4 ms·

The fact the BMI is determined by a "simple" formula doesn't change the merit of the original statement. If an insurance company uses BMI to determine your phy

The fact the BMI is determined by a "simple" formula doesn't change the merit of the original statement. If an insurance company uses BMI to determine your physical health, then yes, it is case closed. It doesn't matter how unrealistic it is, it doesn't matter what any research has shown. It is based on a strict definition set by the insurance company that defined how it is calculated. If a different company wants to use a different approach, then they're free to do so, no one is forced to use BMI to calculate their health. However, if we want to determine if a country is in recession by comparing to a specific country's definition of recession, which is what the OP just did, then the case is closed (by that definition). > Just like your physical health, economic health should really be measured holistically across different aspects. Unfortunately, the world and people that live in it doesn't work like this. A lot of people like simple calculations even if it is wrong, outdated or not realistic. It's easier for people to say recession is determined by two quarters of two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth. A few countries use this as mentioned by the OP. It is case closed by this specific _strict definition_ of what a recession is.

bumby 4y ago
>It doesn't matter how unrealistic it is From a rules-lawyering perspective, this is true. But I believe the true intent of determining if a country is in a recession or not is not about semantic gamesmanship, but about how accurately we can represent reality because the fidelity of that representation is what drives policy. That fidelity is what matters in terms of "correctness". If I say the official definition changes to whether or not a groundhog sees his shadow on a particular day, that's probably not the best way to represent economic health as a means of crafting policy even if it's "official" by fiat. Let's not miss the forest for the trees. Policy is what matters because it's what ultimately impacts peoples lives.

bumby 4y ago

>It doesn't matter how unrealistic it is From a rules-lawyering perspective, this is true. But I believe the true intent of determining if a country is in a recession or not is not about semantic gamesmanship, but about how accurately we can represent reality because the fidelity of that representation is what drives policy. That fidelity is what matters in terms of "correctness". If I say the official definition changes to whether or not a groundhog sees his shadow on a particular day, that's probably not the best way to represent economic health as a means of crafting policy even if it's "official" by fiat. Let's not miss the forest for the trees. Policy is what matters because it's what ultimately impacts peoples lives.