3 ms·
I mean, by default, any economic crisis is always going to be worse than/bigger than the previous, just due to growth. Am I wrong for thinking this way?
by ccffpphh 6y ago
I mean, by default, any economic crisis is always going to be worse than/bigger than the previous, just due to growth. Am I wrong for thinking this way?
- kd5bjo 6y agoThis sort of thing is usually measured in percentage lost from the previous peak, or some other relative measure that corrects for the overall growth over time.
- fock 6y agoand not accounting all the stuff we have accumulated, which (at some point) has/had a lifespan of multiple recessions. But hey, just picture these hungry, ragged children - some Covid deaths are just to be accepted with thie outlook.
- ccffpphh 6y agoI'm not even talking about econometrics. As our supply chains become more and more integrated globally, as the amount of services built on top of each other continue to grow, and as the global economic system continues to use, build, and develop these services, any significant disruption is going to be more catastrophic than the previous which didn't rely on as much integration as it currently does.
- nopriorarrests 6y agowell, yes you are? This is why people measure in percentages, as opposed to absolute numbers, such as dollars of GDP.
- eru 6y agoFrom the article: > That compares to a January projection of 3.3% expansion and would likely mark the deepest dive since the Great Depression. It would also dwarf the 0.1% contraction of 2009 amid the financial crisis. Growth would have an impact on the decline in absolute dollar values (inflation adjusted or not). But wouldn't have much of an impact on relative decline measured in percentage.