Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
Club -- I try to avoid ad hominem attacks, but it seems to me that you are being unusually stupid on this point. What you have just said is in no way related to what I said. I said that a recession is defined as two quarters of negative growth, or "contraction". Your example is of three quarters of positive, though slightly slowing, growth. So, what's your point? Has there been some new revision to the GDP figures thqt I missed, which would showthat there was never actually a recession in 2001? Last I recall, the right was using as Bush's defense the figures showing that the economy was "already in a recession"by March, 2001.
S_A_M
|
I appreciate the no ad hominem attach rule and I try to adhere to it myself. My post was in response to yours which said that there had been a recession. There has not been negative growth in this country for decades, so I think we are now in agreement. As far as I know, the only administration quotes that resemble the one above is that the economy had slowed by 3/01.
