posted on May, 13 2007 @ 11:38 AM
sorry but the link you used is a second hand account of what greenspan supposedly said the article specifically mentions this
"'The odds are 2-to-1 that we won't have recession,"' he said, according to the person
and the title of that article "recession less likely" that is misinformation
less likely according to what? accoridng to what change in odds?
THE spin is he predicts the same chance of resession within this year as he has been, but the misleading article takes that to say well recession is
less likely than non recession because it is 2:1.
greenspan says the chance of recession THIS year is one in three. a 33 percent chance in recession WITHIN the year. which is 66.6 : 33.3 or 2 to 1
chance of recession not happenng within the year
wow that sounds great, so are we to beleive it is GOOD NEWS that the chance of recession (pay attention to the time frame) WITHIN THE YEAR is "ONLY"
when in past years the chance has been much lower (within the year)
ah let's ask him the chance of recession within the next 3 years shall we? i don't think we will answer that (wonder why?)
so let me get this straight (with all due respect)
u say that with the election year coming economist are spinning news, when this is infact what you are doing in this very post.
you have "recession less likely" as one of your "accurate reports" when the misinformation LEADS one to beleive that greenspan has changed his
stance and said recession has a smaller chance of happening than previous when in fact, it is simply misleading and an abstractioin of language. i.e
2:1 of not happening is 66.6%: 33.3 which equals 1/3 which means simply there is 66.6 chance of no recession within this year.
wow talk about a glass half full type of guy ??
[edit on 13-5-2007 by cpdaman]