A recession is labeled by the NBER and has a modestly strict definition of: A recession is a significant decline in economic activity spread across the economy, normally visible in production, employment, and other indicators. A recession begins when the economy reaches a peak of economic activity and ends when the economy reaches its trough. Between trough and peak, the economy is in an expansion.
Even if we’re to take this arbitrary definition from this small private organization, the article of this thread states that GDI is the highest and debt is the lowest since 2014. While GDP is 1% from the highest.
Record job numbers were posted in May.
There’s absolutely no evidence that any sector other than the social entertainment sector has been negatively impacted. Even REITs are doing well. Traversing economic damage across sectors is a key ontological definition which the NBER and monetarists agree on. Which is what I mean by systemic.
Most major central banks, including the Fed hold the monetarist parallax of where a recession is endogenous as the other commenter notes—-where all recessions are caused by monetary policy failures.
Indeed the surprising facts of this article are instead predicted by the monetarist, perhaps it’s only the NBER acolytes and Keynesians who are left confused with their certain ontological stubbornness.
I don't care how many references you have claiming that a recession defined only by statistical data points, you're wrong. A coherent definition of a recession involves the stipulation that it is an endogenous crisis. Exogenous effects showing the same data points still can't be the same.
Uhhh that’s a completely different argument. A recession is a recession. Economists, bankers, and policy makers all but unanimously agree that a recession is defined by the NBER.
A recession need not be an endogenous crisis. I don’t know where that’s coming from, but there have been plenty of exogenous induced recessions. 9/11 being one of them. (I know you don’t like references, so I’ll leave that up to you)
There’s nothing less scientific than defining some phenomenon as some authority’s whimsical arbitration. It’s a deeply mistaken view that all economic analysis is incontrovertibly decided by some coterie, and that somehow that is the unspoken agreement.
When there is exogenous disruption, the Fed is responsible and capable of preventing a then endogenous recession. For instance, this is the first time the money stock has been raised proportionally to the extent as the money velocity has dropped—-a correct measure as described by the monetarists.
https://www.nber.org/cycles/june2020.html