I mean not to insult you, but that's one of the most horrid oversimplifications I've seen on this forum and that's saying a lot. I understand you're probably doing your best to wrap your head around this. It has nothing to do with what our current Fed funds rate is in comparison to previous booms and recessions. The economy was hitting on all cylinders in 1984 when the Fed funds rate was above 11%. That doesn't mean anything. The problem is that rates were at 0% for 9 of the last 15 years with trillions in additional stimulus on top of that in the form of QE and the markets got used to that free ride. In the late 1990s, understand that the Fed rate had been even higher in the early 90s and way higher in the 1980s. We didn't have a bunch of banks holding vast quantities of severely overvalued treasury bills and we didn't have corporations that were being forced to refinance their debt at 5 to 6 percent higher than the original note. This is a consequence of raising interest rates so quickly, but at the same time, the Fed painted themselves into that corner and it became a damned if you do damned if you don't scenario.
How much Debt did we have then? The effect of higher rates is multiplied by the huge increase in the National debt since the late 90’s. The late 90’s also appeared great until the dot con crash wiped it out…
Odd that I hear many experts on CNBC using the 2 consecutive quarters of negative GDP as criteria for a recession, I guess those guys are all idiots too? I guess CNBC is reporting fake news
Did I say that? It’s all over the place that generally 2 consecutive quarters of negative GDP is considered to be a recession. Perhaps you should take it up with all the guest experts on the leading business and financial channel who quote that metric.
Liberals own the media and the government. Here’s something though. U.S. recession ended in April 2020, making it shortest on record
I am now dumber having to read the takes in this thread by @mdgator05. Like arguing with a flat earth’r.
Your stock “brocker” is an idiot if he’s making significant short term changes based on backwards looking data. It was a nice attempt at a dig though. Call your broker (who the hell still calls them a broker anyway) and have him/her tell you the definition of a recession. Report back because I’m on pins and needles.
Per todays data: Job market/payrolls still running red hot. What was that talk about imminent recession? Seems the fear of recession was greatly exaggerated. Based on futures, market doesn’t like even the possibility of higher rates, but it seems the fed just can’t kill this economy. I love how right wing “economists”/talking heads are feverishly trying to figure out how to find negatives out of this report. Fox Business channel talking heads super depressed right now, even they are having a hard time spinning it (one dude even pulled a “forget the data, look at the polls!!!!”… on a business channel? LMAO. Let’s face it, it’s a Goldilocks jobs report for the fed (strong job growth + continually moderating wage growth). The only “negative” is it could be a high water mark, even without a full recession surely as wage growth slows you might get less juice in the labor market participation (more people choosing to retire or stay on the sidelines if wages stop growing).
Someone remind me every 6 months to make a post saying that a recession is coming. Eventually I will be right
I'm sorry that NBER, the group that defines recessions, Macroeconomics textbooks, and just about any credible source that you could find disagrees with you. But that is why you aren't really bringing anything to the table here.
We're going to have another stock crash. the big question is when. Our economic cycle has been leading up to this. Did you think interest rates would stay low forever? they're finally going up and it seems like all people want to do is complain about it. I hope you all have been preparing for this instead of waiting until it's happening.
Don't have a stock broker. But if I called one and they blindly said '2 quarters of negative GDP growth' I'll know they don't know what they're talking about.
The hot employment numbers are simply going to drive more inflation, hence higher rates from the Fed. I know you don’t want to accept it, but eventually that levee is going to break.
Of course rates would go up it’s the speed they went up, usually is over the course of years not months. Plus they were at record lows for years. People got used to cheap money. Doesn’t phase me in the least really my rate is low, not buying a new car or house anytime soon.
I guess CBNC needs to clear their slate of expert commentators by that definition then I hear it all the time from them…
