Or is it? Economists are forecasting GDP growth in the 4th qtr of 0.2% to 0.4%. However the recession officially began with 3 consecutive negative growth qtrs.What if the 1st qtr of 2010 is negative? Are we back in recession then? or do we have to wait another 6 months.
They missed!
ISTR it's *two* consecutive quarters, not three, but in any case...
I was just thinking something similar, and about to post the question: why does it require two consecutive quarters for it to be considered that a recession has started, and yet only one quarter of positive growth to exit that recession.
However, maybe I am misunderstanding the 'two months' aspect. Perhaps a recession is defined simply as 'two or more quarters of negative growth', in which case the second of your two possibilities would apply i.e. it would be a new recession (potentially).
You would think it would be more neutral, though, to deem a recession ended on condition of two quarters of positive growth.
Because if it's just one it can be dismissed as a blip, whereas if it's two, it's more difficult to hide.
Whilst one could, and arguably should, argue along the same lines as above, that just one could simply be a blip, you have to remember the psychology of spin. Good news, however little, always gives cause for optimism, whereas bad news needs to be staring you in the face before it can wipe the smile off it.
BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.