2 thoughts on “New Paper: No, We Haven’t Been in a Recession since 2022”
pgl
Mitchell, Wesley Clair. Business cycles: The problem and its setting. No. 10. National Bureau of Economic Research, 1927.
I stand corrected as I have been noting that excellent 1946 paper. It is still true that BEA’s tracking of quarterly real GDP began in 1947. So when Antoni says his definition of a recession (two quarters in a row where real GDP fell by any amount) has been taught in textbooks for a hundred years (which would be going back to 1924), Antoni shows his utter ignorance of economic history.
Q: Why doesn’t the committee accept the two-quarter definition?
A: There are several reasons. First, we do not identify economic activity solely with real GDP, but consider a range of indicators. Second, we consider the depth of the decline in economic activity. The NBER definition includes the phrase, “a significant decline in economic activity.” Thus real GDP could decline by relatively small amounts in two consecutive quarters without warranting the determination that a peak had occurred. Third, our main focus is on the monthly chronology, which requires consideration of monthly indicators. Fourth, in examining the behavior of production on a quarterly basis, where real GDP data are available, we give equal weight to real GDI. The difference between GDP and GDI—called the “statistical discrepancy”—was particularly important in the recessions of 2001 and 2007–2009.
Now that is pretty thorough. And also rather devastating of the trash Antoni has been writing of late. In 2022 we did have a quarter where real GDP dipped a bit but to say this was a significant decline is both stupid and dishonest. Antonl’s best two qualities!
Mitchell, Wesley Clair. Business cycles: The problem and its setting. No. 10. National Bureau of Economic Research, 1927.
I stand corrected as I have been noting that excellent 1946 paper. It is still true that BEA’s tracking of quarterly real GDP began in 1947. So when Antoni says his definition of a recession (two quarters in a row where real GDP fell by any amount) has been taught in textbooks for a hundred years (which would be going back to 1924), Antoni shows his utter ignorance of economic history.
Q: Why doesn’t the committee accept the two-quarter definition?
A: There are several reasons. First, we do not identify economic activity solely with real GDP, but consider a range of indicators. Second, we consider the depth of the decline in economic activity. The NBER definition includes the phrase, “a significant decline in economic activity.” Thus real GDP could decline by relatively small amounts in two consecutive quarters without warranting the determination that a peak had occurred. Third, our main focus is on the monthly chronology, which requires consideration of monthly indicators. Fourth, in examining the behavior of production on a quarterly basis, where real GDP data are available, we give equal weight to real GDI. The difference between GDP and GDI—called the “statistical discrepancy”—was particularly important in the recessions of 2001 and 2007–2009.
Now that is pretty thorough. And also rather devastating of the trash Antoni has been writing of late. In 2022 we did have a quarter where real GDP dipped a bit but to say this was a significant decline is both stupid and dishonest. Antonl’s best two qualities!