While the popular definition of a recession is “two consecutive quarters of negative real gross domestic product (GDP) growth,” the NBER does not strictly abide by this designation (note 2).
where does that say that NBER used to use the 'two quarter' definition?
"Nber does not strictly abide by this designation (2 consecutive quarters)." It means NBER generally DOES abide by the 2 consecutive quarter definition. If they didn't they would say NBER DOES NOT abide by this designation. No, instead, it is NBER does not STRICTLY abide by this.
Recession or not, the Fed, government bureaucrats, and politicians have really screwed up. Likely so bad the nonsense of unhinged spending on wars, handouts, and corporate welfare will force a recalibration of priorities.
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Tony Dow, who as Wally Cleaver on the sitcom “Leave It to Beaver” helped create the popular and lasting image of the American teenager of the 1950s and 60s, died Wednesday. He was 77.
While the popular definition of a recession is “two consecutive quarters of negative real gross domestic product (GDP) growth,” the NBER does not strictly abide by this designation (note 2).
where does that say that NBER used to use the 'two quarter' definition?
agip has nailed it. I've read a fair share on this and simply put, we are in a recession when NBER says we are in a recession. And that factor in a number of things, like employment, savings, etc.
The two consecutive quarters of negative growth is a short hand definition, used more frequently in other countries, but is not the formal definition of a recession.
To the condition at hand, several things are in a condition that doesn't make this look like a recession at all. At least not yet.
And pertaining to this current political climate, it should be no surprise that some would bend the truth to fit their interpretation and views. I say that because slanting an interpretation is relatively benign compared to the outright lies we see propagated these days.
where does that say that NBER used to use the 'two quarter' definition?
agip has nailed it. I've read a fair share on this and simply put, we are in a recession when NBER says we are in a recession. And that factor in a number of things, like employment, savings, etc.
The two consecutive quarters of negative growth is a short hand definition, used more frequently in other countries, but is not the formal definition of a recession.
To the condition at hand, several things are in a condition that doesn't make this look like a recession at all. At least not yet.
And pertaining to this current political climate, it should be no surprise that some would bend the truth to fit their interpretation and views. I say that because slanting an interpretation is relatively benign compared to the outright lies we see propagated these days.
So two consecutive quarters of negative growth is good because it is not your accepted defintion of a recession?
where does that say that NBER used to use the 'two quarter' definition?
"Nber does not strictly abide by this designation (2 consecutive quarters)." It means NBER generally DOES abide by the 2 consecutive quarter definition. If they didn't they would say NBER DOES NOT abide by this designation. No, instead, it is NBER does not STRICTLY abide by this.
A well written article covering exactly the issue at hand, and I encourage those with questions to read it.
One paragraph I pulled sums it up"
"She (Janet Yellen) pointed to consumer spending, which has continued to grow, credit quality, how households are doing and a jobs market that's still very strong. In June, the U.S. economy added 372,000 jobs. But the challenge for the White House is a majority of registered voters believe we are in a recession already, given slowing growth and high inflation. And ahead of the midterm elections, Republicans are saying Democrats are making a semantic argument when people are suffering."
The federal government is releasing its latest update on the U.S. economy. But numbers showing negative growth in the second quarter of the year will add to fears that a recession is underway.
This downturn has been a blessing if you’re still contributing to your investments. I’ve been upping my investing since spring and hope to continue. If you still have long time horizon, keep on upping your contribution. Investing more today is worth a lot more than later.
Or, as any gambler should know, you may be throwing good money after bad.
I’m not investing in Hussman fund so im confident that in 20 years when I start withdrawing from my Mega backdoor Roth, it’ll be much more than it is today.
Or, as any gambler should know, you may be throwing good money after bad.
I’m not investing in Hussman fund so im confident that in 20 years when I start withdrawing from my Mega backdoor Roth, it’ll be much more than it is today.
Pro tip: buy your Hussman funds in taxable accounts. That way you can write off the losses and thereby deduct taxes owed on capital gains. Doing so in a Roth IRA would eliminate that advantage.
I’m not investing in Hussman fund so im confident that in 20 years when I start withdrawing from my Mega backdoor Roth, it’ll be much more than it is today.
Pro tip: buy your Hussman funds in taxable accounts. That way you can write off the losses and thereby deduct taxes owed on capital gains. Doing so in a Roth IRA would eliminate that advantage.
I’m not investing in Hussman fund so im confident that in 20 years when I start withdrawing from my Mega backdoor Roth, it’ll be much more than it is today.
Pro tip: buy your Hussman funds in taxable accounts. That way you can write off the losses and thereby deduct taxes owed on capital gains. Doing so in a Roth IRA would eliminate that advantage.
Actual former pro tip:
Same lesson holds on the downside - internals don't define limits or "catch" short-term moves. They gauge uniform shifts in speculation/risk-aversion.
As with valuations and internals in 2000-02 & 2007-09, "I missed my chance to get out" can abruptly replace "I missed the lows." pic.twitter.com/fkhpTMDwtB
Pro tip: buy your Hussman funds in taxable accounts. That way you can write off the losses and thereby deduct taxes owed on capital gains. Doing so in a Roth IRA would eliminate that advantage.
This seems to be a discussion about when to buy, when to hold, when to sell - a fund that well, let's just say, doesn't fit with my 'investment objectives.'
But best of luck to you and enjoy your weekend. It's been a good week in the markets this week, given everything thrown at them.
Darn kicking myself for not grabbing more crypto at the lows. Thought I was too heavy into it, but easy play really in retrospect.
Easy to say now. People were calling BTC 12-15k, ETH 500-700 a month ago. Bet you'd feel different if you bought at 20k and it tanked to 12k.
Yeah I expected about a bottom towards there as well - was waiting for the 3AC and all that contagion to spread and then despair to set in… but it never did. Guess yet another lesson to never try to time the bottom. Fml.
At least I have this pile of cash building up if things do get worse. Worst case I just go to Japan and take advantage of the rate and get a lot of sushi.
I recall that a regular on here, and I believe it was the poster who went by the handle 'idiot', was going to buy if bitcoin dropped to what seemed like at the time, a ridiculously low level. If memory serves me, that level may have been 23K or lower.
I've missed a lot of the posting these last few weeks, but wonder if he ever bought like he said he might.