« Origins of Neo-Hooverism | Main | Three Four-Handed Economist Christina D. Romer »

December 05, 2008

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00e551f0800388340105363c0dd0970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A Brief Word on Economic Vocabulary...:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

If unemployment is above 10% and GDP is 10% off trend, does that count as depression?

I see that the depression following 1893 had a couple of years with unemployment topping 14% (Lebergott) or 12% (Romer).

GDP:
"Estimates of annual real gross national product (which adjust for this period's deflation) are fairly crude, but they generally suggest that real GNP fell about 4% from 1892 to 1893 and another 6% from 1893 to 1894." I don't know whether those particular GDP estimates suffer from the problems that C. Romer pointed out.
http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/whitten.panic.1893

I was going to send a rant out about Reich being an economic drama queen, you did it for me. Thanks!

I'll agree if we use U4 instead of U3. Or agree on some other labor force participation rate metric to account for discouraged workers.

Depression will be declared when tenured economists are paid by the state with commodity cheese.

Depression will be declared [by some Republicans] when President Obama takes the reins of government.

[This is easy to predict because some are already calling our current economic unpleasantness "The Obama Recession."]

For the record, the 1.2 million job loss in the last three months is the worst 3-month performance since February 1975; the 6th worst 3-month performance on record. Bigger 3 month employment losses were only recorded in July-Sep, Aug-Oct, Sep-Nov 1945 Nov74-Jan75 and Dec74-Feb75.

In percentage terms, though, the 0.91 percent 3-month drop is only the 41st worst in history, not quite as bad as Apr-June 1980 and May-July 1980.

Just wait.

Do economists have any terms that describe the first or second derivative of U3, instead of the absolute value? Also, are there assumed limits on the maximum negative 2nd derivative, such that projections can be made on the value of the minimum max value of U3 we'll reach at the base of the recession/depression?

I assume there are models that include these kinds of parameters and try to correlate them with different recessions, etc. Just curious if the results are bounded enough that they are considered useful for prediction.

- Dave

The last time unemployment increased like this was the first oil shock of the 1970s.

Not just discouraged workers, but unemployed teens and twenty somethings who have never or only briefly been in the workforce, us 50 something moms who are lucky enough to afford to take a break even though we could and would like to be working, but respect that the kids and our husbands need jobs desperately, "full time" jobs of 35 hours or so that don't or just barely even pay the bills, and come without health insurance, etc, etc, etc...

Much of our potential workforce is largely unemployed or desperately employed right now.... it may not be a depression, but it's certainly an extremely bad recession already.

When do we call it a depression? When the magnitude of the contraction eclipses all of those pesky things we've called recessions since WWII and we need a new word.

Which may be any day now.

Is there a source for unemployment rates calculated off of the Employer/Payroll survey, instead of the Household survey? I'd like to see U-6, but calculated from the Employer/Payroll survey, not the Household survey (of course you'd need portions of the household survey to get the # of discouraged/marginally attached/etc. workers).

(Somewhat) What crack Said. (Which is one of those sentences...)

I'll agree to your definitions =if= we readjust "headline unemployment" to mean what it did ca. 1932.

Until then, U6 is the best proxy we have of that figure, so there are about 2.5 years to go...

On a quick glance, the E/P ratio hasn't been this low since February of 1993. Basically, any per capita employment gain of the past near-sixteen years is gone.

Heckuva job, that. And that's before any prospective GM bankruptcy.

someone sent me a commentary that said republicans were relatively bad for equities yet tough on inflation (inflation does not increase too much). Democrats, on the other hand, are good for equity values but inflation tends to go up. What is perspective of others?

Dang! If the Supremes had selected Gore in 2001 we would just now be making good progress out of the Gore Depression instead of just starting the Bush Depression. Ha Ha.

How can this be a depression? When people start to a ride donkey instead of a Toyota prius to work, then we can talk.

Until then, I have 3 cars sitting in my driveway, and most of my neighbors do, too.

What world do we live in when we think we have it bad?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search Brad DeLong's Website

  •  

A Rising Sun

  • "I now know it is a rising, not a setting, sun" --Benjamin Franklin, 1787

Graphs

  • Global Warming
    Matthew Yglesias » Yes, The World is Really Getting Warmer
  • The U.S. Federal Budget Deficit
  • Modern Economic Growth Is a Historically Recent Phenomenon
    20090604 issuu Slouching.VI.doc
  • Escape from Malthusland
    20090604 issuu Slouching.VI.doc
  • The TED Spread Normalizes
  • Recovery in the 1930s
    Path Finder
  • Stock Market: The Graham Ratio
    Path Finder
  • Employment-to-Population
    Path Finder
  • GDP Growth
    Path Finder

From Brad DeLong

Egregious Moderation