“No you see, idiot, uneducated worker, the economy is doing great actually. Now go back to the your 3rd job’s shift to barely make ends meet.”
“No you see, idiot, uneducated worker, the economy is doing great actually. Now go back to the your 3rd job’s shift to barely make ends meet.”
A recession is a word with a specific economic definition and measurement.
It sounds like you’re saying that if people feel like there’s a recession, it should be called one. That’s not a good idea.
What do you think would happen if we stopped using calvinball measurements like GDP and started using metrics based around people’s material conditions?
If a majority of your population feels like they’re in a recession then you have economic problems and dictionary definitions make no difference.
Stick around in these threads long enough and someone will come and post statistical proof that how you feel is anecdotal and of absolutely no bearing on realty. So at what point do you stop caring about the “definition” of recession and realize that maybe it’s not measured in a way that promotes a health society rather than just a healthy economy?
Record profits and millions uninsured. Record profits and crumbling infrastructure. Record profits and mass layoffs. Maybe it’s fucked?
Or just use a different word that means what you’re trying to say. When you remove the meaning from words, it becomes harder to solve problems.
Full agree. Why not just say main street has been shit for decades and there isn’t a recession? It’s easy.
That seems a lot more meaningful. GDP is going up, and most people are still feeling the crunch? That is a correctly identified issue that needs a solution.
If you do stuff that historically fixes a real recession, you’re going to potentially make that problem worse.
Who is removing the meaning? If anything i thought we were trying to define it better and maybe challenge the traditional meaning because i don’t think it suits the current times. You are free to use a different word.
So your argument here… is that you’re not trying to remove the meaning from a word.
You’re just trying to change the traditional meaning and ask people who use the word correctly to use a new and different word.
You’ve given me a lot to think about, thank you.
Or maybe that correctly might be too traditional? If that’s too much i can just stop. I don’t wanna overload ya.
Actually rereading my content: What i meant was to say “well just a different word” in regards to the current situation if recession doesn’t fit into the metrics of what a recession is. If you don’t like recession being used than give people who feel like it’s a recession a different word.
Nah. Whatever word we use, some propagandist will argue its semantics rather than argue that people’s lives should actually be good enough to eat, be happy, be healthy, have a home and raise kids.
When the media talks about recession (same as your papers, your favourite news site, it’s the media in general), they mean “shit’s bad and you’re struggling”. Same in school, when you learn about a recession, you learn about the simplified definition. That’s fine. I don’t care what your economics book is saying, I deal with real science, not imaginary shit.
So when people start complaining because their living conditions are getting worse, the same media and the people who suck up to them for some reason (wink wink) come back with “akshully, I think you’ll find things aren’t that bad because technically, this is not a recession”.
The same thing happens when a government counts “unemployment”. They define it in such ridiculously restrictive ways that every time they report on it, it magically goes down.
“Oh, you’ve gotten out of bed at least once in the past 12 hours? Well, that’s a job, buddy! Well done, you’re now self-employed and can’t be counted as unemployed.” Telling me “unemployment” is down is meaningless and I couldn’t care less. Telling me “it’s not a recession so everything is fine, trust me bro” is just as meaningless.