Is there a magical point when one moves into the other. What are the distinguishing features between the two? I'm an ignoramus in the domain of political economics!![]()
Th old rule is an unemployement level greater than 14%.
The Difference
So how can we tell the difference between a recession and a depression? A good rule of thumb for determining the difference between a recession and a depression is to look at the changes in GNP. A depression is any economic downturn where real GDP declines by more than 10 percent. A recession is an economic downturn that is less severe.
By this yardstick, the last depression in the United States was from May 1937 to June 1938, where real GDP declined by 18.2 percent.
Last I heard, the White House drops someone from the unemployed numbers when their unemployment insurance runs out. Might add that the one percent of the population in prison are discounted as well. Charming, eh?
Near as I could tell they decided some time in the '40s to invent the word recession so there'd never, ever be another depression. Reality is in the eye of the spinner these days...
And should a prisoner be counted as employed or unemployed- or not counted at all? It makes more sense to not include them. They can't exactly leave where they are to get to work even if they wanted to.
Some divergent ideas here. It is interesting that some people say that the government wants the economy to be bad so that they can take over while others say that the government is trying to hide the state of the economy. Wouldn't they want people to think things are bad if they want to impose more control?
It is true that an economic slowdown was called a depression all the time until the Great Depression came along. Then they decided to use a different term to describe lesser downturns (and probably because of the strong connotations from the Great Depression).
And should a prisoner be counted as employed or unemployed- or not counted at all? It makes more sense to not include them. They can't exactly leave where they are to get to work even if they wanted to.
So it appears that when the soup kitchen queues stretch around the corner from all the boarded up businesses it will still be called a recession.
I suspect no-one will take responsibility for the mess. It will be OPEC'S fault, no - make that Iran and Venezuala's fault, and George Bush will be spotted tap-dancing from time to time.
Thanks for the information.
The old rule is an unemployement level greater than 14%.
But, with the enormity of big government, you could see a depression with unemployement lower than 14% because the US gov't would monetize even more debt to try to fix the problem by hiring the unemployed, to work unproductive jobs.
But, as we know, government merely eats, wastes, and consumes capital, it does not create capital, so government will fail when they try that measure.
edit:
I knew I was plagiarizing from memory, here's a source:
http://www.mises.org/journals/rae/pdf/rae3_1_5.pdf
See "Definition of Depression"
The game they seem to be playing involves several stages, much different messages for each stage, and careful timing.
It's a recession when your neighbor loses his job,
it's a depression when you lose yours.