Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Buzz Words that are annoying
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Buzz Words that are annoying - Page 23

post #331 of 348
Originally Posted by gnatty8 View Post
And I hate to break this to you, but that is actually a commonly held misbelief about the technical definition of recession. See here:

Well, technically anytime output decreases it is a recession. However, you need at least 2 quarters to assure that it is sustained. That is, we worry about it if it's more than one quarter.

And the point is that no matter if it's one quarter or two, if you want to talk about just output or output and income, etc., it is measurable. It is not debatable. It's a yes or no question.

And the former economics professor in my weeps that Wikipedia was your first source for a definition.

From the San Fran Fed
A significant decline in general economic activity extending over a period of time.

From the Economist magazine.
Broadly speaking, a period of slow or negative economic GROWTH, usually accompanied by rising UNEMPLOYMENT. Economists have two more precise definitions of a recession. The first, which can be hard to prove, is when an economy is growing at less than its long-term trend rate of growth and has spare CAPACITY. The second is two consecutive quarters of falling GDP.

Finally, from McConnell and Brue's Economics (16th ed., McGraw-Hill)
...a period of decline in total ouput, income, employment, and trade. This downturn, which lasts 6 months or more, is marked by...

post #332 of 348
Here is your original post:

As long as we're on this topic, I'd like to bitch about the news people debating whether or not we're experiencing a recession. It has a very strict definition. Either we hit 2+ quarters of declining GDP or we don't. Now, it might not be a terribly relevant measure of most poeple's economic life, but you cannot say we are in a recession if we're not. Just say the economy sucks. Or better yet, use statistics like unemployment etc. to show why the term "recession" doesn't mean much to the every day person.

I have bolded the portion I believe is incorrect. You can have a recession without 2 consecutive quarters of contraction, and it does not have a very strict definition. That is the common misconception of the press referred to in the wiki. In the passage above, you are arguing that recession is strictly defined as 2+ quarters of declining GDP. That argument is incorrect. Yes, a recession can be characterized by this, but not necessarily and not always. In other words, 2 quarters of contraction is a sufficient, but not necessary condition, of identifying a recession. The NBER, which is widely regarded as the pre-eminent source of information on U.S. recessions, states this in their FAQ section:

Q: The financial press often states the definition of a recession as two consecutive quarters of decline in real GDP. How does that relate to the NBER's recession dating procedure?

A: Most of the recessions identified by our procedures do consist of two or more quarters of declining real GDP, but not all of them. The most recent recession in our chronology was in 2001. According to data as of July 2008, the 2001 recession involved declines in the first and third quarters of 2001 but not in two consecutive quarters. Our procedure differs from the two-quarter rule in a number of ways. First, we consider the depth as well as the duration of the decline in economic activity. Recall that our definition includes the phrase, "a significant decline in economic activity." Second, we use a broader array of indicators than just real GDP. One reason for this is that the GDP data are subject to considerable revision. Third, we use monthly indicators to arrive at a monthly chronology.
post #333 of 348
Healing Process
Hate Crime
Village (when used in Newspeak terms "it takes a village to raise a rugrat" et al.)
Sensitivity Training
Anger Management
Time Sharing
Time Out (when parents use it thinking it'll shut the rugrats up)
Play Date
Stress Management
Brand (when referring to a corporation)
Team (when referring to employees)
People Of Color
Communities Of Color
Skanks Of Color
Asshats Of Color
post #334 of 348
post #335 of 348
This thread got really long.
post #336 of 348
Originally Posted by GoSurface View Post
This thread got really long.

There are a lot of annoying buzz words in life..

Each day I attempt visioning a world in which buzzwords play no part..
post #337 of 348
Anything that comes out of a consultant's mouth,
post #338 of 348
Originally Posted by Connemara View Post
Anything that comes out of a consultant's mouth,

Have you worked a day in corporate America? Where do you get this from?

Consultants are unquestionably repeat offenders in this area, but you really don't have standing to be jaded on this issue just yet.

Give it a few years...
post #339 of 348

and simply, any other democrats name
post #340 of 348
Engage, as in, we need to engage marketing for this thing to fly..

You engage the enemy in battle numbnuts..
post #341 of 348
"Based on the fact that..."

I hear this one girl say it all the time during her presentation and it irks me.
post #342 of 348
"From the get-go" negatively impacts me.
post #343 of 348
post #344 of 348
rollcall. I have been hearing that a lot lately. apparently it means 'hours of meaningless banter over the phone conducted by attention whores"
post #345 of 348
Not a buzzword per se (that must have pissed a few people off), but needlessly adorning perfectly capable words

The latest Canadian Dept. of Finance Economic Statement includes a section entitled "Forward Agenda".
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Buzz Words that are annoying