Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is nothing more than liberal spin to make it look like they are saving the economy from collapse, which couldn't be further from the truth.You need people with real jobs buying goods and services over a long period of time to see recovery, Liberals are such liars, it's pathetic. I see so many people that have lost and are losing houses, many foreclosures in my neighborhood, try getting a job, tell me how good it is, it's all BS!
Well, they are going strictly by the numbers. Doesn't matter who contributed to those numbers; it's the "numbers" that determine the result. It's just that the USGovt came up with all these whacky programs right before GDP reporting so the GDP stayed in positive territory.
As they say..."lies, damn lies and statistics".
Now..the recession itself may be over but a recovery ? To what..2005 ?
No, I don't think so. You see we still have all that debt and now that much more with all the spending. I think more a transition rather than recovery and it will hurt. What you are looking at today just may be THE recovery we got.
So because it hasn't gotten significantly worse it is a recovery. Well, some recovery. I've read and heard that as long as there isn't two straight quarters of decline in GDP, they can say the recession is over. Seems like they get to jump the gun and is a sneaky way of promoting that the government or whomever stopped the recession. I think people know the real truth.
Well, here's a frightening thought - "recession" is based on overall national GDP. If GDP continues to grow (regardless of how slowly), then technically, there is no "recession," even if the labor market continues to decline.
It may be that the US economy no longer needs to create jobs in order to expand at a gradual rate, thanks to increased efficiency and careful corporate profits management, combined with overseas operations.
Perhaps we will reach a point where the labor market is in an open depression, but the country as a whole is not even in a technical recession.
Which is why in a roundabout way I agree with the heading.
For all those who are thinking that a recovery will mean that we turn back to the boom times of the 90s where we flipped houses for a living because everyone else was doing it, credit was endless, and the likes of Carleton Sheets and Robert Kiyosaki were probably making a great living off of their overnight infomercials...well, snap out of it, because all those high paid pencil pusher jobs and other phony crap of that sort that came from that won't be back.
I guess all that explosive growth came at a cost.
Once upon a time, it was discovered that California's huge economy was propped up by the billions in debt liabilities and some bozo out there got creative and spun that debt into an asset. Hence, an economy rivaling that of Zimbabwe, more or less, looked pretty darn impressive.
Well, no difference here with the Feds, folks...enjoy the reality of today's recovery.
This is nothing more than liberal spin to make it look like they are saving the economy from collapse, which couldn't be further from the truth.
I would disagree.
NBRE defines a recession as ended when there are two consecutive quarters of economic growth.
If the recession ended in June 2009 (2nd Quarter) then by their own definition the 3rd and 4th Quarters had positive economic growth.
The data for the 4th Quarter generally isn't available until about February 15 the following year.
Essentially, they would have known that the recession is over by March or April. Usually such information is published the first week of the month or the quarter.
Yet they have waited until the 3rd week of September. If you knew the economy had recovered in March or April (or even May) then why would you wait several more months to make the announcement?
I suspect it has to do with the tax cuts.
If the economy is in a recession then many people would argue that the tax cuts should be extended.
However, now that a "report" has been issued saying the recession is over, then they argument is that the tax cuts should be allowed to expire and not renewed.
I think the timing of the announcement is related to that more than anything.
NBRE defines a recession as ended when there are two consecutive quarters of economic growth.
If the recession ended in June 2009 (2nd Quarter) then by their own definition the 3rd and 4th Quarters had positive economic growth.
The data for the 4th Quarter generally isn't available until about February 15 the following year.
Essentially, they would have known that the recession is over by March or April. Usually such information is published the first week of the month or the quarter.
Yet they have waited until the 3rd week of September. If you knew the economy had recovered in March or April (or even May) then why would you wait several more months to make the announcement?
I suspect it has to do with the tax cuts.
If the economy is in a recession then many people would argue that the tax cuts should be extended.
However, now that a "report" has been issued saying the recession is over, then they argument is that the tax cuts should be allowed to expire and not renewed.
I think the timing of the announcement is related to that more than anything.
I still say it is liberal spin to push the tax increases through, they can point and say see tax increases are good look we fixed the economy aren't we great. When the stimulus was just throwing money down a rat hole delaying any recovery and if people are not working and still losing jobs and houses there is no recovery. I don't consider mcjobs areal job ether as you can't afford anything on that wage.
So a bunch of academics in Cambridge MA have decided that the recession ended a year ago!!!
The recession is over! So where's the party? - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100920/ap_on_bi_ge/us_end_of_recession - broken link)
"Not that it's the fault of the academics — in this case the National Bureau of Economic Research, a group of economists based in Cambridge, Mass. It's their job to declare when recessions officially begin and end....."
I was going to start a thread, why are economists so detached from reality??!?!
-It'd be like a group of volcano experts (volcanologists?) declaring that an eruption is "over"...even though smoke is still rising, there's damage all around the town that lay at the base of the volcano, peoples lives have been displaced, there's ash and rock everywhere. You can't walk for a 5 mile radius because of the molten rock. But it's "over", lol. It's not over for the residents.
-Or like someone on 9/11 watching the twin towers fall. It's "over". But it's only going to take 7 years to rebuild. And 25,000 lives have been displaced.
Do they make these "declarations" just to pat themselves on the back?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
