Hacker News Reader

Comment by gruez | Hacker News Reader

>(Chartbook: tmsnrt.rs/2Yyra8r)

Is there a reason why the dip in 2016 isn't considered a recession, but this dip is?

The first figure shows the percent change from the previous year, so it’s basically a moving slope of the actual trade volume. If it’s positive, trade is increasing. Compared to the slope in 2009, I wouldn’t call the current decrease a recession (but I’m not an economist). It may be negative but it’s still pretty close to zero.

The author’s thesis is that mistaken protectionist policies that affect trade are not in the interest of business and the economy. I don’t know that we can conclude that, as changes in policy tend to create new opportunities for businesses, both entrenched and new. The same cannot be said for policy that is continuous and non-changing.

But changing policy at rapidly and at whim makes it difficult for businesses to invest in anything that has a longer payoff. I think on balance business people would prefer to have a fairly stable macroeconomic and regulatory environment. Look at the UK, where uncertainty over Brexit has caused a substantial drop in business investment.

Investors are different than business owners, and have different goals. Business owners tend to find opportunity in change, whereas investors prefer a steady status quo.

A recession is a prolonged period of economic contraction. That dip wasn't long enough.

As for now, it's to early to call. It takes time trip measure GDP; the author's opinion is that, when the data will come out, it will show that we entered a recession.

There were fears of recession in 2016 too

And 2015

Also 2017-2018.

Basically every year there are fears of recession.

>Basically every year there are fears of recession.

Not if you're an economist. We have some standard indicators to gauge economic growth, and those years you mentioned looked fine according to most indicators.

The "economists don't know what they're doing" trope is overused. Economists are always wrong, but they still have a track record of being less wrong than everyone else.

"Economists have correctly predicted 9 of the last 5 recessions."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-28/economist...

More like, predictably bad in a wisdom-of-the-crowd way that could actually result in a good prediction: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-07-19/recess...

So, that's what economic math looks like!

Most economists see a recession as a negative economic growth for a period of 2-3 quarters.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com