Its Officially A Depression

[Realistbear]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/edmundconway/100001543/this-recession-just-became-a-depression/

This recession just became a depression

By Edmund Conway Economics Last updated: October 23rd, 2009

It is difficult to know what to be most shocked by in the gross domestic product figures published by the Office for National Statistics this morning: the fact that we are in the longest-lasting deepest continuous recession in recorded history or that no-one in the City foresaw it*.

Leaving aside the City’s failings, with which we are intimately familiar, the scale of the economic collapse is disturbing. The National Institute for Economic and Social Research has been calling this a “depression” rather than a recession for some time – these figures surely now underline such a description.

The stimulus wore off here quicker than elsewhere because our back hole was larger. Not long before reality strikes elsewhere. Deflation anyone?

[buyinbrazil]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/edmundconway/100001543/this-recession-just-became-a-depression/

This recession just became a depression

By Edmund Conway Economics Last updated: October 23rd, 2009

It is difficult to know what to be most shocked by in the gross domestic product figures published by the Office for National Statistics this morning: the fact that we are in the longest-lasting deepest continuous recession in recorded history or that no-one in the City foresaw it*.

Leaving aside the City’s failings, with which we are intimately familiar, the scale of the economic collapse is disturbing. The National Institute for Economic and Social Research has been calling this a “depression” rather than a recession for some time – these figures surely now underline such a description.

The stimulus wore off here quicker than elsewhere because our back hole was larger. Not long before reality strikes elsewhere. Deflation anyone?

[Alan B'Stard MP]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/edmundconway/100001543/this-recession-just-became-a-depression/

This recession just became a depression

By Edmund Conway Economics Last updated: October 23rd, 2009

It is difficult to know what to be most shocked by in the gross domestic product figures published by the Office for National Statistics this morning: the fact that we are in the longest-lasting deepest continuous recession in recorded history or that no-one in the City foresaw it*.

Leaving aside the City’s failings, with which we are intimately familiar, the scale of the economic collapse is disturbing. The National Institute for Economic and Social Research has been calling this a “depression” rather than a recession for some time – these figures surely now underline such a description.

The stimulus wore off here quicker than elsewhere because our back hole was larger. Not long before reality strikes elsewhere. Deflation anyone?

I'm suprised. 44 comments of scathing vitriol even before the dogs of HPC have been let of their leashes.

[tpbeta]

The National Institute for Economic and Social Research has been calling this a “depression” rather than a recession for some time – these figures surely now underline such a description.[/indent]

It's just not true. A depression is traditionally defined as a 10% loss of GDP. We've only had 6%. When (and I think now it is probably a when not an if) we get to 10% you could say in retrospect it was a depression I suppose.

[winkie]

The truth of the matter is it is tough out there, no source of income can be relied on, and any income received can not be relied upon to purchase what it did in the past.

[Guest UK Debt Slave]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/edmundconway/100001543/this-recession-just-became-a-depression/

This recession just became a depression

By Edmund Conway Economics Last updated: October 23rd, 2009

It is difficult to know what to be most shocked by in the gross domestic product figures published by the Office for National Statistics this morning: the fact that we are in the longest-lasting deepest continuous recession in recorded history or that no-one in the City foresaw it*.

Leaving aside the City’s failings, with which we are intimately familiar, the scale of the economic collapse is disturbing. The National Institute for Economic and Social Research has been calling this a “depression” rather than a recession for some time – these figures surely now underline such a description.

The stimulus wore off here quicker than elsewhere because our back hole was larger. Not long before reality strikes elsewhere. Deflation anyone?

Yup

The inflation stage will come later.

[dr ray]

Its been funny watching Gordon Browns boasts being revealed as hollow, one by one.

After he had banished inflation and boom-and-bust and put the UK on a path of endogenous growth more able to withstand the downturn, and reduced inequality in the UK, he continued to boast that however bad it was at least house repossessions and unemployment were not as bad as under the Torys and that he had presided over the longest period of economic growth in UK history (which actually started some time before Labour even came to power such was the anticipation of Nulabours economic genius)

Now he has a new boast as the Prime Minister who presided over the UKs longest recession but, somehow, I don't expect to hear it from him.

[Guest KingCharles1st]

I suppressed my initial gut feeling of "pompous spoonfed twit" to at least try and read this "seminal" article.

I stopped at THIS sentence-

"Leaving aside the City’s failings, with which we are intimately familiar, the scale of the economic collapse is disturbing. "

Eeerrrr- HEELLLLOOOO-- and just WhereTF have you been hiding since 2003?

I imagine his anus is a nice resting place for the editor's todger on many occasion- how else could he have missed the last decade?

Edited October 24, 2009 by KingCharles1st

[Saving For a Space Ship]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/edmundconway/100001543/this-recession-just-became-a-depression/

This recession just became a depression

By Edmund Conway Economics Last updated: October 23rd, 2009

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=128420

This article has already been posted & discussed here

-----------

Philosophical question:

If a thread falls off the forum front page and RB is not around to see it, does he make a search?

Edited October 24, 2009 by Saving For a Space Ship

[interestrateripoff]

It's just not true. A depression is traditionally defined as a 10% loss of GDP. We've only had 6%. When (and I think now it is probably a when not an if) we get to 10% you could say in retrospect it was a depression I suppose.

And who picked to define a depression in that way?

It wasn't until the 60's there was a clear definition of what a recession was even then it's creation was politically motivated to obfuscate economic reality.

Edited October 24, 2009 by interestrateripoff

[JonnyTomes]

Its been funny watching Gordon Browns boasts being revealed as hollow, one by one.

After he had banished inflation and boom-and-bust and put the UK on a path of endogenous growth more able to withstand the downturn, and reduced inequality in the UK, he continued to boast that however bad it was at least house repossessions and unemployment were not as bad as under the Torys and that he had presided over the longest period of economic growth in UK history (which actually started some time before Labour even came to power such was the anticipation of Nulabours economic genius)

Now he has a new boast as the Prime Minister who presided over the UKs longest recession but, somehow, I don't expect to hear it from him.

You won't. He doesn't even see it. Pathologically disturbed and incapable of associating reality with his 'vision' (one eye anyone?)

[Lander]

And who picked to define a depression in that way?

It wasn't until the 60's there was a clear definition of what a recession was than it's creation was politically motivated to obfuscate economic reality.

Unemployment levels reached around 25% in the 30's depression. It's actually worse than that this time for people aged 16-25

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125006273172925327.html

Edited October 24, 2009 by Lander

[interestrateripoff]

Unemployment levels reached around 25% in the 30's depression. It's actually worse than that this time for people aged 16-25

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125006273172925327.html

Exactly, relying on a single definition is pointless, if you consider the economic "inactive" on invalidity benefits the figures are even worse.

I don't like rigid definitions but we do appear to be up a certain creek with no paddles and boat has a huge hole in it. Once you have a definition you can then work around it an manipulate the data.

"Goodhart's law".

This is the theory named after the economist Charles Goodhart, which states that once an economic indicator is made a target of public policy it becomes increasingly devalued and eventually irrelevant or even counter-productive.

[Wimbledon88]

Its been funny watching Gordon Browns boasts being revealed as hollow, one by one.

After he had banished inflation and boom-and-bust and put the UK on a path of endogenous growth more able to withstand the downturn, and reduced inequality in the UK, he continued to boast that however bad it was at least house repossessions and unemployment were not as bad as under the Torys and that he had presided over the longest period of economic growth in UK history (which actually started some time before Labour even came to power such was the anticipation of Nulabours economic genius)

Now he has a new boast as the Prime Minister who presided over the UKs longest recession but, somehow, I don't expect to hear it from him.

Yes, thank heavens this has come and can be latched onto him. But he will just fall back on "it started in America" anyway.

I just started a topic complaining about the annoying black rectangle that flashes up whenever you open a new page here and the unusable format and it was pulled straight away, not even moved to off-topic. Why is that?

[dr ray]

Yes, thank heavens this has come and can be latched onto him. But he will just fall back on "it started in America" anyway.

I just started a topic complaining about the annoying black rectangle that flashes up whenever you open a new page here and the unusable format and it was pulled straight away, not even moved to off-topic. Why is that?

As annoying as it must be, I don't think it affects house prices or the economy. Should have been posted in the thread about the forum update.

[Wimbledon88]

As annoying as it must be, I don't think it affects house prices or the economy. Should have been posted in the thread about the forum update.

The thread about the forum update is locked.

[porca misèria]

It's just not true. A depression is traditionally defined as a 10% loss of GDP. We've only had 6%. When (and I think now it is probably a when not an if) we get to 10% you could say in retrospect it was a depression I suppose.

That's 6% of a monetary base that's been devalued by 20%. So you might be looking in the 26% region for real decline.

[scottbeard]

In the same way that you need two quarters of negative growth for a recession but only on quarter of growth to exit the recession and given 'seasonal fluctuations' this is easy for the governement to achieve when they need to do this. So I would expect that we will exit the recession in December with say 0.2 growth and then have further growth of 0.5 in March ready for the election.

If the government could fix the figures this easily, why would they let figures rack up the longest recession of all time first?

[Jack's Creation]

That's 6% of a monetary base that's been devalued by 20%. So you might be looking in the 26% region for real decline.

To get a reasonably accurate figure, you'd probably have to include the measured 20% devaluation against a basket of import weighted currencies. Which would mean that the true amount of value destruction could possibly only be 20% of the balance of payments difference ( if negative) as a percentage of the overall measurement of GDP. Does any body else think that this makes this make sense?

Edited October 25, 2009 by Jack's Creation