Social mobility in the USA

[Torvald Von Mansee]

As described by that leftist commie rag, The Economist:

http://www.economist.com/world/unite...ry_id=15908469

[tater]

The Economist is certainly "left" as defined by American politics. I read it since my father in law gets it. It's clearly left of the WSJ, or even Bloomberg (my cousin's a reporter for the latter, so I read that, too). As is, of course, PEW which that article quotes.

Comparing mobility to countries like Europe that have twice the unemployment isn't really very fair. We freak out with even double-digit unemployment, a condition that's been endemic to the EU for ages.

I think, as your article states, the situation in in fact more complicated. Look at lifestyle changes over the same period. People might make less than mom and dad, but their houses are bigger, they have more (and better) stuff.

I think if people lived a 1970 lifestyle, they'd have loads of leftover money. I sure would.

[SteamWake]

As the country emerges from recession

LOL they lost credibility in the first sentance.

The only reason to read this magazine is to impress lib chicks in an airport lobby

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

LOL they lost credibility in the first sentance.

They lost credibility for stating the obvious?

[CaptainHaplo]

Mookie - they lost credit when they claim the recession has ended - try telling that to the 11.2% unemployed in the state of NC (which doesn't even count those no longer looking for work having given up, or simply run out of benefits but still looking)....

When unemployment as a whole makes a steady, significant improvement over the course of 3 months (say at least .2% per month) then the recession will be ending - to the man on the street.

You can use some fancy definition for what is and isn't a recession - but to the common man on the street - its defined by jobs.

You can use some fancy definition for what is and isn't a recession

There is nothing fancy about an ordinary, everyday well established definition.

So the definition of recession as used isn't really the definition even though it is the usual definition as Haplo doesn't like it and Steamwake doesn't understand it.

[August]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

You can use some fancy definition for what is and isn't a recession - but to the common man on the street - its defined by jobs.

The Dems do seem quite eager to declare victory over the recession.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by August

The Dems do seem quite eager to declare victory over the recession.

Because all the data supports that conclusion. You'd have to be blind or a partisan hack to argue with the fact that the gradual increases in industrial manufacturing, exports, autos, retail sales, durable goods all confirm the economy is getting better.

Remember - a recession ending is not the same as full recovery. It just means that things are getting better instead of worse.

[August]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Because all the data supports that conclusion. You'd have to be blind or a partisan hack to argue with the fact that the gradual increases in industrial manufacturing, exports, autos, retail sales, durable goods all confirm the economy is getting better.

Remember - a recession ending is not the same as full recovery. It just means that things are getting better instead of worse.

The point is you are jumping the gun to declare the recession over. What increases we've seen are minuscule and could easily be temporary.

*I hope that is not the case.* but to declare that we're on the road to recovery is at best premature and at worst putting lipstick on a pig.

[tater]

The definition is like recession in the first place. Consecutive quarters of growth or retraction.

The point is you are jumping the gun to declare the recession over.

The word is entirely dependant on measured levels of growth or contraction.
You cannot just decide you don't like the definition as it must be wrong because your favourite muppet isn't in office and some other muppet got the job instead.
Well to be fair you can just decide that the agreed definition used wordwide is wrong because you don't like it, but you must realise it just makes you look rather foolish when you decide to do that.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by August

The point is you are jumping the gun to declare the recession over. What increases we've seen are minuscule and could easily be temporary.

*I hope that is not the case.* but to declare that we're on the road to recovery is at best premature and at worst putting lipstick on a pig.

You are correct in saying that it could very easily slip back into recession and to some extent it remains to be seen if the road to recovery is sustainable and long term, but based upon the available empirical data the country is indeed out of the recession (i.e. contraction) stage at this point in time.

And tater, there is no one single benchmark test of a recession or recovery. Instead, folks in my business look at a variety of factors and how they interplay and affect each other. The old saw about "two quarters of positive/negative GDP" oversimplifies things.

[tater]

Any less simple definition opens the economist link to criticism based on claiming we're leaving recession. It in effect becomes entirely subjective.

Using a simplistic definition then they could very well be correct that we're coming out of it. Regardless, the economist, like ALL journalism has an editorial slant, and that slant as calibrated by US politics is absolutely "left." It's also very European in sensibility from my reading ("the US is bad, m'kay").

[SteamWake]

http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/12/news...usiness_cycle/

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/12/news...usiness_cycle/

From your own article:

While those and other developments have caused many economists to tentatively place the recession's end date sometime in June or July 2009, the economists at NBER decided they needed to wait for more definitive data before making an official determination.

(emphasis mine)

The NBER is notorious for taking a lengthy amount of time to call an official end to the recession. It took them over a year and half after the 2001 recession ended to call the trough of the cycle. And it took 21 months after the 1990-1991 recession ended for NBER to call that one over.

So the moral of the story is that just because the NBER hasn't said its over yet, doesn't mean it isn't over yet.