I'm going old school, which is the best school, and using the traditional definition of a recession as two successive quarters of economic contraction. Meaning Americans produced less stuff two quarters in a row than they did last year. That is the classic definition of a recession.
Which means we are not in a recession yet. We certainly could be on our way to one, and I think we are, but until that time comes, do not claim we're in the middle of a "Great Depression" or the middle of a horrible economy. If you want a horrible economy, then go to the Volcker Recession which was the worst economy we had since the Great Depression…
The reason I'm posting this now is that I forecast something similar to the 2000-2001 economy. Not in terms of economics, but back then the mantra on the left was that "this is the worst economy in 50 years" suggesting it was so horrible and so bad that only the Great Depression was worse. Obviously it wasn't because (even though NBER puts a gray line there around 2000-2001 saying it was a recession) according to the traditional definition, it wasn't even a recession. Regardless, recession or not, it was the weakest economic slow down we had in history.
I predict the same thing going into an election year. The left will jump on the horrible economy as a means by which to legitimize their election to the presidency and will not only blame Bush and Republicans for this to-be-recession, but no matter how weak or whether we even experience a recession or not, they will chant similar mantras to "this being the worst economy in 60 years."
So, before we get all into recession talk, let alone Great Depression talk, can you at least wait until we have ONE quarter of contraction?
from Captain Capitalism