5 ms·

Can we put to bed this belief that the Biden administration is simply gaslighting us when they push back against the utility of the "2 consecutive quarters of n

Can we put to bed this belief that the Biden administration is simply gaslighting us when they push back against the utility of the "2 consecutive quarters of negative growth" benchmark for our current economic environment? Seems fairly obvious that we should be questioning how useful that metric is right now.

thesis 4y ago
So you’re advocating that negative gdp growth is the same as positive gdp growth? It’s seems quite advantageous to suddenly change the definition when it slaps you in the face.
- bandyaboot 4y ago
  > So you’re advocating that negative gdp growth is the same as positive gdp growth? I can only assume you must have responded to the wrong comment.
- orwin 4y ago
  One interesting fact is that while GDP/Capita decline, median GDP/Capita doesn't. Maybe our indicator should be median rather than average, if we are really worried about the middle class.
xbar 4y ago
We should question that metric. Also, a little gaslighting. What I mean: if an administration doesn't like a given metric, it should get its replacement metric identified and publicized in advance. It sure looks a lot like gaslighting when the world has an agreed upon metric and you say "just ignore that; look over here."
- bandyaboot 4y ago
  > What I mean: if an administration doesn't like a given metric, it should get its replacement metric identified and publicized in advance. That's assuming that they had a previously existing problem with the metric. But why would they, it's always been a fairly reliable rubber stamp. Economic indicators give consistent bad news for an extended period of time, then months later 2 quarters of GDP numbers have been released and the metric says "yep, that was/this is a recession". But the metric now kind of falls on its face in this strange situation of quite a lot of bad economic indicators paired with a strong jobs market. If we want to rigidly hold to the 2 quarters metric, then we're going to have to accept that "recession" means nothing larger about the economy than "2 consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth". It just becomes a short way of saying simply that.
- shapefrog 4y ago
  > What I mean: if an administration doesn't like a given metric, it should get its replacement metric identified and publicized in advance. The US definition of a recession was identified and publicized a very long time ago. The National Bureau of Economic Research has been putting dates on downturns since 1929 before there was such a thing as gross domestic product.
- PuppyTailWags 4y ago
  My understanding is that the world has two different agreed upon metrics. We have one definition that was a effectively a rule of thumb for the uneducated, unwashed masses. Then we have one that actual experts use when investigating actual policy that would affect those masses.
  - bcassedy 4y ago
    This is correct. I believe some other countries do use this rule of thumb for their official purposes, but the US never has.
SuoDuanDao 4y ago
There are less silly ways to push back against the utility of established terminology. I enjoy Sean O'Malley as a combat athlete, but his insistence that he has an unblemished record is, at best, an amusing quirk of his public persona. Nobody but him takes that claim seriously, and I'd respect him more if I learned he doesn't either. What is happening now looks like a reversal of the trend that saw a growing average GDP per Capita coupled with a shrinking median GDP per Capita. The economy is contacting, but the man on the street is seeing a bigger piece of it. Most would agree that's on balance good thing. But calling it not a recession avoids the awkward conversation of how we hid the opposite trend with an over reliance on GDP size.
- bandyaboot 4y ago
  No disagreement here. Certainly if I were a political advisor in the room where people were suggesting getting in the weeds with the press about the definition of a recession, I would have set my hair on fire. Whether there are valid points to be made or not, they're losing politically the moment the conversation begins.
spaceman_2020 4y ago
Personally, I disregard any economic data from the last two years. Growth was so uneven from month to month because of lockdowns and covid waves that there’s no consistency at all. I compare to 2019 numbers. Everything else is just noise honestly.

thesis 4y ago

So you’re advocating that negative gdp growth is the same as positive gdp growth? It’s seems quite advantageous to suddenly change the definition when it slaps you in the face.

bandyaboot 4y ago
> So you’re advocating that negative gdp growth is the same as positive gdp growth? I can only assume you must have responded to the wrong comment.
orwin 4y ago
One interesting fact is that while GDP/Capita decline, median GDP/Capita doesn't. Maybe our indicator should be median rather than average, if we are really worried about the middle class.

xbar 4y ago

We should question that metric. Also, a little gaslighting. What I mean: if an administration doesn't like a given metric, it should get its replacement metric identified and publicized in advance. It sure looks a lot like gaslighting when the world has an agreed upon metric and you say "just ignore that; look over here."

bandyaboot 4y ago
> What I mean: if an administration doesn't like a given metric, it should get its replacement metric identified and publicized in advance. That's assuming that they had a previously existing problem with the metric. But why would they, it's always been a fairly reliable rubber stamp. Economic indicators give consistent bad news for an extended period of time, then months later 2 quarters of GDP numbers have been released and the metric says "yep, that was/this is a recession". But the metric now kind of falls on its face in this strange situation of quite a lot of bad economic indicators paired with a strong jobs market. If we want to rigidly hold to the 2 quarters metric, then we're going to have to accept that "recession" means nothing larger about the economy than "2 consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth". It just becomes a short way of saying simply that.
shapefrog 4y ago
> What I mean: if an administration doesn't like a given metric, it should get its replacement metric identified and publicized in advance. The US definition of a recession was identified and publicized a very long time ago. The National Bureau of Economic Research has been putting dates on downturns since 1929 before there was such a thing as gross domestic product.
PuppyTailWags 4y ago
My understanding is that the world has two different agreed upon metrics. We have one definition that was a effectively a rule of thumb for the uneducated, unwashed masses. Then we have one that actual experts use when investigating actual policy that would affect those masses.
- bcassedy 4y ago
  This is correct. I believe some other countries do use this rule of thumb for their official purposes, but the US never has.

SuoDuanDao 4y ago

There are less silly ways to push back against the utility of established terminology. I enjoy Sean O'Malley as a combat athlete, but his insistence that he has an unblemished record is, at best, an amusing quirk of his public persona. Nobody but him takes that claim seriously, and I'd respect him more if I learned he doesn't either. What is happening now looks like a reversal of the trend that saw a growing average GDP per Capita coupled with a shrinking median GDP per Capita. The economy is contacting, but the man on the street is seeing a bigger piece of it. Most would agree that's on balance good thing. But calling it not a recession avoids the awkward conversation of how we hid the opposite trend with an over reliance on GDP size.

bandyaboot 4y ago
No disagreement here. Certainly if I were a political advisor in the room where people were suggesting getting in the weeds with the press about the definition of a recession, I would have set my hair on fire. Whether there are valid points to be made or not, they're losing politically the moment the conversation begins.

spaceman_2020 4y ago

Personally, I disregard any economic data from the last two years. Growth was so uneven from month to month because of lockdowns and covid waves that there’s no consistency at all. I compare to 2019 numbers. Everything else is just noise honestly.