This is a company that I know previously to be quite ethical, yet here they are doing dirty tricks. Market falls can be a threat to companies, but by engaging with propaganda trolls can influence the market and make money. Read any mortgage or real estate propaganda and you'll see they're all using the same words, false comparisons, etc. Maybe the true signal of a recession is the defiance of admitting there is a recession.

I ended up asking my real estate agent for suggestions and she suggested a local hole in the wall originator that gave me significantly better rates than anyone else.

It’s stunning to me that people will outsource all decision making to an app they saw in an advert, for their most expensive life purchase.

Their rates are terrible, and even light research would show they were uncompetitive, but it seems many americans value convenience over common sense.

> Nine in ten CEOs in the U.S. (91%) believe a recession will arrive in the coming 12 months, while 86% of CEOs globally feel the same way

- So what? Most CEOs I know cannot foresee what they will eat tomorrow. No offence, but being CEO makes you no better at predicting the future as the janitor. "They have, more info, experience" yada yada... I knew just too many incompetent CEOs.

Also, what does it mean, cutting jobs... how many? why? which ones?

Seems like content, but completely empty.

Seems a bit circular to me.

We're not smarter than everyone else. No, we're just more clued in to what's happening with our capital markets, vendors, competitors, and customers.

Try to be forward thinking about what trends might be coming. It used to be easier to do this but now everyone hops on trends quickly so it's harder to maintain a head start.

I'm looking at my next venture right now and I'm mostly focused on the overall macro picture surrounding the growth prospects of an industry. Things like population dynamics are playing a bigger part of how I see opportunity. The best CEO won't accomplish much in a dying or flat industry.

Ignore people who say "X is saturated". Everything is saturated. What matters is if the market is going to grow.

Now I'm more focused on wealth deployment and preservation and trying to focus less on building new things. Building is where my passion is but it's high risk and I don't need to be taking risks anymore.

Here is an interesting thought experiment: if McKinsey wanted to force a recession, could they invoke one by telling all the CEOs the worst possible news and making terrible recommendations?

This recession is a self fulfilling prophecy intentionally triggered by the Fed at the behest of Congress behind the scenes to curtail the public meta mind technology companies were creating via social media.

Don’t stop doing. There’s no reason our agency must be coupled to macro economic views of a coddled minority. The public gifts them their hallucination of being a valuable member of society. We don’t have to coddle their figurative identity.

Do you mind expanding on your statement that the current actions of the fed/congress are a reaction to technology companies?

No, really, most people have a stake one way or another, and when presented a chance to influence the populace, by making people afraid of losing their jobs and making other CEOs afraid of hiring like crazy, they’ll say the line whether it’s true or false.

They are not. CEOs are generally optimistic. this is a very bad sign. 99.99999% of knowing what someone will do is what they say. people try to read way too much into other things, "what were they really thinking? how has that changed over time?" etc etc. sometimes you just have to snap out of it and LISTEN.

and what you hear is very bad, and far from 'useless'.

as far as whether we are heading into a recession or not, we are not. We are already in a recession. We've had 2 quarters of shrinking GDP. maybe we notch a positive quarter in between the next negative quarter, but its a recession. stop over thinking it.

Two periods of negative GDP growth without a rise in unemployment is unprecedented, but that is largely the result of bullwhip effects of the pandemic which was unprecedented.

The actual recession is going to be substantially worse.

The people who argue that we're in a recession right now due to two quarters of negative GDP growth while discounting the fact that every other indicator of the economy has been pretty healthy up until recently just makes me think "tell me you were too young to remember 2008/2001/1992/1982/1980 without telling me you were too young to remember".

IDK it is probably pointless to argue about this with people who will double-down on the strict definition that they think they know. Wait for another 12-24 months and let me know if it feels and order of magnitude worse or not.

(Agreed, though, that CEOs are generally almost naive optimists and that when they're all pessimistic about the economy it can almost become a self-fulfilling prophecy)

That definition of recession is not codified.

The official definition is that we’re in a recession only after an octogenarian declares it (retroactively of course).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2...

Using the 2 quarters rule (something that has no official bearing) means that 2 of the last 3 recessions (2000 and 2020) weren't recessions.

Almost every situation in history of 1 0 1 is considered a recession but 2011, but that one wasn't considered one because Obama was president. however, every time that I know of, back to back shrinking quarters has always been a recession, as far as I know.

And it matches up, we all know its a recession now (except those who want to deny its one because of their political view). its a recession, you only look more wrong trying to deny the obvious.

Only two though-- Q2 was so sharp that everything after that was recovery.

It wouldn't be unusual for a major economic calamity to occur within a single quarter. Both Covid lock downs and the collapse of AIG/LB happened within a matter of weeks.

But that's not receding, that's has receded.

If your implied definition is slipping below the growth trend, then any '50% collapse' is going to ensure 'recession' (by this definition) for probably (or even hopefully) a long time.

A recession is past tense. One can speculate that we are in a recession, but it's not feasible to collect all the information necessary to make that determination in real time. The best one can do is say, "a recession started six months ago, and I think the situation is better/the same/worse."

Shift the quarter to begin in Feb and you'd only have 1Q of decline.

That is why the 2 quarters rule is stupid and why 2020 doesn't fit the rule.

It's just a rule of thumb, not some profound maxim of economics.

That said, you can apply the same to GP's suggestion of months, if the timescales are even shorter.

Begin using the data > Section 1 Domestic Product and Income > Table 1.1.5 Gross Domestic Product > Modify > First year 2016 (refresh table)

How convenient!

look at consumer debt levels and how several major banks in Europe are ready to blow up, not a sign of a healthy economy. Unemployment rates are a lagging indicator for recessions, companies don't start laying people off until revenue takes a hit. The Fed has outright said they are going to keep raising rates until people start losing jobs so inflation declines.

It primarily exists to give you a believable model that promotes behavior of the masses towards the interests of the owners of the company or nation state that controls it.

It primarily exists to give me a believable model that promotes your beliefs.

That kind of statement is literally true for everything.

Another more conspiratorial take. Since wage growth finally started again for the average worker, talks of recession are an attempt to crush that growth.