tenant has gone belly up or is staggering.

I feel bad for the unemployed and underemployed. For them, the economy is in a recession, regardless of what the economists term it. But this is a discussion board. You'd think the "well the recession can't be over if unemployment is 9%" crowd would understand that the economy returns over a long period and in steps.

I see a recovery in progress, where some of the efforts of the administration and congress have paid off. I expect some inflation. I LIKE some inflation. I expect some federal debt increases that are alarming. The ship of the economy ran aground a year ago. It bottomed out in March of this year. If we're lucky, that bottom holds and we survive one more scare before we see real increases in jobs, maybe next summer.

I know it sucks to bevunemployed and feel for all who are. I wish the administration was doing more about jobs. I would have been fine with a modern day WPA to provide jobs. Put people to work doing things in the community that need doing. Pay them.

In the fourth quarter when cash for clunkers is out. Without Cash for Clunkers this a 2% growth and even extending that program will run into diminishing returns...just like the home tax credit.

Without significant government spending this is negative growth.

There should be an increase in the business equipment and software with Windows 7.

There will also probably be a retail unemployment bomb that will hit in January/February depending on Christmas sales. I expect to see more retailers either fold or close stores in underperforming areas.

Stores that are in trouble are holding on to pray for a Christmas miracle.

Remember Circut City went down in January. There was a reason for that.

Sometimes a big log requires a lot of rich lighter kindling to get started burning good, and getting this economy restarted reminds me of that. The fire in the economy went out entirely. I don't know if you ever had to use a fireplace for heat, but nothing is worse in the winter than letting the fire in the fireplace die. Early morning, and there's nothing but gray ash and the ends of the log, little pyramid pieces of charred wood, laying at either end. You have to start the fire from scratch. That means rich lighter. That means small pieces for kindling. That means maybe adding some odd pieces of lumber. Anything to get the fire going strong enough to burn a big log again.

This economy's fire went out. It was dead cold. We had to restart it from scratch. It's a long, long turnaround, but I'm convinced it is in a turnaround.

Here is the deal.

For 30 years Financial Services increasingly ruled the economy. We are coming to an end of that era because, Financial Services produce no wealth. It is a symbiotic relationship which has turned parasitic. When an event like that occurs in an economy this sort of thing happens.

We will see what is done next to turn that relationship back to a symbiotic one.

If the parasite isn't controlled we are simply stuck where we are right now.

You see, the log is the economy. And the kindling, well that's the ....

But seriously, I don't agree with your view that "We are coming to an end of that era because, Financial Services produce no wealth."

We will puke up all the bad paper over a period of years. People will eventually let go of real estate deals that will go under. Out of the ashes will arise a true long term recovery. And the financial services sector will again serve the economy. They ALWAYS go overboard with something when they're in a boom. They can never accept that it can't go on forever, so as the economy starts a downturn, they start looking for ways to beat the reality that it's not as good as it was. These gimmicks that arise in Wall street vary from generation to generation, but they always involve large packages of securities that are usually real estate based and are sold to investors who think "what could possibly go wrong?"

I don't know if this patch job is going to hold. I think there's a 30% chance the whole thing blows up again the first quarter of 2010, and we see a precipitous drop in the DOW and other indices.

of corporate profits is not sustainable. The economy really doesn't need all the Financial Advisors and firms that it has in them right now.

I hope as the big boys fail...which they will I hope they return to the enviroment we had when I was younger...where there really were no national banks.

It's analogous to the situation with health care.

They're not addressing the core problem: UNREGULATED HEALTH CARE has resulted in run away costs that are based upon one rule: maximize profit. Until we make health care 12%, not 16%, of our economy, health care charges will wreck our personal and government budgets.

Likewise, our financial system has been largely unregulated in key areas, with catastrophic results. It requires government regulation to limit credit card interest and fees, to stop predatory loans, to squeeze out the speculation in bundles of paper. These people have proved they aren't up to the job and they're not trustworthy.

If it was profitable and legal for a corporation to sell six year olds to pedophiles there would be a corporate entity set up for that very purpose.

The reason I know this, is there is a black market that does this.

I find it amusing that the Christians in the country get their panties all in a bunch over drugs, gay people, abortions and taxes, however fail to get upset with usury which is one of the most talked about subjects of the bible.

These free market idiots fail to realize the market has no morals.

In that new conservative Bible, they'll insert this clause: "but in no way is this to interfere with our right to insist that such credit card debt not be dischargeable in bankruptcy."

Joel Osteen preaches a prosperity gospel which is the exact opposite of what Jesus preached.

Haggard preaches a Doomsday Gospel that focuses on Israel needing to be protected at all costs to ensure it is there for God (you think that God could take care of things like that but he needs Haggard)

Falwell and Roberts preach a gospel focused on personal morality rather than spiratual morality.

The entire reason they want to write a new translation is the Bible Study movement might be backfiring and people are asking questions on what they are reading in it.

...... is .... well ..... stupid.

we all know you see yourself as the second most brilliant person on DU. That's a given. The person who sees herself as the first most brilliant person has yet to weigh into this thread.

See, here's the thing ...... GDP growth is a good thing. It gets the stock market going. It raises confidence. It is also a measure of a key economic structure and yes, it matters a lot and yes, it is necessary for other things to happen and yes it is a leading indicator. All true.

But until people have jobs, the recess .... er .... Depression is not "over".

That may be technically imperfect, as you will no doubt tell me. But it IS what people feel. And it IS the economic indicator that matters most.

So yeah ..... you wave those pom poms and call everyone stupid.

I'm waiting until unemployment is below 6% and the people in economically devastated cities like Detroit can again have hope for THEIR futures. THAT will be the end of the Depression. And that ain't no bump up in GDP reported by some egghead in the stock market report on their nightly nooz.

There is a single definition for recession just as there is a single definition on when a person becomes a person, or what makes a person "dead", or when someone is bankrupt, or when someone is legally a MD (Medical Doctor).

Soeciety exists as a result of definitions and standards.

The recession is a technical definition. A recession is 2+ consecutive qtrs of negative GDP growth. Period. It is possible to have a recession with low unemployment. It is also possible to have high unemployment when not in a recession. The recession is over. Does this mean there is no problems? No. Does this mean people aren't suffering? No.

The recession is over and the recession ending eliminates the possibility of a depression.

Yes, you're correct, technically. I knew that before I posted what I did.

And I am not saying the bump up in GDP is a bad thing.

What I AM saying that it is not a good idea to tell the unemployed that the Depression is over and they just need to have hope.

Oh .... and how 'bout that market, huh?

Rah rah rah ......

Just like a fetus doesn't have human rights. Just like being poor doesn't give you Bankruptcy protection. Just like really really really believing you are good at medicine doesn't make you a Doctor.

A depression is defined by negative GDP growth of 10% or worse. You could have 0.00% unemployment and be in a depression (certainly possible in a centrally planned economy like Soviet Union).

Tell it to the National Bureau of Economic Research

The NBER does not define a recession in terms of two consecutive quarters of decline in real GDP. Rather, a recession is a significant decline in economic activity spread across the economy, lasting more than a few months, normally visible in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales

http://www.nber.org/cycles.html

The real question is whether the definition has any particular utility or meaning to regular persons. :hi:

Unemployment has NEVER in the history of recorded economics peaked BEFORE GDP turned positive.
Not single time in this country or any country.

So if you want unemployment to go down the first step is positive GDP. Kinda like crawling before walking.

Also since peak unemployment tends to lag GDP turning positive by 6-9 months I would think most people would prefer GDP turning positive sooner rather than later.

Right?

The former is fine. We all do that.

But if it is the latter .......

I said such people are IGNORANT. As in "you're ignorant of the meaning of the word 'ignorant' and think it means 'stupid'."


However, I'm not going to argue that you aren't stupid, as I have no evidence to suggest such a statement is true.

Geithner’s Fed Made AIG Pay Banks to the Max

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6874739&mesg_id=6874739

:hi:

I'm not happy about the administration's handling of TARP money or the stimulus package. I'm not happy about their lack of oversight on Wall Street or the banks they've bailed out. I'm not happy that they let AIG use our money to pay banks to the max. In my view, the big banks should have been allowed to fail, and the dozens of men most responsible for the scandalous use of questionable banking practices should have been held criminally and civilly responsible.

and bad for Wall Street. As it stands, it was a monstrous rip off of taxpayers (and their children, since this was all done on borrowed money,) but it's hard to argue that the infusion of trillions of dollars of taxpayer cash to Wall Street hasn't help boost GDP.

So...

I'm not sure how to reconcile your two arguments. Especially if we're sticking to strict definitions.

What's to be reconciled?

I like some of the things the Obama has tried to do or done. I like the general direction of the economy. I think we're slugging our way out of a recession and into recovery, but I think we're a long, long way from 6% unemployment again.

I also think Geinther and that whole crowd are untrustworthy Wall Street goons who aren't really serving the public good, but to Obama it's like having garbage to be hauled in Jersey. He has to deal with those who specialize in garbage removal in that area, whoever they are.

vs.



These are the two arguments that are hard to reconcile, unless you deny a causal connection between the two (but c'mon...) :hi:

You have a bizarre way of connecting things that are not connected.

If you want to talk to me about something substantive, please direct yourself to that. I'm not interested in carrying on a conversation about your inability to understand that I don't think like you do.

:eyes:

I have never said "the TARP is not connected to the GDP growth." This is your problem. You make things up from nothing more than your inability to read a post and understand it.

Like I've said, you lack the ability to understand simple sentences, and no amount of my trying to explain it will help.


nnhn

Or you could just engage in a bit of namecalling then slink off...

:shrug:

You can't be this inept at reading and understanding what you read.

I can only conclude your continuing comments are not made in good faith. No one here is as clueless as you're pretending to be. You can find another person for your childish games.

In response to a request for you to discuss the tension between your two quotes (one regarding GDP growth, the other regarding TARP, Stimulus.)

Again, namecalling is almost always the last arrow in one's rhetorical quiver. :hi:

I have said numerous times that the TARP and Stimulus packages have helped the recovery. I've also said that I don't care for the way the administration has handled the TARP and Stimulus funds. I've also said it's good to have GDP growth.

Those are not statements that require any reconcilation. I realize you THINK they do, but they don't.

Or they are the cause of the present (perhaps short lived) growth. Your analysis is incomplete if it disregards basic context (no matter how many times you claim factual context "irrelevant" to whatever point you'd like to make.)

Your entire premise is false, and you know it.

:hi:

Initial look of cheerleading you understand that there are deeper concearns.

The poster is just a horray for good news type of person. If challenged nicely Texas will provide a more balanced opinion.

Just like when I'm pressed you get more optimistic opinions on certain things.

Which is why the exchange in the above posts will go nowhere.

We started off fighting but once we actually started to talk to each other, we agreed about a surprising number of things.

Those above screaming "IT'S THE DEFINITION!" are buffoons.

The question is not whether a recovery for Wall Street (on the back of TRILLIONS of taxpayer dollars, let's not forget!) is the self-serving "definition of the end of a recession"; it's whether that definition has any meaning or resonance for the rest of us.

So...

I don't care if your baby's hungry--WE'RE OUT OF A RECESSION! is a mind-numinbingly stupid argument, but

Corporations must make obscene profits before the poor can eat, while also a stupid argument, at least has the potential of going in a positive direction.

That simple.

Never in any economy in any country since we began recording this stuff has a country peaked unemployment without GDP turning positive.
So if you want unemployment to peak someday it needs to start with GDP turning positive.

I think we understand the "necessary" part, but again, the real argument lies in the "sufficient" part...

GDP growth does not guarantee job gains however GDP declines do guarantee job losses.

The good news is despite the meme that US doesn't make anything we are the 3rd largest exporter in the world and 1st largest manufacturing base.

Many other economies are recovering earlier and sharper so US job growth may be export led. Especially is dollar remains weak. US goods are cheaper and rapidly rising foreign economies will have higher desire to import rather than constrain economic growth.

Most US exports are non-consumption. They are industrial products (capital expenditures) that are required in an economic expansion.

The final verdict is still out. The economic could falter and we go into a double dip recession however if dollars remains low and foreign economies are growing I think that is unlikely.

I have yet to see see anyone say GDP growth is bad thing. The argument I have been seeing is that it is a technical milestone and signals some hope. The crowing about the "Recession is Over" is what is wrong headed. Maybe technically true, but insensitive in the extreme to crow about.

What you (or I or anyone else) want is irrelevant to whether we are in a recession or not. Exactly HOW is that wrong?

I notice of course you truncated the quote to leave off the "to the end of a recession". If you really thought I was wrong why lie about what I said?

The significance of given set of facts is worth arguing about. The label you might put on it is not.

Whether people desire any number of positive things does not influence a recession ending. I just don't see why that is even debatable.

Here, I still don't see the point in an argument regarding semantics on what is a political message board.

Here is the argument: your definition of "recovery" notwithstanding, the economy sucks. :hi:

.... an entire paragraph.

nt

:hi:

Personal incomes continue to fall. Median household income has been stagnant for almost 9 years now. Inflation has increased as the prices of goods an services has risen. Essentially we have gotten poorer since 2000.

GDP growth has not benefited average Americans one bit. It has only benefited the top 1%.

Our economy is a joke as we continue to shed hundreds of thousands of jobs a month.

The coverage of how many jobs a are lost each month and how many more homes are boarded up next to the small businessess boarded up . And then they talk about people starting new businessess with what . Add to this the healthcare as if this will be up and running in a few weeks when n o one really ever mentions it might be 4 to 5 years or even if it will work.

and it (like every other repulsive libertarian/republican theory) has been a complete failure.
what are we supposed to do? throw a fuckin party the recession is over?
"the economy" still sucks for most humans, regardless of the GDP.

And they have sold our umbrellas to China and India for 5¢ on the Dollar.

And then they tell us to suck it up.

the recession is over, isnt capitalism great ! (sarcasm)

We have a large contingent of folks here that would love to see the entire US devolve into a broken and destitute third world country, just so they would have the satisfaction of dancing atop the rubble and singing the "I told you so" song.

:eyes:

I'll have to check Monster again to see if there are jobs now...nope job market still sucks.

I know lagging indicator. Here is the deal I'll celebrate when you can't back out Government stimulus spending out of GDP.

Here is some "SOUP" for you and some "BREAD," too. Enjoy!

Pump tons of dough into the financial sector, count the dough, and declare it as a signal that happy days are here again.

It's from the P.T. Barnum School of High Finance. Guess who the suckers are who are paying the banks?