5 ms·

I'm not sure that locking the place down for a little while per se will cause a recession. Numbers will take a hit for a while because people are prevented from

I'm not sure that locking the place down for a little while per se will cause a recession. Numbers will take a hit for a while because people are prevented from spending and working, but the normal course of action after a snow day or staying home with the flu is to get up and go back to work and resume spending money. This is the path China could be on for its economy overall, if not for its economic interdependence with the U.S., which is handling things differently. The U.S. is steering itself toward a year-or-more-long issue that has people fearfully avoiding stores, deliveries, workplaces, and the consequences of this will ricochet. A recession happens when people and businesses restrict spending and hiring, and that's exactly what this scenario causes in a chronic way. But who knows? Maybe Gilead's experimental antiviral will be approved within a month or two, and maybe that will be enough to make people not fearful and regain economic confidence.

jsight 7y ago
A common definition of recession is a decline in GDP lasting for 2 consecutive quarters. It seems likely for this to cause a decline in GDP in Q1 and Q1 at a minimum, so a recession seems inevitable. I do think there will be a point when going out becomes less of a concern and there will be a lot of pent up demand for travel. The recovery will likely be sharp (V-shaped).
- odyssey7 7y ago
  I was speaking to the strategies that could be employed vs what we’re actually doing, and I am concerned that what we’re doing will cause a recession. To relate the strategy to that formal definition of a recession, if everybody stayed home for a month this quarter, we might lose 1/3 of the quarter’s GDP. But if that break is structured so that it’s expected and we resume normal activity afterward, then in the next quarter we would see the GDP “grow“ a ton, if only back to normal because people are working and spending for the full three months, and we would cleanly avoid this formal definition for a recession.
  - jsight 7y ago
    Oh, I understand what you are saying now. I think the issue is that government officials aren't comfortable defining an endpoint right now. There are a lot of unknowns as to what could stop the spread at this point.
stjohnswarts 7y ago
no vaccine will be approved at the earliest 6 months from now. By then the worst will be over. Most vaccines take 1+ years

jsight 7y ago

A common definition of recession is a decline in GDP lasting for 2 consecutive quarters. It seems likely for this to cause a decline in GDP in Q1 and Q1 at a minimum, so a recession seems inevitable. I do think there will be a point when going out becomes less of a concern and there will be a lot of pent up demand for travel. The recovery will likely be sharp (V-shaped).

odyssey7 7y ago
I was speaking to the strategies that could be employed vs what we’re actually doing, and I am concerned that what we’re doing will cause a recession. To relate the strategy to that formal definition of a recession, if everybody stayed home for a month this quarter, we might lose 1/3 of the quarter’s GDP. But if that break is structured so that it’s expected and we resume normal activity afterward, then in the next quarter we would see the GDP “grow“ a ton, if only back to normal because people are working and spending for the full three months, and we would cleanly avoid this formal definition for a recession.
- jsight 7y ago
  Oh, I understand what you are saying now. I think the issue is that government officials aren't comfortable defining an endpoint right now. There are a lot of unknowns as to what could stop the spread at this point.

stjohnswarts 7y ago

no vaccine will be approved at the earliest 6 months from now. By then the worst will be over. Most vaccines take 1+ years