26 ms·

According to the White House, it is not [1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/written-materials/2022/07/21/how-do-economists-determine-whether-the-economy-is-in-a

According to the White House, it is not [1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/written-materials/2022/07/21/how-do-economists-determine-whether-the-economy-is-in-a-recession/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/written-materials/2022/07/21/...

BuyMyBitcoins 4y ago
Kind of amazing how this administration isn’t getting the kind of ridicule that would be expected if the previous administration tried to deny a recession was happening according to the objective definition by including a subjective qualifier. Is this not the same thing as ‘alternate facts’?
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
  What conclusion are you trying to draw from this subjective view?
  - pgrote 4y ago
    That the definition of a recession has always been 2 quarters of negative GDP. The administration now believes there is nuance in the numbers, so what was the accepted definition in the past is no longer. The fact the media on whole has decided it's ok to redefine a commonly accepted definition when the administration promotes it lends itself to the media being a mouthpiece for the administration. I am willing to understand nuance and a changing definition, as I am sure there are parts of the economy people are learning to deal with. Gig workers, workers headed back from retirement and more. This doesn't even touch on the self fulfilling prophecy of hearing that the country is in a recession. I am less willing to accept a change in a short timeframe and right before numbers are released.
    - chrisco255 4y ago
      > This doesn't even touch on the self fulfilling prophecy of hearing that the country is in a recession. That's not how recessions work. There is always people predicting a recession and always people predicting a turnaround or growth. It's quite simple, however, to engineer a recession when you raise interest rates for such a heavily indebted economy.
      - pgrote 4y ago
        >That's not how recessions work. I am unsure the point you are making. My point was related to mindset and I should have clarified. If a group of people, normal non economic expert citizens, believe a recession is here they change their behavior. The media plays a part in amplifying it. At that point it doesn't matter what is happening at a macro economic level. I am for introducing nuance to the judgement of a recession or not. I am not for doing it right before numbers are released the admin saying, "Well, there is nuance in the determination" before the numbers are released. At best all you are doing is introducing confusion to the non economic expert citizens and at worst you are attempting to gaslight people. I hope that helps explain my thoughts.
    - NovemberWhiskey 4y ago
      >That the definition of a recession has always been 2 quarters of negative GDP. Well, if you want to be specific, the NBER (which calls the game on what is a recession or not) defines it as "a significant decline in economic activity that is spread across the economy and that lasts more than a few months." The "two quarters of declining real GDP" (GDP increased by 7.8% in nominal terms) is the pop-economics yardstick. Are you aware we had a recession in 2001? And yet that managed to happen without having two consecutive quarters of negative GDP.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - kevstev 4y ago
      I mean I hear you on "changing the definition" from the commonly accepted two quarters of declining GDP numbers- though that was never actually official, you are mistaken about that- the NBER is the "official" source and they declare it based on a range of factors that there is some subjectiveness to- its not a direct formula. However, wouldn't you agree there is nuance here? In Q4, GDP rose 6.9%, a number so big that we haven't seen that in decades- it appears around the early 1980s was the last time we saw those kinds of numbers. There has been a lot of whipsaw effects as we get out of covid- supply chains are all over the place, companies placing orders to get goods in to avoid snarls, only to now find that demand for goods, which boomed during the pandemic, has now eased as people have reverted to spending on going out and traveling, etc... There seems to be a lot of mismatch in supply and demand again. The unemployment rate is at 3.6%- an astonishingly low number- these lows were last seen in the 1960s and 1970s. On the flipside, inflation is high, gas prices are high and that hurts a lot of people- I live in a city, so this is mostly irrelevant and driven by forces out of anyone in the US govt's control. There is evidence of some rockier times ahead, but when I think "recession" I think of a lot more pain than what we are currently experiencing.
  - BuyMyBitcoins 4y ago
    The news media is not nearly as objective as they claim to be. And, they exercise a considerable amount of discretion when it comes to either amplifying a potential controversy or downplaying it.
- jeffbee 4y ago
  - BuyMyBitcoins 4y ago
    >”You beclown yourself by believing there is or has ever been an objective definition. There is not and has never been.” Okay, consider myself beclowned then. So how did economists define all of the previous recessions on record? I know that ‘a recession’ is not a scientific measurement, it is a conventional definition. But don’t you find it odd that the administration wants to jettison the conventional definition when it applies to the economy under their leadership? Right before the midterms, no less?
  - collegeburner 4y ago
    a lot of economists use 2 consecutive quarters negative bc 1. the business cycle committee is slow af 2. they only cover the U.S. so we gotta have something a bit consistent across countries
  - bumby 4y ago
    Their procedure is subjective, but there is still a standardized measure of convenience, no? Just like there is an "official kilogram". We can say, "That's an objective measurement of weight on Earth" but it's not. It's the measurement of the standard kilogram in France. And that "objective" measure can change [1]. It doesn't mean there isn't a consensus on what a kilogram is. Yellen was on Meet the Press last week explaining there is a difference between the "official" measure of a recession and the "two quarters of negative growth" heuristic. That's not to say that politicians can't, or won't, play wordsmith games. [1]https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070921110735.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070921110735.h...
    - jeffbee 4y ago
      The kilogram is a quite poor analogy. The GDP is not an objective indicator of recession for the exact reasons you see around you right now. Contraction of economic activity caused by supply bottlenecks doesn’t fit the pattern of recession. The labor situation is still white hot, prices are going up etc.
- willcipriano 4y ago
  Soon people will start disappearing from photos, back to the future style.
  - mokanfar 4y ago
    Or Stalin Style.
- bushbaba 4y ago
  It’s because the media leans democrat. But make no mistake Fox News, BBC, and other moderate or right leaning news sources will call this a recession. The news has for the most part has not called out Biden’s many missteps. Not even John Oliver is making fun of it.
  - throwawaycuriou 4y ago
    Oliver's most recent ditty did roast Biden remarking 'I can taste it. I think he could've done more to roast previous administration policies.
  - Der_Einzige 4y ago
    Oh man if you think the BBC is even "moderate" than I have a bridge to sell you.
    - systemvoltage 4y ago
      Yes, BBC isn't moderate just like NPR isn't moderate anymore. May be in the 20th century, BBC and NPR were neutral. But, that's clearly and indisputedly not true anymore. They're all left leaning.
- collegeburner 4y ago
  i don't much like the former guy but there's def a slant. i'm pretty sure joe is this close sharpieing in "no" in front of "recession" on his slides. up until literally 2 weeks ago the media was on about the "biden boom" (lmao)
- refurb 4y ago
  That’s because it’s not politically convenient to hold to that definition. When the other party is in the Whitehouse it will be though. “It’s not about what’s true, it’s what you can get people to believe.”
- boredumb 4y ago
  It's fairly obvious there are political bias in american media and always has been. If your party is hostile to increasing federal government or regulatory capture you will be under a microscope and even sacrifice some credibility to attack you, otherwise you can bumble around, redefine common terms, deflect and mislead and have the entirety of relevant and 'trusted' media sources run cover for you indefinitely.
  - weberer 4y ago
    >and always has been Even just 15 years ago it was nowhere this overt or coordinated. The turning point seems to be shortly after JournoList and CabalList started when different independent media organizations began to collude to push a unified "narrative" rather than the truth.
  - Workaccount2 4y ago
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - hedora 4y ago
      In fairness, the "free from government" party has direct ties to foreign powers that are openly trying to drive us to a civil war. Taking away bodily autonomy is just a minor skirmish; and the means justify the ends, after all. Wait till next year when the sodomy and birth control laws start to pass, along with the plans to erect border checkpoints within the US to prevent people from entering and leaving certain states. Those are enabled by existing supreme court rulings. They've already taken up a case for next year that will allow state legislatures (that are already controlled via gerrymandering, and often elected by a minority) to just ignore vote tallies and appoint whoever they want. I'm curious to see who the military sides with during the inevitable 2024 coup. Last time, they made it clear they would remove Trump by force if needed. Presumably they're not becoming more loyal to him, given that he's out of office, but it will be dicey when they have to choose between ending democracy in the US or overriding the supreme court and also the house or senate.
- chiefalchemist 4y ago
  > Kind of anazing... Get used to it. We're back to the status quo (of incompetent media). In fact, it was the same for the previous admin, just in a different way. The System doesn't like outsiders. If you haven't paid your dues, sucked up, kissed the ring, etc. then you're marginalized. Put another way, how would it look if someone with no experience was decently effective? Say about as effective as the current highly experienced (politician) that's POTUS? I'm no fan of Don T, but given humam nature and The System, he was doomed to "fail" no matter what. As in, perception is reality (and most people now have a bias that isn't going to change).
  - chiefalchemist 4y ago
    It's worth adding - especially for the down voters - that prior to leaving The Daily Show, Jon Stewart was the most trusted source for news for a fair percentage of the population. The channel for TDS was on...Comedy Central. Believing in the mainstream media is the adult equivalent of believing in Santa Claus.
- jddddd 4y ago
  - jddddd 4y ago
    - pgrote 4y ago
      >don't understand what NBER is. There is a consideration that NBER isn't the issue. yes you are correct, they make a determination. I think the difference this time is that you have what was commonly accepted among normal people that 2 quarters negative meant recession. This time there is pushback against it. I think the hang up is more political than technical. When the opposing party controls the white house there wouldn't be broad support for "let's wait and let NBER make a determination." Hope that helps somewhat.
- everdrive 4y ago
  I believe they are getting quite a bit of ridicule for it.
  - shusaku 4y ago
    The announcement was like an hour ago and we’re already trying to measure the amount of ridicule?
- MattGaiser 4y ago
  But it is not the objective definition: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/jul/27/instagram-posts/no-white-house-didnt-change-definition-recession/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/jul/27/instagram-...
- jasonlotito 4y ago
  No. They are basing it off facts. The NBER is the one who defines a recessions. They haven't done so (that I'm aware of) as of right now. It might be that it will eventually be the case, but the arbitrator of this hasn't ruled on it. Calling it a recession officially now would be the alternate fact. Basically, it's like how someone can be guilty of something, but you still have to say "alleged" before referencing the crime. Yes, you might have a million witnesses, but they aren't guilty until they are guilty. And I'd much rather have a government that abides by these rules than not. Offhanded remarks based on willful disregard to order should not be encouraged.
  - junofan 4y ago
    Come on. The NBER is not a government organization. This sophistry is just that.
- actusual 4y ago
  What do you mean they aren't being ridiculed? Biden's approval rating is literally worse than Trump's was -> https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/?ex_cid=rrpromo https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/?...
newaccount2021 4y ago
If it were Trump in office, that article would been disembowelled all over Twitter
- roflyear 4y ago
  Well. His admin did have some astoundingly incompetent and insane people.
rufus_foreman 4y ago
According to many of Biden's economic advisers, it is. For example: "Of course economists have a technical definition of recession, which is two consecutive quarters of negative growth." -- The head of Biden's National Economic Council, in a past life, apparently. You can find many other examples in the past of his advisors defining a recession as two quarters of negative GDP. And you can find many examples in the past of the press defining a recession as two quarters of negative growth. "two negative quarters in a row is a standard indicator for an economic recession." -- Washington Post, fact checking Donald Trump What has changed?
- refurb 4y ago
  What has changed? The party in power.
joshuahedlund 4y ago
honest question: has there ever been two quarters of negative GDP with this much job growth?
- boredumb 4y ago
  Government forcing people out of their jobs and then allowing them to come back into the work force is not job growth in the sense of anything meaningful. So no it probably hasn't been seen before, but it's irrelevant, if I took your 10 dollars today and gave you back 8 dollars next week, your bank account isn't growing unless you only look at this weeks balance and choose to ignore the extremely recent past.
  - loeg 4y ago
    Employment is higher than it was before Covid and unemployment is down at around the same level. To put it in terms of your metaphor, the bank has given you back $10.10 or so for your $10.
    - s1artibartfast 4y ago
      Except it isn't actually higher. https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-labor-force-participation-rate.htm https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-lab...
      - loeg 4y ago
        You can quibble with the exact threshold, but it certainly isn’t 80% of pre-Covid employment: https://www.statista.com/statistics/269959/employment-in-the-united-states/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/269959/employment-in-the... https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PAYEMS https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PAYEMS
        s1artibartfast 4y ago
        Certainly not 80%, but by all metrics, both mine and yours, it is still below what it was before.

BuyMyBitcoins 4y ago

Kind of amazing how this administration isn’t getting the kind of ridicule that would be expected if the previous administration tried to deny a recession was happening according to the objective definition by including a subjective qualifier. Is this not the same thing as ‘alternate facts’?

2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
What conclusion are you trying to draw from this subjective view?
- pgrote 4y ago
  That the definition of a recession has always been 2 quarters of negative GDP. The administration now believes there is nuance in the numbers, so what was the accepted definition in the past is no longer. The fact the media on whole has decided it's ok to redefine a commonly accepted definition when the administration promotes it lends itself to the media being a mouthpiece for the administration. I am willing to understand nuance and a changing definition, as I am sure there are parts of the economy people are learning to deal with. Gig workers, workers headed back from retirement and more. This doesn't even touch on the self fulfilling prophecy of hearing that the country is in a recession. I am less willing to accept a change in a short timeframe and right before numbers are released.
  - chrisco255 4y ago
    > This doesn't even touch on the self fulfilling prophecy of hearing that the country is in a recession. That's not how recessions work. There is always people predicting a recession and always people predicting a turnaround or growth. It's quite simple, however, to engineer a recession when you raise interest rates for such a heavily indebted economy.
    - pgrote 4y ago
      >That's not how recessions work. I am unsure the point you are making. My point was related to mindset and I should have clarified. If a group of people, normal non economic expert citizens, believe a recession is here they change their behavior. The media plays a part in amplifying it. At that point it doesn't matter what is happening at a macro economic level. I am for introducing nuance to the judgement of a recession or not. I am not for doing it right before numbers are released the admin saying, "Well, there is nuance in the determination" before the numbers are released. At best all you are doing is introducing confusion to the non economic expert citizens and at worst you are attempting to gaslight people. I hope that helps explain my thoughts.
  - NovemberWhiskey 4y ago
    >That the definition of a recession has always been 2 quarters of negative GDP. Well, if you want to be specific, the NBER (which calls the game on what is a recession or not) defines it as "a significant decline in economic activity that is spread across the economy and that lasts more than a few months." The "two quarters of declining real GDP" (GDP increased by 7.8% in nominal terms) is the pop-economics yardstick. Are you aware we had a recession in 2001? And yet that managed to happen without having two consecutive quarters of negative GDP.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - kevstev 4y ago
    I mean I hear you on "changing the definition" from the commonly accepted two quarters of declining GDP numbers- though that was never actually official, you are mistaken about that- the NBER is the "official" source and they declare it based on a range of factors that there is some subjectiveness to- its not a direct formula. However, wouldn't you agree there is nuance here? In Q4, GDP rose 6.9%, a number so big that we haven't seen that in decades- it appears around the early 1980s was the last time we saw those kinds of numbers. There has been a lot of whipsaw effects as we get out of covid- supply chains are all over the place, companies placing orders to get goods in to avoid snarls, only to now find that demand for goods, which boomed during the pandemic, has now eased as people have reverted to spending on going out and traveling, etc... There seems to be a lot of mismatch in supply and demand again. The unemployment rate is at 3.6%- an astonishingly low number- these lows were last seen in the 1960s and 1970s. On the flipside, inflation is high, gas prices are high and that hurts a lot of people- I live in a city, so this is mostly irrelevant and driven by forces out of anyone in the US govt's control. There is evidence of some rockier times ahead, but when I think "recession" I think of a lot more pain than what we are currently experiencing.
- BuyMyBitcoins 4y ago
  The news media is not nearly as objective as they claim to be. And, they exercise a considerable amount of discretion when it comes to either amplifying a potential controversy or downplaying it.
jeffbee 4y ago
- BuyMyBitcoins 4y ago
  >”You beclown yourself by believing there is or has ever been an objective definition. There is not and has never been.” Okay, consider myself beclowned then. So how did economists define all of the previous recessions on record? I know that ‘a recession’ is not a scientific measurement, it is a conventional definition. But don’t you find it odd that the administration wants to jettison the conventional definition when it applies to the economy under their leadership? Right before the midterms, no less?
- collegeburner 4y ago
  a lot of economists use 2 consecutive quarters negative bc 1. the business cycle committee is slow af 2. they only cover the U.S. so we gotta have something a bit consistent across countries
- bumby 4y ago
  Their procedure is subjective, but there is still a standardized measure of convenience, no? Just like there is an "official kilogram". We can say, "That's an objective measurement of weight on Earth" but it's not. It's the measurement of the standard kilogram in France. And that "objective" measure can change [1]. It doesn't mean there isn't a consensus on what a kilogram is. Yellen was on Meet the Press last week explaining there is a difference between the "official" measure of a recession and the "two quarters of negative growth" heuristic. That's not to say that politicians can't, or won't, play wordsmith games. [1]https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070921110735.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070921110735.h...
  - jeffbee 4y ago
    The kilogram is a quite poor analogy. The GDP is not an objective indicator of recession for the exact reasons you see around you right now. Contraction of economic activity caused by supply bottlenecks doesn’t fit the pattern of recession. The labor situation is still white hot, prices are going up etc.
willcipriano 4y ago
Soon people will start disappearing from photos, back to the future style.
- mokanfar 4y ago
  Or Stalin Style.
bushbaba 4y ago
It’s because the media leans democrat. But make no mistake Fox News, BBC, and other moderate or right leaning news sources will call this a recession. The news has for the most part has not called out Biden’s many missteps. Not even John Oliver is making fun of it.
- throwawaycuriou 4y ago
  Oliver's most recent ditty did roast Biden remarking 'I can taste it. I think he could've done more to roast previous administration policies.
- Der_Einzige 4y ago
  Oh man if you think the BBC is even "moderate" than I have a bridge to sell you.
  - systemvoltage 4y ago
    Yes, BBC isn't moderate just like NPR isn't moderate anymore. May be in the 20th century, BBC and NPR were neutral. But, that's clearly and indisputedly not true anymore. They're all left leaning.
collegeburner 4y ago
i don't much like the former guy but there's def a slant. i'm pretty sure joe is this close sharpieing in "no" in front of "recession" on his slides. up until literally 2 weeks ago the media was on about the "biden boom" (lmao)
refurb 4y ago
That’s because it’s not politically convenient to hold to that definition. When the other party is in the Whitehouse it will be though. “It’s not about what’s true, it’s what you can get people to believe.”
boredumb 4y ago
It's fairly obvious there are political bias in american media and always has been. If your party is hostile to increasing federal government or regulatory capture you will be under a microscope and even sacrifice some credibility to attack you, otherwise you can bumble around, redefine common terms, deflect and mislead and have the entirety of relevant and 'trusted' media sources run cover for you indefinitely.
- weberer 4y ago
  >and always has been Even just 15 years ago it was nowhere this overt or coordinated. The turning point seems to be shortly after JournoList and CabalList started when different independent media organizations began to collude to push a unified "narrative" rather than the truth.
- Workaccount2 4y ago
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - hedora 4y ago
    In fairness, the "free from government" party has direct ties to foreign powers that are openly trying to drive us to a civil war. Taking away bodily autonomy is just a minor skirmish; and the means justify the ends, after all. Wait till next year when the sodomy and birth control laws start to pass, along with the plans to erect border checkpoints within the US to prevent people from entering and leaving certain states. Those are enabled by existing supreme court rulings. They've already taken up a case for next year that will allow state legislatures (that are already controlled via gerrymandering, and often elected by a minority) to just ignore vote tallies and appoint whoever they want. I'm curious to see who the military sides with during the inevitable 2024 coup. Last time, they made it clear they would remove Trump by force if needed. Presumably they're not becoming more loyal to him, given that he's out of office, but it will be dicey when they have to choose between ending democracy in the US or overriding the supreme court and also the house or senate.
chiefalchemist 4y ago
> Kind of anazing... Get used to it. We're back to the status quo (of incompetent media). In fact, it was the same for the previous admin, just in a different way. The System doesn't like outsiders. If you haven't paid your dues, sucked up, kissed the ring, etc. then you're marginalized. Put another way, how would it look if someone with no experience was decently effective? Say about as effective as the current highly experienced (politician) that's POTUS? I'm no fan of Don T, but given humam nature and The System, he was doomed to "fail" no matter what. As in, perception is reality (and most people now have a bias that isn't going to change).
- chiefalchemist 4y ago
  It's worth adding - especially for the down voters - that prior to leaving The Daily Show, Jon Stewart was the most trusted source for news for a fair percentage of the population. The channel for TDS was on...Comedy Central. Believing in the mainstream media is the adult equivalent of believing in Santa Claus.
jddddd 4y ago
- jddddd 4y ago
  - pgrote 4y ago
    >don't understand what NBER is. There is a consideration that NBER isn't the issue. yes you are correct, they make a determination. I think the difference this time is that you have what was commonly accepted among normal people that 2 quarters negative meant recession. This time there is pushback against it. I think the hang up is more political than technical. When the opposing party controls the white house there wouldn't be broad support for "let's wait and let NBER make a determination." Hope that helps somewhat.
everdrive 4y ago
I believe they are getting quite a bit of ridicule for it.
- shusaku 4y ago
  The announcement was like an hour ago and we’re already trying to measure the amount of ridicule?
MattGaiser 4y ago
But it is not the objective definition: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/jul/27/instagram-posts/no-white-house-didnt-change-definition-recession/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/jul/27/instagram-...
jasonlotito 4y ago
No. They are basing it off facts. The NBER is the one who defines a recessions. They haven't done so (that I'm aware of) as of right now. It might be that it will eventually be the case, but the arbitrator of this hasn't ruled on it. Calling it a recession officially now would be the alternate fact. Basically, it's like how someone can be guilty of something, but you still have to say "alleged" before referencing the crime. Yes, you might have a million witnesses, but they aren't guilty until they are guilty. And I'd much rather have a government that abides by these rules than not. Offhanded remarks based on willful disregard to order should not be encouraged.
- junofan 4y ago
  Come on. The NBER is not a government organization. This sophistry is just that.
actusual 4y ago
What do you mean they aren't being ridiculed? Biden's approval rating is literally worse than Trump's was -> https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/?ex_cid=rrpromo https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/?...

newaccount2021 4y ago

If it were Trump in office, that article would been disembowelled all over Twitter

roflyear 4y ago
Well. His admin did have some astoundingly incompetent and insane people.

rufus_foreman 4y ago

According to many of Biden's economic advisers, it is. For example: "Of course economists have a technical definition of recession, which is two consecutive quarters of negative growth." -- The head of Biden's National Economic Council, in a past life, apparently. You can find many other examples in the past of his advisors defining a recession as two quarters of negative GDP. And you can find many examples in the past of the press defining a recession as two quarters of negative growth. "two negative quarters in a row is a standard indicator for an economic recession." -- Washington Post, fact checking Donald Trump What has changed?

refurb 4y ago
What has changed? The party in power.

joshuahedlund 4y ago

honest question: has there ever been two quarters of negative GDP with this much job growth?

boredumb 4y ago
Government forcing people out of their jobs and then allowing them to come back into the work force is not job growth in the sense of anything meaningful. So no it probably hasn't been seen before, but it's irrelevant, if I took your 10 dollars today and gave you back 8 dollars next week, your bank account isn't growing unless you only look at this weeks balance and choose to ignore the extremely recent past.
- loeg 4y ago
  Employment is higher than it was before Covid and unemployment is down at around the same level. To put it in terms of your metaphor, the bank has given you back $10.10 or so for your $10.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    Except it isn't actually higher. https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-labor-force-participation-rate.htm https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-situation/civilian-lab...
    - loeg 4y ago
      You can quibble with the exact threshold, but it certainly isn’t 80% of pre-Covid employment: https://www.statista.com/statistics/269959/employment-in-the-united-states/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/269959/employment-in-the... https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PAYEMS https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PAYEMS
      - s1artibartfast 4y ago
        Certainly not 80%, but by all metrics, both mine and yours, it is still below what it was before.