I'm reading stories today about how Europe is now in recession. There was a revision to GDP growth for the European Monetary Union that puts first quarter growth in negative territory at -0.4% (annualized Q/Q) matching it with a -0.4% (annualized Q/Q) change in the fourth quarter. This magically gives us two quarters in a row of negative GDP growth – and… here we go again.
Is 1+1=2 the ‘technical definition’ of arithmetic? I have long railed against using this ‘rule of thumb’ as an unimpeachable definition of recession. I am completely opposed to anyone using the expression ‘two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth is a technical definition of recession.’ When was the last time you ever thought of 1 + 1 equaling 2 being something that was technical? There was nothing technical about this. It is, in fact, what we economists call a ‘rule of thumb,’ and that denigrates the concept to something that more accurately describes what it is. It's an exaggeration or a simplification of an underlying process that is much more complicated than the rule that we are applying to it. In this case, two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth is a gross simplification of what are rather complex underlying economic processes. In the U.S., the NBER uses 3-concepts to vet a period as recession: (1) Is the period of economic disruptions long enough? (2) Is the disruption deep enough to be termed ‘recession?’ (3) Is the disruption broad enough across the bulk of the economy? One plus one equals two glosses over most of that.
Not long, not severe, a breadth of discomfort…not pain More to the point, this is a two-quarter decline in GDP that's less than 1% at an annual rate - and that's true even when the two declines are combined! I thought that we put this nonsense behind us in 2022 when everyone failed to call two key back-to-back declines in quarterly U.S. GDP a recession. U.S. GDP in the first quarter of 2022 declined by 1.6% at an annual rate; it declined in the second quarter at 0.6% at an annual rate. These are combined annual rate declines much larger than what we're seeing in the European Monetary Union. And yet we denied calling that a U.S. recession. One of the reasons for this was because the rest of the economy was performing quite well. The labor market continued to perform extremely well and so it was quite clear to everybody that this ‘rule of thumb’ had failed. In the European Monetary Union, the unemployment rate continues to drop. The economy has been under some stress. But I'm still quite against using this two-consecutive-quarter of GDP decline rule to call a recession now.