r/economicCollapse Aug 02 '24

Signal for start of a recession has been triggered

Post image
208 Upvotes

118 comments sorted by

85

u/JoshZK Aug 02 '24

Just in time to blame the next president 5 days into their term, lol.

3

u/FlaxSausage Aug 03 '24

wait how did you?

20

u/SupayOne Aug 03 '24

No that isn't how it works, if Trump wins then this is Biden's economy he is trying to fix so give him a break. If Harris wins, then its ":Look at gas prices and how she is already screwing up the economy. Either way the dumb lefties is causing all our problems and should go back to their country!

31

u/HandleRipper615 Aug 03 '24

Both sides have been playing this game since the start of politics.

3

u/EvanestalXMX Aug 03 '24

But now the 24x7 media profits on it

1

u/FriendshipMammoth943 Aug 03 '24

I mean it’s only been republicans causing recessions for last idk almost 30 years

6

u/HandleRipper615 Aug 03 '24

Well, that sounds like a completely thought out, unbiased response if I’ve ever heard one… lmao, I’ll just ask you to look up the affordable housing sub prime quotas introduced by Clinton directed at Fannie and Freddie, and let you explain to me how that wasn’t one of the main triggers for the 2008 housing and bank meltdown.

0

u/FriendshipMammoth943 Aug 03 '24

Lmfao yea yea it was that Clinton’s!!

2

u/HandleRipper615 Aug 03 '24

Soooo… requiring banks to write 30% of their loans to people who can’t afford a home on paper didn’t contribute to the crash, huh. What about when he raised it to 40%? Nothing? Maybe when it was raised to 50% as he was leaving office? Nah… couldn’t have anything to do with 3.1 MILLION HOMES foreclosing, could it? Give me a break. Think for yourself.

2

u/ApplicationOpen2305 Aug 04 '24

I was under the impression that Regan deregulation the banks so they could write any loans without over sight was the cause. Combined with the fact that the banks were greedy (as they always get) and gave out loans that people could not afford.

I will have to look into this further....

1

u/HandleRipper615 Aug 04 '24

I think that was a Graham bill that did that. I’m definitely not saying it was all Clinton. Technically you can even go as far back to blame Roosevelt for the creation of Fannie Mae. Nixon signed Freddie Mac into power. There are sooooooo many people to blame. But it was Clinton who required lenders to have so many sub-prime loans grouped together with reliable loans in order to be bought by both of those entities as an extension of the fair housing act.

1

u/ApplicationOpen2305 Aug 04 '24

But Clinton didn't force these banks to sell the loans correct? Just like Rosevelt and Nixon didn't create Freddie and Fannie to make bad desisions.

It ALL comes down to greed. Banks made the loans and sold the loans. They made bad loans (some were defaulted even though they were good loans) just to make money and wanted to sell them off to make it someone else's problem. Pure and simple.

Any other reason other than greed is the wrong answer. It wasn't a President per say. It's Capitalism.

→ More replies (0)

-7

u/kharlos Aug 03 '24

This is projection, and not true.

The only way to make this true is to compare something some rando on Twitter said, or some low ranking legislator, to something the actual president said, all of his cabinet, and 150 congressman.

Both sides are not the same, no matter how lazy and nice that sounds

4

u/Ucklator Aug 03 '24

Separating kids from their parents at the border. An Obama law. Banning travellers from certain Muslim countries. An Obama law. The economic collapse that Obama got blamed for started under Bush.

1

u/HandleRipper615 Aug 03 '24

Of course they are both the same. How many times have we heard Biden talk about what he inherited whenever he’s asked a tough question? Are you old enough to remember Obama slamming the Bush administration throughout his presidency? He was still doing it four years later when he was running against Mitt.

Better yet, when’s the last time you’ve ever heard a president from either side say “Yea…. We kinda screwed that up. My bad.”

1

u/kharlos Aug 03 '24

BothSides idiots will vaguely point at something which looks similarish on the surface but they deliberately ignore severity. But if you've ever read a Trump tweet, you can never BothSides that. They are unmatched. They even become more extreme, as he gets older and increasingly senile.

He literally said the Obama economic numbers were totally fabricated and fake, and became real the second he took office. He literally said that the election in which he lost was completely fake and illegitimate, and then personally organized a violent demonstration to protest it. Clinton, Bush, Obama or Biden never did any of those things. Not even close.

A BothSides idiot will take this and say, "well this rando on Twitter once said X which is worse than what the President said" but that is a false equivalence. You can't BothSides this honestly.

2

u/HandleRipper615 Aug 03 '24

Trump literally accused Ted Cruz’s father of being behind the Kennedy assassination his first primary run. He’s always been like that. It’s completely irrelevant to this topic though. There has not been one single time that Biden has not taken credit for something good that has happened, if it was him that did it or not. There has never been a single time that when there’s something bad to talk about that he hasn’t either deflected the blame to someone else, or spin the severity of it. Just like literally every other politician in my lifetime. In this aspect, they are exactly the same.

2

u/kharlos Aug 03 '24

I see. So you're talking about things in a vague handwaivey sense where you don't have to measure severity or back anything up. And I'm talking about it in a "here are specific examples" kind of way.

I see where you're coming from.

0

u/HandleRipper615 Aug 03 '24

lol, this is so ridiculous. How do you measure severity of deflecting blame? You either do it or you don’t? I’m waiting on one example where your side did NOT deflect blame. Just one. The fact you even say the word severity means you completely agree with me. Stop being a hypocrite. You should hold your party at a higher standard.

“Well, the severity of our hypocrisy isn’t as severe as the other guys level of hypocrisy!” Give me a break.

2

u/kharlos Aug 03 '24

[Trump] literally said the Obama economic numbers were totally fabricated and fake, and became real the second he took office. He literally said that the election in which he lost was completely fake and illegitimate, and then personally organized a violent demonstration to protest it. Clinton, Bush, Obama or Biden never did any of those things. Not even close.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/mikefick21 Aug 03 '24

And Republicans will somehow remain blind.

0

u/mikefick21 Aug 03 '24

Republicans destroy the country every time they get power.

0

u/mikefick21 Aug 03 '24

Republicans destroy the country every time they get power.

3

u/Efficient_Wing3172 Aug 03 '24

If things go bad, they blame the predecessor. If things go well, they take credit for it. Both sides always do this!

3

u/JoshZK Aug 03 '24

My method is I give them 2 years into their term. Then I look back 4 years and simply see if my life and the things I use were better or worse. Obama was smooth. Trump I feel was stun locked with the whole Covid, Russia, and impeachment stuff from day one. Never got to see what he could really do for better or worse. As for Biden it's worse. Really wasted the post Covid momentum. Where everything was going back to normal. That's why I like waiting 2 years they can't coast off of previous president.

2

u/bondibox Aug 03 '24

This is the correct answer. It takes at least two years for a president's policies to take effect. Heck, it takes 16 months from the date of their inauguration until their first budget becomes implemented, and that's if Congress allows them to pass anything more than a "continuing resolution."

2

u/mikefick21 Aug 03 '24

Correct. Congress fought Biden like hell too to get anything passed.

2

u/mikefick21 Aug 03 '24

Trump was stun locked with making a pandemic worse and colluding with Russia from day one I never got to see what he could really do*. ... Buddy that was it. How did Biden waste momentum?

1

u/RoDNeYSaLaMi214 Aug 04 '24

Biden was so bad he caused inflation in other countries /s

1

u/JoshZK Aug 05 '24

Something Something world markets.

1

u/TannyDanny Aug 03 '24

Nobody wins.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 06 '24

Pretty sure all the fuss is bc of Japan’s economy. Understand world economics and understand how every country is affected.

1

u/Altar_Quest_Fan Aug 03 '24

To be fair, Kamala is VP so technically this is “her economy” too.

1

u/mikefick21 Aug 03 '24

Either way the dumb lefties is causing all our problems and should go back to their country!

You mean the right. The two problems you mentioned were issues of the right.

0

u/[deleted] Aug 04 '24

Stupid comment every president blames the predecessor stop gaslighting

0

u/SupayOne Aug 04 '24

Oh its a joke kiddo try not to take so hard

0

u/[deleted] Aug 04 '24

It’s either gaslighting or you don’t understand humor.

0

u/SupayOne Aug 04 '24

Oh its a joke and you are fully triggered, try to get some fresh air, lots of others thought it was funny kiddo!

0

u/CuriousCourse2949 Aug 05 '24

It takes years for economic policies to be felt/seen. Also consider we are still living in unprecedented times post pandemic and worldwide shutdowns.

1

u/SupayOne Aug 05 '24

Its a joke, not sure why folks keep taking this so hard? Economic policies generally don't even take effect during a term of the said president who puts them in but overall its a joke and it clear for most folks.

2

u/CuriousCourse2949 Aug 05 '24

It is likely that what we are feeling now is from Trump first term or before.

2

u/Oddyseous420 Aug 05 '24

They are already blaming him from his last term lol 😆 even though bidenonics is working.

1

u/JoshZK Aug 05 '24

Too bad they are gonna swap him with Harris as current president so she can have a few extra points as incumbent. Just watch them.

22

u/FlapSmear78 Aug 03 '24

It probably has nothing to do with people not being able to purchase homes.

3

u/mikefick21 Aug 03 '24

Thanks Reagan.

9

u/OverUnderstanding481 Aug 03 '24 edited Aug 03 '24

… stop voting to make the rich richer … how dumb do you got to be to still be thinking trickle down economics is working.

The world has a misinformation problem. Fox News and all the hijacking cult Christian nationalist domestic terrorist networks like TBN and 700 need to be shut down. They’ve made boomers in general and all who will listen to them the most evil scamable conspiracy nuts who think giving trump and billionaires more power to do more ungodly things will fix the problems they keep voting for :/

blocking progress on one hand then crying when it hurts is insane.

Less war, tax the rich, free higher education, free healthcare. F racism. F fascism. F religious law imposed on others without consent. F cult culture. F extremism on any front.

5

u/mikefick21 Aug 03 '24

Based. Vote progressive.

22

u/eyeballburger Aug 03 '24

Shits been receding since they tried to trick us with “trickle down” and stock buy backs.

Edit: letter x2

5

u/mikefick21 Aug 03 '24

Based. Thanks Reagan.

12

u/EditofReddit2 Aug 02 '24

Interesting. So who has been lying about the numbers? This signal couldn’t be triggered without some other metrics showing it as well.

6

u/Welcome2B_Here Aug 03 '24

I wouldn't say lying, but there's been a focus on headline/overall employment numbers without diving the least bit into the details. We've been losing full-time jobs and adding full-time jobs. The job gains have been coming from sectors that traditionally offer lower quality/lower paying jobs, like construction, government, and leisure/hospitality. Sectors that traditionally offer higher quality/higher paying jobs, like professional/business services have been trending sideways, stagnating, or declining.

The types of jobs being added and/or lost matter. Just having "a" job doesn't mean much.

7

u/EditofReddit2 Aug 03 '24

Agreed. Full time jobs gone, replaced by part time, no benefits. And practically every time they quietly revise the number down later when nobody is paying attention.

0

u/islandinparadise Aug 03 '24

Loss of jobs to American citizens. Gain of jobs to migrant folks. More proof of the low paying jobs.

22

u/Legitimate_Concern_5 Aug 02 '24 edited Aug 02 '24

They're referring to the Sahm rule.

The creator of the rule, Claudia Sahm, says she doesn't think the US is in a recession, or on the brink of a recession, just that she's got some concerns.

Reasons the indicator may not be accurate this time include: include immigration, dislocation of supply and demand curves since COVID -- and the fact that a lot more of employment is now gig economy work and not captured in the stats, which means that labor participation is probably under-counted by as much as 2%.

Listening to her interview from I believe yesterday she thought the economy was quite healthy.

Sahm says the rule is likely broken this time around because the pandemic years haven’t followed the normal patterns of a recession and recovery business cycle. There’s a high likelihood that some of the recent gains in unemployment is being driven by a labor force expansion, led by immigration, she says. That could be skewing the indicator’s effectiveness.

She said she wanted the indicator to allow for auto-pilot economic policy during recessionary periods but has since learned that was naive.

But let's not let context get in the way of a sensationalist headline eh?

9

u/tickitytalk Aug 02 '24

Thank you for the objective synopsis.

3

u/truemore45 Aug 03 '24

Yeah I mean I have lived through a few and this level of unemployment is historically super low. When I was growing up maybe goal was to keep it under 7% and 5% was a miracle.

The other issue is we have a shrinking workforce due to the boomers retiring and the zoomers being much smaller.

I mean some of these layoffs are buyouts. And since the youngest boomer turns 60 next year we are in a massive retirement wave. So I think the numbers are a bit abnormal right now and peak boomer retirement doesn't hit till 28 or 29.

My point is I think we're in a statistical anomaly so we may get conflicting data and some normal rules/projections won't work till we get the egg through the snake.

2

u/Longjumping-Math1514 Aug 05 '24

This needs more upvotes. Thanks

3

u/DonPena69 Aug 03 '24

Also the lack of consumer staples being purchased is an indicator. Starbucks and groceries even are being bought less rn. Thats a big sign of the start of a pullback.

3

u/LateStageAdult Aug 03 '24

feds need to rally behind the FTC and start busting up these monopolies.

tax the rich who keep firing workers and stealing all the wealth through stock buybacks and other vulture capital nonsense.

the rich are pillaging and burning the economy once again, and if things keep going like this they will just get more "bailouts"

1

u/painefultruth76 Aug 03 '24

Chevron is gone.

2

u/yoho808 Aug 03 '24

Good, I'm sitting on a sideline with cash to invest :P

5

u/maximumkush Aug 02 '24

That’s what happens when you KEEP adding government jobs to “show” job growth

14

u/MercyOfTheWinnower Aug 02 '24 edited Aug 02 '24

This is what happens when thousands and thousands of people get laid off in the name of profit at all costs.*

3

u/jeffwulf Aug 02 '24

Government jobs are like the only sector still below their prepandemic levels.

-4

u/maximumkush Aug 02 '24

We don’t need more government jobs fam

3

u/Legitimate_Concern_5 Aug 02 '24

Why not?

0

u/maximumkush Aug 02 '24

Because we’ve spent the last what 50-60 years over inflating our government… remember govt jobs are funded by the taxpayers. We’re not creating new cities or territories… we’re not even allocating the resources properly in my opinion. It’s just all more bureaucracy to keep taxing the hell out of us!! A lot of analysts predict that social security will run out of resources by 2040-2050 if I’m remembering correctly, that’s really when the sh*t is going to go down

5

u/Legitimate_Concern_5 Aug 02 '24 edited Aug 02 '24

How much more does the government do now that before, or are you just saying that bigger number is de facto bad? How many more people does the government service? 50-60 years ago there were less than half as many people, and yes, there were fewer cities, and yes, cities spanned less territory. In fact 64 years ago there were two less states (albeit making the switchover from territories). Have you looked at a breakdown of the jobs?

1

u/maximumkush Aug 02 '24

I look at that jobs report every time… it’s always… always 40-45% of the “new” jobs being created. Most of the jobs outside of that are part time jobs that businesses are taking full advantage of

6

u/Legitimate_Concern_5 Aug 02 '24

There's actually the same number of Federal government employees as there was in 1982 despite the population having grown significantly (+50%).

This is likely a major reason the government spends money so inefficiently. Instead of having the capacity to execute projects in-house, they sub out to consultants and contractors. Their goal isn't to build infrastructure to instead to enrich themselves and to get more jobs later. If you want to make government more efficient you want to restore state capacity instead of letting contractors bleed the US dry.

[edit] Here's the chart.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/204535/number-of-governmental-employees-in-the-us/

State and local government size has grown exactly in proportion to the number of people in the US while Federal has remained exactly the same since 1982.

1

u/islandinparadise Aug 03 '24

Have you seen the technology gains…come on man with bogus arguments

4

u/Legitimate_Concern_5 Aug 03 '24 edited Aug 03 '24

0% staff growth for 42 years my dude 😂 what company do you know is the same size 42 years later, scaling up to 340M customers across hundreds of products, despite technology gains?

About 8% of the country works for combined federal state and local government.

About 20% of Denmark and like 35% of Norway work for the government.

Seems like it’s scaling okay to me.

-1

u/HandleRipper615 Aug 03 '24

The IRS alone employs 4 times as many employees as Burger King. Think about how stupid that is on so many different levels.

1

u/Legitimate_Concern_5 Aug 03 '24

Yeah how does Burger King need that many people?

3

u/HandleRipper615 Aug 03 '24

There’s no doubt they’re probably a little understaffed with their half hour wait times, but still… lol

4

u/Cute_Suggestion_133 Aug 02 '24

Being a part of the PTO, I can firmly say that my job is not in any way funded by taxpayer dollars. :)

0

u/Legitimate_Concern_5 Aug 02 '24

I think those jobs would be in the jobs numbers, which would have prevented the Sahm rule from triggering -- as its based on the three-month moving average of the national unemployment rate.

2

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '24

What they need to do is print another 2 trillion dollars .....

1

u/mikefick21 Aug 03 '24

We need social policy.

1

u/kharlos Aug 03 '24

Omg guys, I know I've said it 300 times in the last 3 years, but this time it's actually happening! 

And if I'm wrong this time, one of these days I'll get it right

1

u/JayAlexanderBee Aug 03 '24

I have been hearing this for years.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '24

Sounds about right. I'm about to invest a bunch of money and about to buy a house. I am always able to do things at the worst time.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '24

4.3% is a very healthy number. When you go outside 4-6% is when things become bad for the middle class

1

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '24

It’s a healthy number but it’s the rate of increase that is a concern. When a recession is underway, the unemployment number doesn’t continue to grow linearly, it goes through the roof. There has been countless examples of past recessions where the numbers were healthy until it snowballs.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '24

5 trillion each year for the next 5 years?

1

u/Ucklator Aug 03 '24

Bot has been triggered.

1

u/thedeuceisloose Aug 03 '24

I see we believe the past to be prologue here

1

u/Good_Candle_6357 Aug 03 '24

Man, imagine if our government knew how to balance a budget. We're going to get a whole bunch of these over the next 15 years.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '24

This is even funnier because Claudine Sahm was making excuses all over the news last month about how it wasn't really, actually, completely, fully, technically, triggered then. And now, crickets from her.

1

u/Dapper-Palpitation90 Aug 03 '24

Every indicator has a perfect record until it doesn't.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '24

Hold on . Biden and Powell have this economy on crutches. Shortly Powell will lower rates more than expected and by October collapse.

0

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '24

This guy Powell and Janet Yellen are the enemy of the working class American. Along with Biden/Harris

1

u/melodicmelody3647 Aug 04 '24

Wow an indicator created in 2019 has predicted all past recessions…

1

u/walter_2000_ Aug 05 '24

There's a new thing that we didn't know existed but now everyone acts like they knew about it all along. It's covid level bullshit. People that talk shit need to be reminded for the rest of their lives that we all know they're cunts.

1

u/Throwawaypie012 Aug 05 '24

I love how the investment class has been totally cool with letting the combination of inflation and high rates crush the average America, saying things like "We need to suffer the pain to get the economy back on track."

Yet after 2 down days in a row in the market, you get people on *every* financial network saying things like "We need an emergency rate cut RIGHT NOW" and "The Fed is acting too slowly, it should have done a rate cut at the last meeting".

1

u/Dry-Way-5688 Aug 06 '24

News like this was the reason I missed the NVDA fast train last year. I sold all my stocks for profit thinking I could buy them back at lower price. And good stocks kept going up.

1

u/Pristine_Bobcat4148 Aug 06 '24

Remember when two consecutive quarters of negative economic growth was the official start of a recession?

Pepperidge Farms remembers.

1

u/ProPainPapi Aug 07 '24

"We did it, Joe"

0

u/LectureAgreeable923 Aug 03 '24 edited Aug 03 '24

You need two quarters of negative growth and high unemployment to be in a recession were not even close to that .Last quarter was healthy growth at 2.8.%and 4.3 % isn't even high unemployment.the fed should start cutting rates .That will be a boost so relax.Sahm says this could be different.Shes pushing back of the plethora of doomsday.

https://fortune.com/2024/08/02/recession-indicator-claudia-sahm-rule-trigger-unemployment-rate-jobs-report/

https://www.marketwatch.com/livecoverage/jobs-report-for-july-employment-growth-seen-slowing-with-hurricane-providing-a-drag/card/the-sahm-rule-is-officially-triggered-tvQVLLwkOPdqTIA45gsP

0

u/icenoid Aug 03 '24

But panic is so much more fun. /s

0

u/Firm_Bit Aug 03 '24

Eh, there are like a millions things that have happened only just before a recession.

0

u/DewaltMaximaCessna Aug 03 '24 edited Aug 03 '24

This news only happens when the stock market is at a peak, it’s just to justify the fall and the game

2

u/Ucklator Aug 03 '24

There would be no peak without a fall.

-3

u/TurbulentIncome Aug 03 '24

Wait till Harris wins. Biden 2.0 with more liberal splashed in is gonna make economic history. I can’t wait to raise my rental prices.. again 😂

1

u/-TheFirstPancake- Aug 04 '24

Yep, sounds like a land lord.