By Kevin D. Williamson
Wednesday, July 27, 2022
When is a recession not a recession? When it is bad
for Democratic incumbents.
From time immemorial, the definition of “recession” in
the financial press and the political conversation has been “two or more
consecutive quarters of declining real GDP.” The Biden administration, fearing
bad news in the near future, is trying to weasel away from that definition. More to the
point, it is trying to persuade its friends in the media and in the bureaucracy
to do the president’s weaseling for him.
“But but but!” come the predictable replies. “What about the
National Bureau of Economic Research, huh? They use a different definition!”
This is true. The NBER defines a recession subjectively,
as a “significant decline in economic activity that is spread across the
economy and that lasts more than a few months.” You can read a more detailed
discussion of that here. The NBER notes that it has at times defined a
recession as something other than two consecutive quarters of declining real
GDP: “For example, in the case of the February 2020 peak in economic activity,
we concluded that the drop in activity had been so great and so widely diffused
throughout the economy that the downturn should be classified as a recession
even if it proved to be quite brief.”
What that example says is not what Biden and his friends
want it to say, in that the NBER declared a recession in spite of not having
two quarters of tanking GDP — and what the Democrats want is for the NBER to
declare that there is no recession despite two straight
quarters of tanking GDP (if the numbers do indeed prove to be as bad as
expected).
You can be sure that if there is real GDP growth of
0.0000000001 percent, the Democrats will snap right back to the two-quarters
rule, and declare that there is no recession.
What the Biden administration and such slavering
Democratic factota as the Center for American Progress are arguing is that we
should not consider ourselves in a recession, even if we have two quarters of
declining real GDP, because the labor market is so strong. The problem with that line
of argument is that the labor market is not very strong — we have low
unemployment, true, but we also have declining
real wages. “Americans are working more hours for less money” is not a
plausible definition of a strong job market. And even with that low
unemployment, we haven’t even gotten entirely back to the pre-pandemic number
of total jobs.
Those declining real incomes are the reason the Biden
administration’s “No recession here!” strategy is not only dishonest but
genuinely stupid. Ask the average American how the economy is doing and you are
not going to get a lecture about real GDP vs. nominal GDP and the distortive
effects of quarterly measuring conventions. You are going to get an earful
about the cost of gasoline, food, clothes, rented apartments, airfares, and
practically everything else. And the Biden administration is not going to talk
its way out of Americans’ skyrocketing bills.
In fact, the No. 1 item on the NBER’s list of indicators
to consider when evaluating whether we are in a recession is “real personal
income less transfers.” And when it comes to real income, the patient looks
like he’s ready for the electric-cardiac-paddle thingies:
How much fun does that look like?
The words cannot be spoken aloud, but surely somebody has advised Joe Biden that he should be praying for a mild recession — because a recession is usually what you get when your anti-inflation policies are working. And while the nominal problem is GDP, the real problem is inflation.
No comments:
Post a Comment