Thanks for the education and for explaining it in such simple terms

I believe that's what's otherwise referred to as "trend growth"

For the 60 years preceding 2007 growth was 3%... since 2007 it was 2%... over that time it represents trillions lost

Obviously the preceding period had plenty of market interference of its own, so *potential growth* would be even higher.

Also the 2% growth since 2007 was largely a product of fiscal stimulus, not productivity.

justin_shocknet

but it's actually growth that's depressed below organic growth.

That’s a nuanced definition of depression that I haven’t come across. What’s organic growth, if I may ask? Growth that arises strictly owing to market forces, with no market interventions?

econ

US has been in a economic depression since 2007

> but it's actually growth that's depressed below organic growth.

That’s a nuanced definition of depression that I haven’t come across. What’s organic growth, if I may ask? Growth that arises strictly owing to market forces, with no market interventions?