Depends - it's not (yet) as bad as the "recession" of the early '80s (4.00 / 1)

Where unemployment nearly reached 11%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...

The unemployment rate in the U.S. reached 10.8% in December 1982-higher than at any time in post-war era. Job cutbacks were particularly severe in housing, steel and automobiles. By September 1982, the jobless rate reached 10.8%. Twelve million people were unemployed,

People were discouraged from looking for work then too.

---

by: tietack @ Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 11:38:29 AM CST

We have changed the way we measure (4.00 / 2)

unemployment since the 80s.

By the standards we used then our unemployment rate is 11%

http://www.blueoregon.com/2008...

---

by: Dameocrat @ Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 13:37:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Depression spin (4.00 / 1)

I read once they only called the Great Depression a "depression" because they thought it sounded better then "recession".  Funny how naming works.

If we call it a Depression, will Wall Street tycoons jump out of their windows?

---

by: Mark Matson @ Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 11:39:54 AM CST

They Used To Call Them "Panics" (4.00 / 3)

The Panic of 1873
The Panic of 1893

A lot more colorful, I think.  Almost sounds exciting.  Who says we have better PR nowadays?

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 11:48:50 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I prefer the term "correction" (0.00 / 0)

Because it subtly suggests that the good times are the anomaly and bad times are normal and expected.


"It's real, but it ain't exactly there."

---

by: SpitBall @ Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 13:54:16 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Actually, "Correction" Is A Relatively Accurate Term (0.00 / 0)

since it came into vogue during the era of bubbles, when the "good times" were pretty much all built on hot air.

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 18:04:03 PM CST

[ Parent ]

This is more of a mini-depression than a great one (0.00 / 0)

Kinda depends on where you are when the lightning strikes, dunnit? If you're living from paycheck to paycheck, and you lose your job, and you aren't a polymath or a Harvard MBA, PhD or JD, mini and maxi are another of those distinctions without a difference that we keep hearing about.

Besides which, as the scythe of the dialectic makes its sweep through our amber waves of grain, the blythe assurances of those who still know where their next meal is coming from are hardly reassuring. Please, Matt, a little more  humility, a little more sympathy, a little more gravitas, for Christ's sake. If this isn't the perfect storm, it's most assuredly good enough for gummint work....

---

by: William Timberman @ Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 11:41:11 AM CST

Look At The Calendar (4.00 / 3)

It's still early yet.  If we avoid another Great Depression, it will be because we take the right steps to avoid it.  Under Hooverism, the Big 3 would fold.  And that would really start the dominoes falling.

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 11:51:17 AM CST

Jumping the gun, much? (0.00 / 0)

This is more of a mini-depression than a great one.

So far.

---

by: FearItself @ Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 12:14:12 PM CST

Yep (0.00 / 0)

Feels like 1930 to me.

---

by: Robert in Monterey @ Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 13:20:14 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Timelines matter (0.00 / 0)

We have 11 percent unemployment in a little less than a year into the recession. The height of unemployment during the Great Depression occurred three years after the crash. It may be a mini-depression now, but it's too early to say how "great" it will become. You'd have to look at the unemployment two to three years into the "recession" for figures that would be comparable.  

---

by: johnraymond @ Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 12:48:54 PM CST

Except, Of Course (4.00 / 1)

Things could unravel more quickly now, what with all that "we're all connected" jazz we've been imbibing for the past 20 years.  Which is why Barney Frank's comments about Obama getting into the game are certainly called for, IMHO.

Either way, however, there's definitely a whole lot more downward potential out there we've barely begun to tap.  

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 13:37:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The Great Recession? (0.00 / 0)

Of course if it took them 11 months to call it a recession then we won't know for another some months if it has reached the Great Recession stage. It would of course need to be worse than any of the other recessions since the Great Depression in order to call it a Great Recession.

After that we could move through the phases of mini-depression, depression and great depression.

Panics seem to move too quickly for this to be called something like that. But certainly the events of the last couple months certainly seem to qualify as a panic.

Jeff Wegerson - Prairie State Blue

---

by: wegerje @ Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 13:53:31 PM CST

"throw in the prison population" ? (0.00 / 0)

Why don't we throw in the retirees, too!

I enjoy your work, and appreciate the honesty (both personal and intellectual) in these blogs, but there is no reason to put in ridiculous items such as "throw(ing) in the prison population" to the unemployed numbers to boost the unemployed percentage.

---

by: GWMustGo @ Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 15:43:33 PM CST

why (4.00 / 1)

I enjoy your work, and appreciate the honesty (both personal and intellectual) in these blogs, but there is no reason to put in ridiculous items such as "throw(ing) in the prison population" to the unemployed numbers to boost the unemployed percentage.

Are prisoners employed, underemployed, unemployed, or just not looking for jobs?  Hard to say, as they don't really fit anywhere.  My rationale for including the prison population under underemployed or unemployed is that imprisoning 2 million people has an economic rationale.  Rather than educate and train people so they can be employed at decent wages, we lock up a few million of them.  Perhaps they shouldn't be included as unemployed, or maybe some other 'painfully out of the workforce' name should be used to describe their situation.

Regardless, that is not true of retired people or children, who are simply not looking for jobs.

---

by: Matt Stoller @ Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 16:44:44 PM CST

[ Parent ]