40 million Americans on food stamps but no "recession", LOL

[StarburstClock]

I mean who needs food or jobs or housing or their health or a future anyway? We can all rest assured knowing that some propaganda-spewing government number geek defined the word "recession" for us.

[eyesroll]

1. "Recession" is a term of art.

Decline in GDP for two consecutive quarters is the definition I've seen elsewhere.

Doesn't mean people aren't hurting--it just means we don't have that particular scenario right now (or, at least, we didn't as of the last time they measured).

[Vincardog]

3. AKA it is still bad but hasn't been getting WORSE for the last two consecutive quarters

It isn't a recession it is a depression

[eyesroll]

5. Actually, I think GDP is growing, but...

Wages are stagnating, unemployment is stagnating (and many people are giving up on working), and employers are squeezing more out of their remaining employees ("productivity is up"). There are some hopeful trends here and there, but not everyone's benefiting.

I don't think this fits the definition of "depression," either. (Wikipedia, not that it's the arbiter of economics, defines "depression" as a recession of 10% or more or lasting more than three or four years. If GDP is up, then by definition we're not in a recession or a depression.)

I guess we just need a new word.

[SDuderstadt]

7. It is not a "depression"...

other than to people who have zero idea what the word actually means.

[SDuderstadt]

2. Maybe you should find out what the word...

actually means.

[Fumesucker]

12. A recession is when your neighbor loses his job..

A depression is when you lose your job.

[SDuderstadt]

15. I was hoping you'd know the technical definition...

silly me.

[Fumesucker]

16. I'm reminded of Benjamin Disraeli's quip ..

There are three ways of lying; lies, damn lies and statistics.

For those at the top of the economic pyramid things are going quite well, no recession in sight.

For those at the bottom of that pyramid though times are rough.

[SDuderstadt]

17. Which has nothing to do with..

the definition of recession.

Wouldn't it be simply easier to admit that you don't know the definition?

[JoePhilly]

21. The funny part of this thread ...

You asked the right question. The word "recession" when used in economics, has an actual meaning. That meaning is not good or bad, it just "is".

And yet the person you responded to ... the one who can't (won't) answer your question about the ACTUAL definition of that word when applied to economics ... that person WANTS to redefine the word.

Apparently, the word recession is important, but knowing its actual definition, is not.

[Fumesucker]

25. Still got a job, eh?

I'm glad for you..

Not all of us are so fortunate, we will bear your scorn though.

[SDuderstadt]

27. No one is "scorning" you...

dude.

Nice strawman.

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Fumesucker]

68. LOL...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1172019#1172616

And you seem to be lacking the wherewithal to understand the rather simple DU rules..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html

[JoePhilly]

75. Fair .... I should have said you "lacked the wherewithal" to

understand the actual meaning of words, and that perhaps THAT is what causes you to not be able to find work.

I stand corrected.

[Fumesucker]

81. Well, I'm sure my age has absolutely nothing to do with it..

Employers are falling all over themselves to hire sixty-somethings because our insurance costs are so remarkably low.

I have a friend who suffers from dyslexia, he's very smart but lacks the wherewithal to easily comprehend the written word, every sentence is a struggle for him.

You'd never know it by talking to him.

[JoePhilly]

88. Could be that ....

I would never suggest that some people have trouble finding work because of age, gender or racial discrimination. We know all that happens, and during all economic conditions. But those facts have little to do with what the word "recession" means when applied to US economic conditions.

The discussion here is about what the actual definition of the word "recession" means when applied to the state of the US economic situation. The most basic, standard definition of a recession can be summarized as "two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth".

This recession began in Dec 2007 ... and we had continuous quarters of negative GDP until June 2009, when the recession ended.

This is a straight forward article about that.
http://thetimes-tribune.com/opinion/technically-recession-ends-1.1022691#axzz1NPx2RqcF

As has has been argued in this sub-thread, the word "recession" has a very specific meaning within that context. And so for one to claim that the use of that word, in that well known context, has some other meaning, is wrong.

Having said this, the OP (or even you) could have made the argument that the word "recession" has multiple meanings. There is the official, technical definition, and then there is also a definition that is far less precise, not an "official meaning" but more of a "common usage" meaning.

In that context, one could argue that while technically, the recession is over (given that we've had multiple quarters of positive GDP growth since June 2009), the reality for many is that it still "feels like" a recession because of the slow change in employment statistics (although even those are also now moving in the right direction).

This would be a reasonable argument.

[Fumesucker]

22. Actually I do know it...

I just think it's funny watching you complain about something any damn fool could look up in ten seconds.

A recession is technically defined as two consecutive quarters of negative growth in real Gross Domestic Product.

I love that Orwellian and oxymoronic phrase "negative growth"..

[SDuderstadt]

26. My irony meter just...

broke.

[Fumesucker]

29. LOL, mine exploded and spread burning plastic and molten metal all over the room..

Nearly a decade ago now..

I haven't bothered to replace it, those mil spec devices are damn expensive.

[socialist_n_TN]

57. And it took 16 responses to get to the crux of it

It's not officially a depression or recession because the overall economy is growing. That doesn't mean it's growing evenly all up and down the income strata.

The top is doing VERY, VERY well. The bottom are hurting BADLY. It's naked class massacre.

[Hannah Bell]

74. i think the economy grew continuously after 1933 too.

but the period 1929-1939 is still called "the great depression" -- because employment didn't grow much.



we've had UE around 9% for about 2 years and there's no downturn in sight. we have been at depression-era UE levels for 2 years (circa 1931).

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate


the U.S. has 2 million fewer jobs than a decade ago in February 2001 and, indeed, 387,000 fewer jobs than 11 years ago in February 2000.

http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2011030904/job-deficit-28-million-our-lost-decade-continues

fewer jobs in the us than there were a decade ago, & they pay worse, too.

let that sink in for a moment.

and now they're cutting public jobs.

[socialist_n_TN]

82. Thanks for the stats Hannah.........

I'm just too lazy to look this kind of stuff up. I'm right in my general points most of the time because it's stuck in my brain from something I've read, but to pull out the stats on cue is NOT something I'm good at. :)

[sendero]

31. And the technical definitions.....

... are worth a bucket of warm spit in our current situation. The supposed fact that GDP is growing is of no use whatsoever to millions and millions and millions of Americans.

With real unemployment (u6) hovering at 17%, I really don't feel like depression it too strong a word. But we can make up a new one for the folks who are hung up on meaningless metrics.

[BOG PERSON]

4. the economy will continue to grow just fine, with or without you

sorry

[Mimosa]

58. That sounds like posts I've read on a right wing board

There are 10s of millions of people who have little or no hope of getting good jobs, especially those over age 50.

[BOG PERSON]

66. it's not my fault nobody wants to hire them

you see, we're having what they call a Jobless Recovery

[Hannah Bell]

78. who cares if the economy grows when jobs don't? we have fewer jobs than 10 years ago.

[Motown_Johnny]

6. Who needs definitions ?!?!? Who needs words?!?!? Lets just grunt a lot

that would work much better




:sarcasm:

[Autumn]

8. It could be worse

but something needs to be done. K/R A hell of a lot of people are at the end of their rope and barley hanging on.

[Autumn]

9. You know how to tell when some one is pissing in your ear?

Rain is cool and piss is warm. Don't know about you but I have felt a lot of warm moisture in my ear, every time I hear one of these idiots say there is no recession.

[SDuderstadt]

10. Please give us your...

definition of "recession".

[no limit]

11. I remember how in 2007/2008 republicans were quick to point out we aren't technically in a recession

eventhough it was perfectly clear to everyone that things were becoming dire.

Today they seemed to have changed the definition around. It no longer has to be technically true as long as their gut tells them its true since the black guy is in the white house.

[SDuderstadt]

13. I just love outrage from people who...

don't grasp basic definitions.

[Hannah Bell]

79. i just love supercilious & irrelevant pedantry too.

[SDuderstadt]

80. Since when are proper definitions...

"supercilious and irrelevant pedantry", Hannah?

Did you read the last sentence of the OP?

[Hannah Bell]

83. When you know what the poster meant & are just trying to divert attention from the point of the OP.

[SDuderstadt]

84. Again...

did you read the last sentence of the OP? It's hard to mistake "what the OP meant", Hannah.

[defendandprotect]

14. It's the GOP third world America -- the new norm -- !!

[Vinee]

18. The misery index was 7.73% in January of 2009. It was 12.16% in April, 2011

which is on par with the highest levels seen in the past 20 years. It's actually over 25%, the highest level ever on record if you believe John Williams of Shadow Stats fame. Either way, it's clear that things are getting better and the economy is growing. woohoo. :party:

[JoePhilly]

23. Misery Index .... let me guess, a GOP creation after 2009 ... yes?

[Vinee]

30. Actually, it was more of a LBJ creation as I recall.

President Carter made it famous though.

edit: for someone who supposedly knows the definition of "recession", I'm surprised you didn't know this already.

[sunwyn]

19. I thought recession meant a general slowdown in the economy

And while this country might not be in a recession, being unemployed for 3 years has not only led to a personal recession but also depression

[SDuderstadt]

20. You thought wrong n/t

[Quantess]

24. Be honest. The economy still is in the toilet.

Trying to emerge from the toilet, but still...

[SDuderstadt]

28. We were talking specifically about...

"recession", one of many economic measures.

Maybe you shouldn't try to read things into my rather plain words.

[SDuderstadt]

32. More accurate subject line:

"I really have no idea what the word 'recession' actually means, LOL!".

[LaPera]

33. This thread sounds it was written by republican anti-government Fox "news" bullshit propaganda!!

"that some propaganda-spewing government number geek defined the word "recession" for us."

Very surprised you didn't use the word "overpaid" government number geek as Fox and republicans would use....

Either you're slipping dude or you don't want to be too obvious in your agenda as you have fooled many here already!

[Fumesucker]

35. Or maybe a Democrat that doesn't have a job..

Despite looking for 99 weeks, and now the unemployment has run out and they don't have money for the little things like rent, medicine, electricity and so on..

[SDuderstadt]

36. Which still has nothing to do with...

the definition of "recession".

Eventually this will sink in, hopefully.

[Fumesucker]

37. I know the technical definition as I already proved to you..

And it makes not the slightest difference what you call it to someone who is out of work and unable to find any job at all.

[SDuderstadt]

38. Dude...

No one is suggesting that unemployment is not a problem.

Quit reading things that no one is saying into the topic.

[Fumesucker]

39. I haven't seen you say anything about unemployment up until now..

You have expended a considerable amount of energy though on trivial minutia that matters not a fig to someone who is lacking a job.

[SDuderstadt]

41. Because we weren't talking about unemployment...

dude. There are all kinds of measures of employment. "Recession" isn't one of them.

[Fumesucker]

42. The OP spoke of jobs..

Perhaps you overlooked it in your zeal to go after the OP for using a word incorrectly.

[SDuderstadt]

43. Dude...

Can you show me the part of the definition of recession that hinges on employment?

[Fumesucker]

46. In the first place the OP put "recession" in scare quotes like I just did..

And in the second place, a hungry belly doesn't care about the definition of recession.

Of course it's not a recession, you're still doing OK.

[SDuderstadt]

48. Dude...

for the last time, "recession" has a specific, technical definition that has ZERO to do with foodstamps, employment or how well you think I am doing. You keep trying to make this about imaginary callousness on my part.

[LaPera]

40. Thank your republican corporate fascist friends for no jobs but tons of bail-out money.

Remember George Bush signed the Bank Bail-out bill on 10-04-2008 and allowed all the corporate deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations to make more more by NOT hiring workers (all work forces have been cut and many more jobs out-sourced) and what have the republicans done about jobs THAT THEY RAN ON since taking over the majority in congress to provide more jobs since they've were elected in November 2010? DO TELL US!!

Republicans and their 342 contributing corporations are NOT hiring (and won't be hiring until after they get rid of president Obama in 2012 as they see it by out-spending the shit out of the dems only and the workers ONLY united voice Unions)) yet those same corporations that are NOT hiring are making more money and stock market going through the roof from republicans deregulation & tax cut and government subsidies (corporate welfare) policies allowing corporations suck up the bucks pay little or NO taxes and reap all the benefits....

[LaPera]

51. Or maybe he's has a different agenda which you share....Get fucking real Skippy!

[Mimosa]

60. Fumesucker, I thank God for giving us hearts and understanding.

You're a wonderful person. *hug*

[katnapped]

34. Obviously those people

Are all lazy fucks that refuse to work.

Or...something....

:sarcasm:

[unblock]

44. it's fallacy of aggregation. the economy "as a whole" is growing. but does that really matter?

if the top 1% are increasing their income by more than the bottom 99% are losing theirs, then the economy as a whole is growing.

but that doesn't do much for the 99% who are losing income.



the economy as a whole is indeed not in a recession, but it would be more accurate to talk about (at least) two different economies: one for the boardroom, which is doing just peachy, and one for the rest of us, which continues to suck.

the 40mm on foodstamps are obviously not part of the boardroom economy.

[SDuderstadt]

45. You might want to look up the definition of...

GDP.

[unblock]

50. i know it quite well, i was conflating income and gdp for simplicity

[SDuderstadt]

52. If you "knew it well"...

you wouldn't conflate it.

[unblock]

56. if you read that i did it for simplicity, you wouldn't ascribe a different reason.

yes, i could have provided a more technically accurate explanation, but it would have been lengthier and more arcane.

as this is not economicsunderground.com, i opted for a politically convenient simplification.


sorry if you found that disturbing.

[SDuderstadt]

59. Accuracy is not "arcane", despite your attempts to...

make it so, dude. GDP is a measure of production, not income. You didn't "simplify" the definition, you totally blew it. You've got GDP mixed up with GDI.

Too funny.

[unblock]

89. no, you're being pedantic and sophomoric

i have taken many academic course in economics and finance at the undergraduate and graduate level, i've worked in finance for decades, and i've even published articles on financial and economic topics.

i know what gdp is and i also know when to make a convenient simplification. the chain of logic and conditions that let the benefit of production go to a narrow few was tangential to the point and would have been distracting to the point.

then again, i also know that there's always someone in your audience you can never please.
despite that, i remain convinced that my thoughts were well communicated to the rest of those who read my post.

[SDuderstadt]

91. Dude...

GDI and GDP are two different things. It'd be a lot easier to admit you got it wrong.

[unblock]

93. well, if you want to play that game, the number of americans on food stamps and "recession"

are two different things.

so, is the op wrong, too?

or did you completely miss the point of that post as well?

[SDuderstadt]

97. I already pointed that out...

dude.

[unblock]

99. reading your other posts on this thread, i'd say

you've lost track of the fact that the goal of words is to communicate ideas.

it's not a game where you lose if you deviate in the slightest from some technical definition.

different forums call for different levels of precision, and du is hardly an academic peer-reviewed journal.

[SDuderstadt]

100. LOL!

Wouldn't it be easier to admit that you didn't know the definition of "recession" or got GDP mixed up with GDI?

[Forkboy]

47. Love the arguing over semantics in this thread.

Notice those arguing the term recession have little to say about the fact that there's 40 million people on food stamps. Divert, attack, deflect. The tactic is older than dirt.

[SDuderstadt]

49. Dude...

the technical definition of "recession" isn't "semantics".

[Forkboy]

63. Hey, speak of the devildude!

[SDuderstadt]

65. I'm certain you don't know the definition of recession...

either.

[MadHound]

53. Yep,

No matter what you call it, the economy still sucks, people are still suffering, and nobody in government apparently gives a damn anymore.

[Forkboy]

64. Hell, most of our own Party doesn't care anymore.

A lot of DUers don't either.

[GreenTea]

55. LOL! You're a joke, a complete stooge....

:rofl:

[Forkboy]

61. Flattery will get you everywhere.

Gimme some sugar, baby!

[Mimosa]

62. What on earth do you find funny about people who are suffering? n/t

[socialist_n_TN]

67. The tactic itself is actually a tried and true

RW debating trick. They attack any hyperbole and/or slight inaccuracy rather than talk about the acutal GIST or point of the post. Like attacking the word "recession" rather than the gist of the post the "40 million people on Food Stamps".

The old board I used to post politic on was FULL of RWers and this was a CONSTANT tactic.

[SDuderstadt]

69. The OP is trying to claim...

"recession" means something that it doesn't.

There is nothing "RW" about pointing that out. If Paul Krugman pointed it out, would you accuse him of being RW?

[Forkboy]

70. Well, some on DU aren't all that different from Right Wingers, so it's expected.

;)

[SDuderstadt]

71. You guys better watch out...

who you try to paint as RWers, dude.

Labeling someone a RWer rather than address their argument is an old debate trick.

[Forkboy]

72. Love watching you puff out your chest lol.

Your argument has been addressed already, and arguing with you is only slightly less a waste of time than watching a Republican conference on Peace Initiatives, though the comedy quotient is about the same.

[SDuderstadt]

73. My argument has only been addressed in...

your mind, dude.

[Forkboy]

76. It only hasn't in yours.

[SDuderstadt]

77. Really, dude?

Perhaps you could point out where my argument was addressed.

Take your time.

[TheKentuckian]

86. The textbook definition has been cited and isn't particularly germane to the current economic

debacle.

You made your point and are very much technically accurate but the meat of the thread is the growing difficulties of the majority of the people regardless if the wealthy have more than ever which allows us to claim we are not in a depression or a recession.

Let's talk about the plight of the people rather than burn up the conversation on vocabulary.

[SDuderstadt]

87. Read the last sentence of...

the OP. It's clear what was meant.

[Forkboy]

90. "Take your time."

Ok, I bookmarked the thread and will answer sometime around Labor Day lol.

[SDuderstadt]

92. If ever...

Who are you trying to fool, dude?

If you could answer it, you would have already. Too funny.

[Forkboy]

95. No, I'm actually not.

Hannah has pointed out what you're doing in this thread, among others. I find the arrogance of someone telling me to "take my time" as an open invitation to do just that. Want to be a smug asshole, deal with the consequences. I have to when I'm a dick, you can do it too.

What's really too funny is watching you desperately try to derail yet another thread with your seemingly endless cravings for flamewars, and your desire to talk about anything but 40 million people being on food stamps. You care about protecting a brand, not people, and all your attempts to make this about a single word can't cover that up to anyone but the most toadie-like sycophants that cling to you like barnacles on a hull.

See you on Labor Day!

Now run to the mods like a little child. You know you want to.

[SDuderstadt]

96. Dude...

Read the last sentence of the OP and quit trying to pretend the OP was about something else.

[DCBob]

85. Well if Republicans had their way those 40M would be out on the streets fending for themselves..

Remember the GOP's proud motto: "Every man, woman, child and invalid must pull their own weight."

[Amonester]

94. If only there was a way to 'organize' some sort of 'structured' protests

with 40 million Americans 'coordinatly' protesting in every large cities, jamming trafic at once and all that jazz for a few weeks, plus the 15 million unemployed joining them, maybe 'change' could have a chance to begin somewhere...

Now THAT would cause a real 'recession' (one TPTB don't want to see...).

[lonestarnot]

98. Hey you fat lazy slobs! Get a fucking job!

:sarcasm: