Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Technical Defition of Recession Draws Controversy
Here you can see how people define recession on their own way. Defining recession in terms of per capita real GDP rather than total real GDP does not make much sense to me. Measuring it in terms of employment situation could serve a better option. Just wonder what you think.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think the goverment should try looking at both of the variables and see which one out weight the other. If unemployment is higher then use the GDP or versa. I think thats more accurated.
ReplyDeleteTalya Arrington
Talya Arrington
I think from that article that the rich are not worried about if the economy gets better or stay worst because they are going to still be wealthy regardless. I think the government needs to focus on GDP and getting the unemployment rate down.
ReplyDeleteBritni Streets
I believe what Warren Buffet is saying is true, we are not out of the recession yet. I think we can say we are out of the recession when the unemployment goes down and the inflation goes up. I also agree with Buffet, that the government should raise taxes for the top 2% of the people. Otherwise the rich are just going to get richer and the poor, poorer.
ReplyDeleteLeyia Getachew
I think its a bad idea just deciding whether the country is in a recession by just basing it on the GDP or even rGDP. GDP is simply the measure of the total value of goods produced in a country over a certain period of time. However, equal amount of goods can be produced with the smaller labor force.
ReplyDeleteUnemployment, underemployment and inflation should factor into the decision of whether or not a country is in recession.
Latif Masud
I don't think that it's a good idea to measure recession on the basis of per capita GDP; I believe that it would be important to look at recession base on employment and unemployment rather that per capita GDP
ReplyDeleteI do think that it is fine to interpret recession differently depending on who you are talking to. This is because people who are running a corporation can tell if for the own goals are they on the right track to making positive profit. Whereas when people are hurting from per capita GDP they and the government need to come up with ways to help. I am keeping in mind that there is a conflict of interest at times but that’s capitalism for ya.
ReplyDelete-Ari Jacobovitz
I agree that defining recession in terms of per capita real GDP rather than total real GDP does not make much sense. This is because there will always be a separation in society in terms of the wealthy and the poor (the article clearly portrays this). Because of this, assigning a per capita real GDP will not clearly show the approximate value of goods produced per person in the country. Measuring the recession in terms of employment situation would be much more effective because there would be no bias between the wealthy and the poor; both would be working, but with a different salary-or may not be working at all.
ReplyDelete-Reekan Honest
Here I feel another recession is on its way unfortunately. Tons of people in our country are having hard times paying off mortgages, loans, and their debt. President Obama needs to come up with a better stimulus within a reasonable amount so we can not have a repeat of The Great Depression. Unemployment is also a serious issue starting with layoffs from The Big Three automotive companies. Jobs are in need right now and people need to start finding some before it goes bad.
ReplyDelete-Mark Lepri
The per capita GDP can be misleading. Measuring/ defining a our recession should be measured with the real GDP as well as other factors. I think Mr. Buffet is right and the tax burden should go to the wealthiest percent of our nation. It is the work of the average person that puts money into their pockets in the first place. When the unemployment rate declines significantly and those employed are making enough to survive and save, then I'll begin t believe that the recession is coming to an end.
ReplyDeleteAccording to me, view of Mr. Buffet about recession is right. Technically, we are out of recession but it will take time to have economy like earliar. Common people believe that when recession occurs unemployment rate would be high and so do I believe.So according to my view, recession is defined in terms of employment rate.
ReplyDeleteKena Patel
I also agree with what Mr. Buffet said about the recession. I agree that we are out of recession, and that we are just looking at the after math of what the recession has caused, and it is going to take a long while until we recover to what our economy was before. I also agree with what Mr. Buffet said about the double dip recession, "We will not have a double-dip recession at all. I see our businesses coming back almost across the board." I also think that when you are defining a recession, we should use the unemployment rate instead of real GDP. I think that it would be more accurate. This is because there is always a gap between the rich and the poor, and the article will back me up on this. I agree with what Reekan Honest said about how measuring the recession in terms of unemployment rate and how it would be much more effective. This is because there would be no bias between the wealthy and the poor; both classes would be working, however there would be a different salary, or not even working.
ReplyDelete-Bindiya Patel
I think that recessions should be measured or compared with unemployment because GDP and unemployment have an inverse relationship. As GDP increases unemployment decreases and vice versa. This would aslo put a recession into more understanable terms for most people.
ReplyDeleteElisabeth Ekkel
Measuring a recession in terms of employment is a logical idea. I Believe due to the fact that that GDP and unemployment correlates with one another. When GDP increases the rate of unemployment decreases and when GDP decreases the rare of unemployment increases. Therefore, measuring a recession based on the fluctuations of employment is a better alternative than defining recession in terms of per capita real GDP rather than total real GDP.
ReplyDeleteI think it would be more logical to compare whether or not we are in a recession using unemployment and employment rate in the U.S. as opposed to using GDP.
ReplyDeleteafter reading the article i believe measuring a recession in terms of unemployment and employment rate. is a better choice than measuring it in terms of per capita real GDP rather than total real GDP.
ReplyDeleteErika Brown
After reading this article, it seems that measuring a recession in terms of employment is a smart idea. Like many people have already stated, unemployment and GDP react oppositly to one another. When GDP goes down, employment increases just like when GDP goes up the employment rate decreases. Mr. Buffet's statement about us being out of a recession seems accurate to me because the unemployment rate is slowly going up. Although it is not as high as it was before we went into a recession, it is not as low as when we were in one so therefore i believe that we can measure a recession by the unemployment rate.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is inaccurate to simply base whether we are in a recession, or not, on the rate of GDP. GDP is just a measurement of newly produced goods and services. I think it would be more accurate to measure the economy base on the employment and unemployment rate with the rate of GDP.
ReplyDeleteLinking the employment to the GDP is a regular or sort of a fact. Whenever one of them goes up the other decreases, vice versa. Measuring the recession in terms of per capita real GDP rather than total real GDP does not reflect the true or the perfect justification of a recession or its measurements, it should be total real GDP instead.
ReplyDeleteNow regarding what Buffett did by flip-flop on his recession view there could be reasons the first time he declared a statement or an explanation and then he changed it. One of them could be his private benefits, by deriving the spot lights on someone else when the heat is turned.
Abdullah Alessa
To define the recession we have to be more accurate. if we just look at the real GDP or GDP it will give us some number but not exactly a clear vision of what we mean by recession. However if we look at the unemployemnt rate versus employembt rate we can easily get almost an accurate idea of recession.
ReplyDeletei agree with mr.buffet we are out of the recession but it will take time before we see change. we were so deep in trouble you couldnt really think you would see a change the day we were declared to b free from the recession. things are changing slowly but surely.
ReplyDeleteNataiya Taliaferro
haha ya thats funny he goes by per capita real gdp, for him that sounds better i suppose? At least he says he is willing to pay more taxes and yes i agree we are probably at a stable line and soon to rise. I work for my family business and agree that things are looking better compared to what they were, still alot of work and progress to make though.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I'll believe that we're really completely out of the recent recession when I can actually see business picking up around the Detroit area. That is how I measure when the recession is over.
ReplyDeleteAdam Kirvan
I think that recession should be based on more than just real GDP. But I do think that unemployment should be counted in recession because when there is a high number of people unemployed than that means the economy is not doing very well.
ReplyDeleteI agree that measuring recession in terms of employment is a better option than per capita real GDP. Per capita real GDP is a country's real GDP per member of the population. So a rich person and a poor person would offset; which doesn't show anything about recessions. Now, employment would not have any offsetting. During recessions we know that unemployment should be high because it is harder for people to find jobs or keep the ones they have; I believe unemployment should be the measure of a recession.
ReplyDeleteAjdin Alic
In my own thoughts and words I believe that the recessions is defined by low emplymeny rate, and real gdp is growing unfortunately. People who have jobs quit less during recssion and people that do not have jobs can not find one becuase no one is hiring. A recession occurs when prices get higher and people loose jobs, and there is a very high unemployment rate.
ReplyDeleteBuffet's comment makes sense, if you are defining recession in a different way. There has to be one clear definition that everyone sticks to no matter the situation. Buffet says we are not out of a recession based on his own view on what a recession should be defined by. Based on real GDP, we are not in a recession anymore, but the economy is still bad. Buffet is just trying to get people to take action by saying the recession is not over. He does not want people to think we are in the clear when conditions are still bad for the average household.
ReplyDeleteI agree that measuring a recession by the employment situation could serve as a better option. Buffet makes a good point when stating that the richest people need to have stricter tax codes and that they have had the benefit of the doubt over the years. It would be a great step in moving towards an economy that was once prosperous by raising taxes on the wealthiest top 2 percent of citizens.
ReplyDeleteAnthony Vitale
I think that the recession shouldn't have ended so fast. If the figures aren't where they need to be then ,technically we should still be in recession. I am not going to listen to a rich person who tells us that word recession should be redefined. I agree that tax systems should take more from rich people. If a person is rich in America ,they got that money from lower income people who buy their business, or just plain hard work. If a person make's a huge excess of money selling business ,they should pay higher taxes.
ReplyDeleteTechnically, we are out of recession but it will take time to have economy like earliar. Common people believe that when recession occurs unemployment rate would be high and so do I believe.So according to my view, recession is defined in terms of employment rate.
ReplyDeleteBrittni Crawford
ReplyDeleteRecession should be measured by employment and real GDP. We were in a recession because of a high unemployment rate. No jobs means no money to feed family, cloth or live. Now when you have alot of people thats not able to do that it becomes a recession and the real GDP of unemployment population rises and brings on recession.
Brittni Crawford
I also agree that defining recession should be based on employment. If there is a high unemployment rate then that means there is not money being made to be spent back into the economy. When the unemployment rate is low there is more money in circulation. This means that businesses have the funds to actually hire, train, and employ workers, which does not seem like a traditional feature of recession. The more money is circulation the faster we will leave behind recession-like symptoms.
ReplyDeleteI think that the definition on recession should be based on employment and unemployment rates rather than the per capita GDP.I think there is less of a bias when looking at the unemployment rate.
ReplyDeleteBina Patel
I think neither GDP nor GDP per capita can be an indication of the recovery since they conflict with the long term economic healing. And, I believe stock market indicates like S&P 500, Dow Jones, and New York Stock Exchange can be used as benchmarks to measure the performance of the recovery.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the term recession should be measured by real GDP but also with how the trend in employment is. Companies don't usually drop a big number of employees if there's just a small drop in how much they put in toward the GDP. Usually the the big cuts come from companies constantly dropping in how much money comes in.
ReplyDeleteBecky Sweeney
I agree with Buffet that the recession is not over. It doesn't really have much to do with GDP, it's mainly about unemployment. Until the unemployment rate goes back down, people will be without jobs, which means they don't have enough money for everyday living. This is what ultimately causes a recession.
ReplyDeleteI believe what Warren Buffet is saying is true, we are not out of the recession yet. I don't think that it's a good idea to measure recession on the basis of per capital GDP; I believe that it would be important to look at recession base on employment and unemployment rather that per capital GDP. I also agree with Buffet, that the government should raise taxes for the top 2% of the people. I think this because the top 2% have the most money. Otherwise the rich are just going to get richer and the poor, poorer.
ReplyDelete-Eric Platte
I do not think that unemployment alone is a good indicator. A recession is referring to the health of the economy going down. If less people are needed to do the work and still able to produce the same amount of product required (for consumption), wouldn’t that mean the economy is doing ok? I know that if there is a high level of unemployment and income across the board is down meaning spending then production would be effected that this would affect GPD but is this not a valid reason to combine the two as an indicator? I believe it is as long as GDP is weighted heavier in the formula.
ReplyDelete-Rafael Schaffa
I believe that a recession should be based more than just per capita GDP. I think that we also need to look at employment and unemployment to help us figure out if we are in a recession or not.
ReplyDeleteI believe that a recession should be based more than just per capita GDP. I think that we also need to look at employment and unemployment to help us figure out if we are in a recession or not.
ReplyDelete-Ryan Katz
Unemployment in my opinion a very good indicator of determining a recession. when there has been recessions like the one we just got out of or the ones in the past there was always a high unemployment rate and until the unemployment rate goes down i don't think the times we are in will get much better.
ReplyDeleteKim Brooks
I don't think that it's a good idea to measure recession on the basis of per capita GDP. I think that a recession should be based on more than the per capita GDP alone. We also need to look at things such as employment and unemployment.
ReplyDelete-Katelyn Lubaway
I think that a recession should be based on multiple things and not just GDP. I don't believe that, in order for a recession to end, that GDP has to be back at where it fell from. I believe that a recovery of GDP should be looked at as a result of the end of a recession.
ReplyDelete-Jacob Losen
I think that in a lot of cases, the GDP takes into account employment and unemployment, although indirectly. Looking at the spending approach to GDP, I think its safe to assume that people will spend less if they are unemployed and more if they have a stable job. A lack or increase in spending would result in a decrease or increase of the GDP. Again this by looking at the GDP through a spending approach.
ReplyDelete- Andrew Joseph
I believe that the recession should be determined by various factors other than per capita real GDP. There are various factors we should look at to determine if we are in a recession.
ReplyDelete-Alyssia Jernigan
Astrit Mehmeti
ReplyDeleteIt does make sense when this guy says that it is best to measure the GDP per capita. Because that way you have a better estimate of your real GDP and therefore know exactly when you are out of the recession. This also helps to closely monitor economies progress on a much shorter time interval which may help them resolve the issue working towards it on a good well known timely fashion. Basically the problem solvers will know how the economy is doing at any given point in time and from there can activate actions to drive the economy which ever way they want it to go.
I think the economy is still struggling to get back on its feet. Soon enough we will be back almost to normal. I ddont see too many Detroit businesses coming back to open their doors. I believe some of the unemployed are milking their benefits. I f they are collecting more in unemployment why would they want a job that wont offer as much. I am glad to see Mr. Buffet is accepting if they were to raise his taxes because of his income but I dont agree that rich people should have to pay some high rediculous prices in taxes. Its not their fault that some people cant make it. Im sure they did their time in college or they worked their butts off to get them where theyre at now.I just hope the economy gets better. I was not around when the economy took a hit in MI and the hit didnt really effect me. I was in the military thank god so I didnt loose anything.
ReplyDeleteMike Truman
Recession shouldn't just be based on per capita GDP. There are other factors that help determine when a country is in a recession. Unemployment is one of the major factors, but it isn't the only one.
ReplyDelete-Rita Murillo
Real GDP should be used when measuring whether or not if the recession is over. the per capita option is too small and addresses each person separately. Real GDP takes in account of gdp and price adjustments which would make more sense and simplicity.
ReplyDelete-Donald McDowell
Per capita GDP doesn't accurately measure or predict a recession. Why? The technological advances have been a prime example for an inaccurate measure of economic recessions for decades in this country. A prime example would be the industrial revolution, the curve that took place was tremendous. While the technological advances grew faster than the number of trained employees the unemployment numbers tainted the true measurements of fact. Clearly a economic recession needs to be redefined to include the technological advances and curve that takes place when something like this occurs.
ReplyDelete-Simon Foster
In my opinion when defining recession, I think the most important factor to look at would be unemployment. This is because their may be a slow down in economic activity without a big change in gdp, or there may be a change in gdp without much slowdown in economic activity, however when unemployment is on the rise there is always a slowdown of economic activity for a prolonged period of time.
ReplyDeleteNour Hijazi