>Or yeah sure, call it "economic health". Economic health was my term to point out where people get wrapped around the semantic axle and miss what's actually i

>Or yeah sure, call it "economic health". Economic health was my term to point out where people get wrapped around the semantic axle and miss what's actually important. >This is treated as a technical term by economists, with an actual definition. To your point, NBER has their definition of "recession" that uses a myriad of metrics beyond just "GDP-growth-over-two-successive-quarters". From my perspective, that "holistic" measure is likely more accurate. Like it or not, economics is more social science than hard science. If recession isn't indicative of economic health, why do we bother to measure it in the first place? Put differently, if it's not a measure of economic health, why does the definition even matter?