• dragontamer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    People on the internet have been telling me that we’re “already in a recession” since 2010 man.

    I’ll believe it when it happens. Not a minute sooner. I definitely see the risks of a recession though, but I’m not going to call it until the data says so.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      A recession, not a depression. And yes half the country has been struggling for 20 years now.

      • dragontamer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Recession isn’t about what people feel though. Its about the productivity of the country. People can feel bad, but if the country continues to produce more stuff, then we’re economically booming.

        I feel like a lot of these issues is that the public is just ignorant to what a “recession” or “depression” really means. Employment (ie: how many jobs are available) indicate booming economies (aka: us making more stuff) because it means that companies are trying to make more stuff and need more workers.

        A recession is the opposite. When our means of production get shut-off for whatever reason. When this happens, people start getting laid off from jobs leading to unemployment.


        We did have a brief COVID19 recession as theme parks, hotels, restaurants, and cruises closed down. As the hospitality sector closed, they laid off workers, unemployment grew, etc. etc. etc. This cascaded to other sectors: tourism declines, air-travel declined. Gasoline usage dropped and oil producers cut off production. It was starting to get out of control until policymakers took swift action with new loans (PPP loans, and other programs) to get the economy somewhat-artifically churning again, but it did work and the job boom kinda-sorta hampered the COVID19 recession.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Uh no. The country is not booming just because production is up. The country is it’s people, not it’s corporations.

          It’s not that people just don’t understand the terms. We don’t agree that the economy should be described in a way that matters only to the country’s wealthy. The working class is in a recession. They are exactly where they are whenever the wealthy say it’s a recession. So for them it is very much a recession, no matter how much money the wealthy are making and no matter what official description the wealthy care to use.

          If the people in charge insist on ignoring the working class then we’ll simply have a repeat of the great depression thanks to a demand crisis. No matter what terms you care to use, we are in a cost of living crisis for half the country right now. When that gets ignored it spirals into a demand crisis, which triggers all the bad stuff at the same time. With half the country not buying things companies go under; banks stop lending as they have to deal with lost assets; then more people have trouble buying stuff because they got laid off and the cycle turns again. The only way out is the one thing that seems to be anathema to our dear leaders, giving money directly to the people so they can spend it.

          And because it bears repeating, jobs numbers don’t mean shit if you can’t pay basic necessities without 2 or 3 of them.

          • dragontamer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Ummmm.

            The country is not booming just because production is up.

            The literal definition of a recession is that production is down. I dunno where you’re going with this, but maybe you can go choose a better word for whatever the heck you’re trying to describe. Economists have words for a reason, and the chief reason among them is that production of goods is an important thing to track.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              No it’s okay. Really. We just won’t make a word for a country with a “booming” economy that exploits it’s workers so hard they have trouble buying food. That way we can just pretend it’s not happening! Yay!

    • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      30
      ·
      7 months ago

      until the data says so.

      If you don’t think the data hasn’t been “massaged” for a decade, to make it seem better than it actually is, you haven’t been paying attention.

      On top of the classic “you can prove anything with statistics” it’s a bit of a joke.

      • dragontamer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        The worker shortage continues today. We have record low unemployment, all my friends are working jobs (and some multiple jobs) because their boss doesn’t care enough to check in on them because there’s too much work to do.

        The economy today is rather strong. But there’s some headwinds that I’m seeing (ex: a somewhat isolated freight recession that’s playing into this decline of gasoline prices). Some items in our economy can change rather quickly, so I’m not going to confidently state that everything’s okay. There’s a lot of shakiness here. But nothing suggests yet that we’ve entered a general recession (like say, China has, or some other countries).

        Even my buddy at WeWork hasn’t been fired yet, lol. I know there’s been a lot of tech layoffs, but it seems like there’s so much programming work everywhere, that everyone basically gets rehired instantly.

        There’s troubling signs in some sectors. I’m worried that spreads to the rest of the economy. But those numbers just aren’t there for the “general economy” yet.

        • Nudding@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          We have record low unemployment, all my friends are working jobs (and some multiple jobs)

          Try getting a third job, maybe that will help.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Lmao. Life is okay for you so fuck the statistics. That’s why we can’t get any economic reform in this country and y’all are going to be left wondering why the bottom fell out one of these days.

      • Lauchs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Gotchya, it’s all a conspiracy and every time some economics grad student checks the publicly available data for a standard project they are inducted into the ever growing secret conspiracy. It’s obvious!

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Don’t ask a grad student. You’ll stop believing in the economy. It’s the news doing stupid shit. Just a few days ago CNBC brazenly printed a headline proclaiming the end of the cost of living crisis and that wages beat the inflation from the pandemic.

          Turns out they meant the actual pandemic, as in the less than 1 percent inflation in 2020. 2021-2023 is still fucked at record levels though. And the actual data they did manage to print was backwards to the headline.

          Then there’s the actual data we can easily access. Like the unemployment number. If you don’t get a job in the next 6 months it just stops counting you. Most measures of wealth distribution available stop at 100,000. Effectively grouping the middle class with billionaires. (Even researchers at Rand have complained about that one) The further you look, the more shenanigans you find. For example go pull the median household income for the last 30 years from BLS. (The agency cited all over the Internet for those numbers in articles.) I can tell you exactly how many teenagers died by slipping in the bath tub with like ten clicks. But finding the most basic economic data from the government is like pulling teeth.

          • Lauchs@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Yes, free online news that relies on clicks isn’t the most reliable. That’s why you don’t see that nonsense in most respectable journalism.

            As for the 6months not counted, you’re misunderstanding. Typically, folks have to have looked for a job in the last 6 months. (Once they pass that, they are considered a discouraged worker.) Which seems a pretty fair measure, you don’t want tp include people not looking for work, what you want out of the unemployment numbers is “of those working or looking for work, how many are currently unemployed.”

            Here it is by worker, broken down however you’d like. It took a minute and a half of googling and meandering through the website:

            https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?le

            While household income is less of a good measure (do you only count married folks as people, how about households where one partner doesn’t have to work as the house is already owned etc) you can similarly find that with a quick google.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              Here’s where your link leads. Now go look at CDC Wisqars and tell me with a straight face BLS is good. And while general median household income is a very broad measure, it’s the most accurate because it accounts for single people, couples with a single income, and multiple income households. Also individual median income is reliably about half of the household median.

              Edit- I forgot to add, the six month limit is an arbitrary number. Just because they don’t get a job, does not mean they aren’t looking. We have effective surveying tools, we can absolutely ask people what they’re trying to do instead of relying on arbitrary time lengths and records.

              • Lauchs@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                What do you dislike about that link? Are you literally complaining because the labour statistics aren’t in pretty infographics? The BLS is designed for those who most commonly use it and we need access to data sliced well, which it is.

                And for the six month, I recommend you look at the actual definition, which can be found here:

                https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#unemployed

                It seems like you’re angry about your own misunderstanding of the definitions being used.

                • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  No I’m angry they’ve put arbitrary limits on how they collect and give data. And over specifying is a form of obfuscation. You say you like tiny little slices pre made but any competent database query system will create any slice you want in seconds. Instead you’re reduced to searching for the basic information among thousands of these slices. Or trying to put each slice together to stitch the data together.

                  This is not neglect, that would look like an abandoned data set or a data set with nothing but a 90’s query. This is not benevolence, that would look like the CDCs query system. This is by design. Someone made the system shitty for anyone who wants to work outside their pre-made crumbs of data. What you’re seeing isn’t someone who wants pretty little graphs. It’s someone who wants a million lines of data in a hundred tables with a query system that’s worth a damn.

                  • Lauchs@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    I’ve never had cause to play with the cdc data but from what I’m looking st in wisqars, it seems lile you’re limited to a si goes query at a time and to .csv output, so are you manually putting those hundred tables together or is there another site or…?

                    For the bls, as with most organizations that do this sort of thing, there’s a handy API so you** can easily** pull all the data and tables you’d like. Also, of course, they have most of their data available in large, admittedly flat, data files for the odd cross section of people who want to get down and dirty with the data but don’t have the skills to pull JSON requests. Simply follow the original link I gave you, select all the groups/data of interest and to format options.

                    It really seems like you’re just searching for a reason to be angry. At first you were railing because as far as I can tell, you blamed the BLS for free news sites being clickbaity. Then were raging about the unemployment number because you didn’t understand how people were counted. Then got angry about having trouble finding the most basic info and when it was shown, are now angry it doesn’t come in database format???