Recession Over - 1 Month to go??

mitchaa

Gordon's only gone and bloody done it then:eek:I thought he was a clown aswell:think:

I'll still be voting conservatives mind you, but if the recession does officially end next month with a +0.1% for June then Gordon is surely going to be hailed as the saviour:rotfl:

I think economists will have to go back to the drawing board and learn their trade again as QE and rising unemployment should not be doing this, should it?

RobertoMoir

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?!

slowing the rate of loss is the new gain. No I don't understand it either.

Generali

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Who made those rules?!

Economists.

I disagree with their definition and prefer the end of a recession to be defined as when real GDP is back to the peak value.

If GDP falls by 5% for 2 consecutive quarters and then rises by 0.1% in the third quarter that is supposed to be good news. Well I ain't buyin' it.

mitchaa

Even if June posts a 0.29% drop next month, the recession will still be classed as over as it's based around 1/4 growth.

I honestly believe now that recession is over and will be called next month. I'm waiting on the April fools old line, but its not coming:rotfl:

Recession only called officially in January 2009..

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jan/23/recession-uk-unemployment

Short and sweet, jesus, it wasn't half

Graham_Devon

Generali wrote: »

Economists.

I disagree with their definition and prefer the end of a recession to be defined as when real GDP is back to the peak value.

If GDP falls by 5% for 2 consecutive quarters and then rises by 0.1% in the third quarter that is supposed to be good news. Well I ain't buyin' it.

Only trouble is, your then attacked as a negative bear! We could have 0.01% better results, and recession over.

Bloody brilliant news for Gordon.

lostinrates

Generali wrote: »

Economists.

I disagree with their definition and prefer the end of a recession to be defined as when real GDP is back to the peak value.

If GDP falls by 5% for 2 consecutive quarters and then rises by 0.1% in the third quarter that is supposed to be good news. Well I ain't buyin' it.

But if not good perhaps its less bad news?, perhaps even, fairly described as better news?

mitchaa

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Only trouble is, your then attacked as a negative bear! We could have 0.01% better results, and recession over.

Bloody brilliant news for Gordon.

Even i agree with you there Graham, it seems ludicrous to me that a 0.01% growth can signal the official end of a recession.

Not another 10 bloody years of Nu Labour, surely not

Graham_Devon

Hmmm, what happens though if they need to revise figures, as they are likely to do with the first quarters, and downwards.

Whats that classed as? We back into recession then?

Or is it something which the terrorism act would cover?! You can just imagine Gordons face if we were put back in on revised figures!!

StevieJ

Generali wrote: »

Economists.

I disagree with their definition and prefer the end of a recession to be defined as when real GDP is back to the peak value.

If GDP falls by 5% for 2 consecutive quarters and then rises by 0.1% in the third quarter that is supposed to be good news. Well I ain't buyin' it.

So you would rather it keep on falling by 5%, until almost 0

Treadmill

People where saying we where in a recession long before we where technically in one, can I say the recession is over or is it a one way street ?