2 ms·
Good point, thanks for the clarification. Worth noting that the role of arbiter of recessions for NBER only came into being in the 1960s, long after that incide
by yuan43 4y ago
Good point, thanks for the clarification. Worth noting that the role of arbiter of recessions for NBER only came into being in the 1960s, long after that incident. And 1947 marked the first year the US produced a quarterly GDP report.
This Twitter thread has details:
https://twitter.com/bencasselman/status/1552411779040419841 https://twitter.com/bencasselman/status/1552411779040419841
The comparison between an economy transitioning from war footing and one transitioning from pandemic footing might be relevant.
- dragonwriter 4y ago> Worth noting that the role of arbiter of recessions for NBER only came into being in the 1960s, long after that incident. So? The NBER business cycle dating work covers back into the 19th century, even if some of it was done retrospectively. If anything, the fact that it applied it's methodology this way to times when there could not possibly have been any policy impact to its decisions just further undermines the idea that exceptions to the 2-consecutive-down-quarter rule are about current political convenience. > And 1947 marked the first year the US produced a quarterly GDP report. NBER was doing income and product reports before the government did, the government actually directly was motivated by NBER’s prior work in starting to do them.