Recession Over - 1 Month to go??

mitchaa

With these 'recession over' threads we have at the moment, i never realised whilst scrolling through them that we have seen growth in both April and May.

Growth in June will complete the 1/4 and the word recession can no longer be used

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/recession/5498052/Recession-is-already-over-says-think-tank.html

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/48772,news,the-mole-recession-over-boost-for-pm-gordon-brown-niesr-politics

+0.2% in April
+0.1% in May

Another +ve in June and bye bye recession:shhh:

mitchaa

Additionally had i been aware of this in Ad's poll, i would have voted differently i think.

Graham_Devon

If GDP is revised to -2.2%, and we got another 0.1% growth in May, that means we would be "growing" at -1.8%.

Have I got this right? In other words, negative growth would mean growth?

I'm not denying it's growth, in a funny way, nor am I denying thats the basis for calling the end of a recession, but, well, erm how?

I thought you needed 2 quarters of growth to come out of a recession, just as you need it to go in?

Does that mean then, that if this coming quarter we see 0.2% growth or whatever, and the quarter after that we see a further 1% fall, the rules mean, that the 0.2% growth (though still negative) would mean that we are still out of recession?

Who made those rules?!

Thrugelmir

mitchaa wrote: »

Growth in June will complete the 1/4 and the word recession will no longer be used

From a business view , I prefer "contraction" as the optimum word currently.

mitchaa

Graham_Devon wrote: »

If GDP is revised to -2.2%, and we got another 0.1% growth in May, that means we would be "growing" at -1.8%.

Have I got this right? In other words, negative growth would mean growth?

I'm not denying it's growth, in a funny way, nor am I denying thats the basis for calling the end of a recession, but, well, erm how?

I thought you needed 2 quarters of growth to come out of a recession, just as you need it to go in?

Does that mean then, that if this coming quarter we see 0.2% growth or whatever, and the quarter after that we see a further 1% fall, the rules mean, that the 0.2% growth (though still negative) would mean that we are still out of recession?

Who made those rules?!

I have no idea Graham, i was shocked when i read the articles to be honest. It seemed strange to me that we have a few recession over threads started today but yet there was no mention of the 2 growth months.

So 6 months to go in, and only 3 to come out, so quite right we could see 6 down, 3 up, and you would then have to get 6 full downs again to re enter?

Crazy world of politics:D

Really2

I must admit I did not know it was three out.

mitchaa

Really2 wrote: »

I must admit I did not know it was three out.

Neither was i, but according to the linked articles it suggests so.

Graham_Devon

mitchaa wrote: »

I have no idea Graham, i was shocked when i read the articles to be honest. It seemed strange to me that we have a few recession over threads started today but yet there was no mention of the 2 growth months.

So 6 months to go in, and only 3 to come out, so quite right we could see 6 down, 3 up, and you would then have to get 6 full downs again to re enter?

Crazy world of politics:D

Seems to be cheating! Specially since Gordon B is less likely to have to face the fact of "being in a recession" if it takes a another full two quarters to get back in, but the tiniest (and still negative) growth to get out!!

He can quite rightly claim he got us out of it.....

Well claim we are out of it anyway.

kennyboy66_2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I thought you needed 2 quarters of growth to come out of a recession, just as you need it to go in?

Does that mean then, that if this coming quarter we see 0.2% growth or whatever, and the quarter after that we see a further 1% fall, the rules mean, that the 0.2% growth (though still negative) would mean that we are still out of recession?

Who made those rules?!

Them's always been the "rules" - at least in the UK. The USA definition is different.

You only need 1 quarter of growth for the recession to officially end.

Between 1979-1982 the UK came out of recession in Q2 1981.

However of the next 6 quarters, 2 showed contraction and 1 had negligible growth.

mitchaa

Sure seems that way...

The recession was short and sharp – and over

6 negative months to go in and 3 positive months to come out.

Graham_Devon

What a bizzare set of rules.

If I had known this, and knew we were all cheating, all of my predictions about recessions would have been different.