|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
Since we are almost in a recession | by imrambi | 2008-03-20 11:48:51 |
|
It's not a recession, it's just prices going up | by murphoid | 2008-03-20 12:05:36 |
|
Do you know the technical definition | by merlin | 2008-03-20 12:20:47 |
|
OECD growth forecast is at 0%. | by CynicalRyan | 2008-03-20 12:25:58 |
|
And as I pointed out in another post, | by merlin | 2008-03-20 12:31:27 |
|
The simplest definition of recession | by CynicalRyan | 2008-03-20 12:42:53 |
| Here's the official definition, from the NBER |
by merlin |
2008-03-20 12:46:52 |
Recessions
From the FAQ at the bottom:
Q: The financial press often states the definition of a recession as two consecutive quarters of decline in real GDP. How does that relate to the NBER's recession dating procedure?
A: Most of the recessions identified by our procedures do consist of two or more quarters of declining real GDP, but not all of them. According to current data for 2001, the present recession falls into the general pattern, with three consecutive quarters of decline. Our procedure differs from the two-quarter rule in a number of ways. First, we consider the depth as well as the duration of the decline in economic activity. Recall that our definition includes the phrase, "a significant decline in economic activity." Second, we use a broader array of indicators than just real GDP. One reason for this is that the GDP data are subject to considerable revision. Third, we use monthly indicators to arrive at a monthly chronology.
|
|
[ Reply ] |
|
Close, but not quite: | by CynicalRyan | 2008-03-20 12:58:06 |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|