Re: [Pen-l] Slow motion recession

["Jim Devine" <jdevine03@xxxxxxxxx>]

me:
>> I get the feeling that it's a "slow motion recession" because (1)
>> journalists are paying much more attention to recessions than they
>> used to and (2) they want something spectacular to happen. Most
>> recessions, I would guess, don't happen overnight and in a spectacular
>> way and are thus "slow motion." The upward movement of GDP and the
>> like has a lot of momentum and can't reverse itself overnight.
>> (Financial crises, on the other hand, are spectacular.)

Doug:
> Job growth in the late expansion was the weakest on record, so job loss is
> likely to be less dramatic on the downslide. Normally in a recession, we'd
> be seeing monthly job losses of 200,000-300,000 - now it's more like
> 50-75,000. Gross job gains and losses have been the lowest on record in
> recent years (though the record starts only in 1992). ...

Right, but that's a separate issue, i.e., is the US in a slow-motion
recession or not? (I was simply remarking on the standard journalistic
attitude seen in the NYT article.) While I waiting in the PT office I
got to read the whole article. The guy who referred to the recession
as "slow motion" was (in effect) pooh-poohing the idea that it could
be a steeper fall in the future, i.e., that the real economy's
problems could make the financial sector's problems worse and
vice-versa, so there would be a vicious cycle. Maybe, maybe not.
-- 
Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own
way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l