Latest news with #AlanGreenspan
Car and Driver
2 days ago
- Automotive
- Car and Driver
Unfair Fight? 2002 Subaru Impreza WRX vs. Audi S4 Quattro and BMW 330xi
From the October 2001 issue of Car and Driver. The Law of Diminishing Returns: A yield rate that, after a certain point, fails to increase proportionately to additional outlays of capital or investments of time and labor.* *American Heritage Dictionary, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1992. Relax, we're not about to launch into a sleep-inducing lecture on money supply, interest rates, and the effects of Alan Greenspan's bedtime rituals on the Gross Domestic Product. The definition is for those of you who are wondering how we could even think of comparing a car costing $25,000 with two that each cost 60 percent more. The question here is: If you spend that extra 60 percent—40 thousand bucks in all—do you get a car that is 60 percent better? In the 40-grand corner we have the Audi S4 Quattro and the BMW 330xi. In the other corner—actually, down in the bargain basement—lurks our underdog, the $24,520 samurai challenger, the Subaru Impreza WRX. Unfair comparison, you say? Duuuh! But wait—check the spec sheets. All three cars have full-time four-wheel drive, four doors, manual transmissions, engines with 225 or more horsepower, and interior and exterior dimensions that come within inches of one another. View Photos JEFFREY G. RUSSELL | Car and Driver Our glowing reviews of the WRX suggest it's a worthy opponent to two of our favorite sporting sedans. The snorty little Subaru sedan has rocked the sporting establishment by producing a remarkable combination of performance and character for the price. We only decided to send it to the wolves after we looked at other similarly priced sedans and realized that matching them against the WRX wouldn't be a comparo, it'd be a slaughter. So we called in the German sharks. Both the Audi and the Bimmer have been frequent honorees on our 10Best list (10 straight years for the 3-series and three years for the S4's less-powerful sibling, the A4). Audi's S4 is a pumped-up, twin-turbocharged version of the A4 and has the added distinction of being the first and only car to outperform the previous-generation M3 in a comparison test. While the M3 has moved up in price—to $46,000—and in performance, BMW has also upped the performance of the entire 3-series line. The model representing a step down from the new M3 is the 330i, offered in both two- and four-door bodies and available with a $1750 four-wheel-drive system that changes the model designation to 330xi. Ask any one of us to pick our favorite cars, and these three would be high on our list. View Photos JEFFREY G. RUSSELL | Car and Driver If you're thinking we've put ourselves in the unenviable position of having to choose a favorite child in this test, you would be right. We put the three through our usual battery of performance tests, lapped DaimlerChrysler's 1.7-mile road course, and tore up the curvy roads of northwestern Pennsylvania—a fitting locale since the discovery and eventual refinement of oil in these hills made fortunes for many and changed the country's path nearly 150 years ago. And, of course, without oil we wouldn't be writing this. Many of us have been quick to point out that there's no need to spend more than $25,000 on a car. Do the German cars deliver the goods to justify their major-league prices? Let's find out. 3rd Place: BMW 330xi View Photos JEFFREY G. RUSSELL | Car and Driver Let this comparo remind all the whiners out there that we don't automatically place the trophy in the trunk of the car bearing the whirling propeller badge before the test. In this one, the Bimmer finished last. What gives? Clearly, this BMW wasn't loaded to compete with the two others. Its 225-hp six-cylinder engine is the least powerful of the group, and it's pushing around the second-heaviest weight. At the drag strip, it lost the sprint to 60 and through the quarter-mile. Still, we love its engine. Neither of the other cars can match the throttle response of the Bimmer's six, which doesn't bear the burden of spooling up turbos. Comments such as "power oozes out in silky-smooth pulses" and "very smooth and strong and makes the best noise" filled the BMW's logbook. HIGHS: Supple ride, slick transmission, graceful moves, silky engine. LOWS: Flat seats, few features for a $40,000 car, underwhelming grip, revs too high on the highway. VERDICT: We expect more from a BMW, especially a $40,000 one. View Photos JEFFREY G. RUSSELL | Car and Driver View Photos JEFFREY G. RUSSELL | Car and Driver We also thought the five-speed was the best-shifting box of the bunch, with low effort and Teflon-coated detents. The transmission routes power to a planetary center differential that under no-slip conditions supplies the rear axle with 62 percent of the torque. Should one wheel slip, the electronic traction control of the Bimmer's Dynamic Stability Control system routes the power to the wheels with grip. The rearward torque bias preserves the rear-drive handling we've come to appreciate in BMWs, but sadly, BMW doesn't offer on four-wheel-drivers the optional stiffer suspension and larger wheels and tires of the 3-series Sport package. The setup of the base model is softly tuned and has weak tires. "Definitely the Cadillac of the group," complained one tester. The Cadillac of the group? A BMW? It was also the quietest. We're not above appreciating a good-riding car, but unfortunately for the BMW, neither of the other cars was unduly harsh, so the BMW came across as somewhat floppy. View Photos JEFFREY G. RUSSELL | Car and Driver And then there are the tires, which squeal at even modest cornering speeds. The tires and the soft suspension conspire to hurt the BMW in every test of grip. The Bimmer finished the poorest on the skidpad and in the lane-change maneuver. On the road course, the 330xi rolled in the turns and the tires howled in protest, limiting cornering speeds and putting it 3.4 seconds behind the Audi and 1.8 seconds back of the Subaru. BMW has heard complaints that the base 3-series is too soft and in response has made the Sport suspension—but not the tires—standard on all 3-series produced after last March. That change was too late for this roundup, and any egg that appeared on the BMW's grille from its performance on the road course quickly flew off when we hit the back roads. The soft suspension displayed a fluidity we hadn't anticipated after those disappointing track laps. We still don't endorse the trend to light steering, but the brakes had the best feel of the bunch, with a firm pedal and perfect linear action. If you're still incredulous over the BMW's third-place finish, consider the features content of the Bavarian car, which at nearly 40 large as tested came with lousy, nearly flat seats that are covered in "leatherette." Sounds like a covering better suited to a $25,000 car, doesn't it? 2nd Place: Subaru WRX View Photos JEFFREY G. RUSSELL | Car and Driver We're still arguing the Subaru's second-place finish. Two of the three voters put the Subaru in first place, with the Audi second. But one—and he'll remain nameless—put the Audi first and the Subaru last, so when we averaged the scores, the Subaru missed the top spot by just one point. So what's missing in the $25,000 car? Actually, it's not what's missing, it's what's there, and in the case of the Subaru, there's a lot of extra noise. The Subaru's sound levels were the loudest during all our decibel tests. The WRX does not qualify as a loud car compared with others in its price class, but it becomes one when the competition gets very expensive. Poke around the Subie's exterior and interior panels, and you see how the noise trickles through to the inside of the car. There's only a paper-thin mat on the trunk bottom and no covering for the underside of the trunklid or hood—items both the BMW and Audi have. HIGHS: Killer value, seats, handling, and turbo 00mph. LOWS: Freeway hum. VERDICT: If you can find a better $24,520 car, buy it. View Photos JEFFREY G. RUSSELL | Car and Driver So the Subaru has less sound-deadening material. The major parts of the interior—the sharp-looking metallic-ringed gauges, the Momo steering wheel, the center console— are all impressive, but the WRX's remaining plastic trim is much flimsier than that in the pricey cars, particularly the handsome Audi. The plus side to the frugal use of sound-deadening material is the WRX's light weight. The Subaru weighs 433 pounds less than the BMW and is 560 pounds lighter than the porky Audi. That said, two of the test drivers weren't annoyed at all by the noise levels. All of us loved the wonderfully designed and supportive cloth seats, the favorite chairs of the group. We also liked the Subaru's in-dash CD changer and cassette player, a combination unique in this zooty group. The Subaru also has no power seats, no stability control, no automatic climate control, and no sunroof. That nose-dived its features rating, but to us, many of those goodies fall under the "nice to have but you don't need them" category. View Photos JEFFREY G. RUSSELL | Car and Driver The rest of the car is pure joy. There's a touch more turbo lag than in the Audi, but we could get a better launch in the Subaru, which gave it a slight edge in the low-speed-acceleration tests. The trick is to do the unthinkable in a four-wheel-drive car: Hold the revs at five grand, and drop the clutch. The WRX's full-time four-wheel-drive system uses a viscous limited-slip center differential that routes power equally to the front and rear axles. The clutch drop breaks the tires loose for only an instant, and then the WRX leaps off the line, scooting to 60 mph in 5.4 seconds and through the quarter in 14.1 seconds at 96 mph—both the best of the bunch. Turbo lag, however, rears its head in the top-gear tests where the Subaru trails from 30 to 50 mph. Keep the engine rpm north of 3000, however, and you won't notice the lag. We also found the Subaru to be the most neutral-handling of the group. Midcorner throttle lifts cause the rear end to slide just enough to tighten your line without provoking fears of a major spin. "Subaru got the big stuff right—the motor, transmission, seats, and handling," wrote one tester in the logbook. That sums up how we feel about this car. One can only marvel at what Subaru could do with another 15 grand. 1st Place: Audi S4 Quattro View Photos JEFFREY G. RUSSELL | Car and Driver So, you say there's no mystery to the Audi's win. Why wouldn't the most expensive car in the test win? Its as-tested price is $1659 above the BMW's and a universe beyond the Subaru's sticker—exactly $16,262 more. Likewise, you get a ton of stuff—power, torque, valves, features, gears, grip, and pounds in this contest. But you don't get the quickest sprinter to 60 mph. Owing to its greater girth and tires that refuse to break loose at the moment of launch despite our best efforts, the Audi trailed the Subaru to 60 mph by a smidge, 0.1 second. By 100 mph, however, the Audi had picked up enough steam to be a half-second ahead of the two other cars, and it continued to widen the gap to its governed 142-mph top speed. But the Audi is the king of every other performance contest, posting significantly better numbers on the skidpad (Audi, 0.86 g; Subaru, 0.82 g; BMW, 0.78 g), through the lane change (67.8 mph versus 66.5 for the Subaru and 63.1 for the BMW), and around the road course, where it was nearly two seconds a lap quicker than the second-place finisher, the Subaru. HIGHS: First-class cabin appointments, potent turbo mill, tenacious chassis. LOWS: Touchy brakes, rubbery shifter. VERDICT: Feels like a $40,000 car. View Photos JEFFREY G. RUSSELL | Car and Driver The Audi is the amusement ride of this group—sit down, buckle up, and hit the button. It's the easiest to drive of the trio, with benign handling and nearly telepathic steering. "The most enjoyable and secure car to drive fast. The rubber really bites in the corners, and the engine pumps power like a fire hose," said one test driver. Which brings us to the wonderful twin-turbocharged 30-valve V-6 engine. There's noticeably less turbo lag in the Audi than in the Subaru. The S4's engine enjoys a considerable displacement edge over the Subaru, so it feels more powerful off-boost. Plus, it runs less boost pressure (10.2 versus 14.2) and employs two blowers, which spool up faster than the Subie's single unit. Unfortunately, the six-speed's action is best described as rubbery. The gearbox routes power to a four-wheel-drive system that uses a Torsen limited-slip center differential to send power to the axle with the most grip, so the traction control only has to limit slip from side to side. Like all the systems here, it's transparent under normal driving conditions. View Photos JEFFREY G. RUSSELL | Car and Driver In addition to the shifter, the powerful brakes drew disparaging comments as well, despite their ability to stop the car from 70 mph in only 164 feet. "There's lots of pedal to push through before the brakes retard, and then the binders are way too touchy," mused one tester. Yet those two niggles did not alter our appreciation of this car's great versatility. Not only is it swift, it's also plush and very serene on the highway. It's easy to drive fast, yet as comfy as a La-Z-Boy. And no one can dispute the attractiveness and quality of the Audi's interior—its subdued hues and materials would fit nicely in a car costing twice as much. And as much as we liked the S4 model, it still came achingly close to being beaten by a car that is hugely less expensive. Perhaps it's not right to say that the S4 is 60 percent better than the WRX. Maybe the best way to put it is that in this test, our collective minds simply liked the S4 60 percent more. Car and Driver Specifications Specifications 2001 Audi S4 Vehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan PRICE Base/As Tested: $40,782/$39,534 ENGINE twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 30-valve V-6, iron block and aluminum heads, port fuel injection Displacement: 163 in3, 2671 cm3 Power: 250 hp @ 5800 rpm Torque: 258 lb-ft @ 1850 rpm TRANSMISSION 6-speed manual CHASSIS Suspension, F/R: multilink/multilimk Brakes, F/R: vented disc/vented disc Tires: Pirelli P6000 225/45YR-17 DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 102.6 in Length: 176.7 in Width: 72.7 in Height: 54.9 in Curb Weight: 3652 lb C/D TEST RESULTS 60 mph: 5.5 sec 1/4-Mile: 14.2 sec @ 97 mph 100 mph: 15.0 sec 120 mph: 23.1 sec Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 6.6 sec Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 8.7 sec Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 7.4 sec Top Speed (gov ltd): 142 mph Braking, 70–0 mph: 164 ft Roadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.86 g C/D FUEL ECONOMY 950-Mile Trip: 21 mpg EPA FUEL ECONOMY City/Highway: 17/24 mpg -- 2001 BMW 330xi Vehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan PRICE Base/As Tested: $36,385/$39,123 ENGINE DOHC 24-valve inline-6, aluminum block and head, port fuel injection Displacement: 182 in3, 2979 cm3 Power: 225 hp @ 5900 rpm Torque: 214 lb-ft @ 3500 rpm TRANSMISSION 5-speed manual CHASSIS Suspension, F/R: struts/multilink Brakes, F/R: vented disc/vented disc Tires: Continental ContiTouring Contact DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 107.3 in Length: 176.0 in Width: 68.5 in Height: 56.5 in Curb Weight: 3525 lb C/D TEST RESULTS 60 mph: 5.7 sec 1/4-Mile: 14.4 sec @ 96 mph 100 mph: 15.5 sec 120 mph: 25.2 sec Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 6.6 sec Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 8.3 sec Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 8.2 sec Top Speed (gov ltd): 129 mph Braking, 70–0 mph: 175 ft Roadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.78 g C/D FUEL ECONOMY 950-Mile Trip: 24 mpg EPA FUEL ECONOMY City/Highway: 20/27 mpg -- 2002 Subaru Impreza WRX Vehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan PRICE Base/As Tested: $24,520/$24,520 ENGINE turbocharged and intercooled flat-4, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection Displacement: 122 in3, 1994 cm3 Power: 227 hp @ 6000 rpm Torque: 217 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm TRANSMISSION 5-speed manual CHASSIS Suspension, F/R: struts/struts Brakes, F/R: vented disc/disc Tires: Bridgestone Potenza RE92 205/55VR-16 DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 99.4 in Length: 173.4 in Width: 68.1 in Height: 56.7 in Curb Weight: 3092 lb C/D TEST RESULTS 60 mph: 5.4 sec 1/4-Mile: 14.1 sec @ 96 mph 100 mph: 15.5 sec 120 mph: 25.2 sec Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 6.6 sec Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 14.2 sec Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 10.0 sec Top Speed: 142 mph Braking, 70–0 mph: 181 ft Roadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.82 g C/D FUEL ECONOMY 950-Mile Trip: 23 mpg EPA FUEL ECONOMY City/Highway: 20/27 mpg C/D TESTING EXPLAINED
Yahoo
07-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion - Jerome Powell is competing to be the worst Fed chair in history
By stubbornly refusing to lower interest rates despite ample data urging him to do so, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell is committing his third major policy blunder in six years. If he continues this tight-money path through the July 29 Fed meeting, 'Too Late' Powell will go down as the worst Fed chair in history. It's not like Powell lacks stiff competition. In the 1970s, to boost Richard Nixon's re-election run, uber‑partisan Arthur Burns kept rates too low for too long, triggering a dizzying inflation spiral and a decade-long stagflation. In the 1990s, Alan Greenspan severely underestimated productivity gains from the tech boom, over-estimated inflationary pressures, and needlessly hiked rates — six times between June 1999 and May 2000. This spiked the federal funds rate to 6.5 percent, triggering the dot-com market crash and 2001 recession. A whiplashed Greenspan then slashed rates to rock-bottom levels and held them at 1 percent for a full year — from June 2003 to June 2004 — well beyond what the recovery warranted. This ultra-cheap money fueled reckless lending, a massive housing bubble, and ultimately detonated the 2007–2008 financial collapse. Greenspan's successor, Ben Bernanke, should have seen it coming. But the Princeton don failed to grasp rising systemic risk in mortgage markets. His paralysis turned what might have been a contained correction into a full-blown global financial crisis — only intervening after Lehman Brothers fell, when it was already too late. Now enters Jay Powell. Even though he leads the world's largest economy, he is a lawyer, not an economist — an anomaly among Fed chairs. Since Arthur Burns, every Fed chair has held an economics degree, except for G. William Miller and Powell. Miller was similarly unqualified and endured one of the most disastrous Fed tenures in recent memory spanning just 517 days before being replaced by the esteemed Paul Volcker on August 6, 1979. Powell's audition for 'worst Fed chair' began shortly after his February 2018 appointment. Promising President Trump in the Oval Office a supportive posture to secure his nomination, Powell instead aggressively raised rates into the low-inflation, high-growth Trump economy. Powell wrongly believed Trump's tax cuts and tariffs would spark inflation — they didn't. Nor did Powell understand that Trump's efforts to deregulate the economy and reach energy independence — positive 'supply shocks' in the macroeconomics vernacular — would provide positive deflationary benefits. As Powell's Fed hiked interest rates four times in 2018—despite muted inflation and strong labor market gains — economic momentum slowed sharply. According to the Fed's own September Tealbook, most of the expected GDP slowdown — from over 3 percent to 1.5 percent — was due to Powell's blunder. Trump was justifiably outraged over Powell's first blunder. It would cost the American economy hundreds of thousands of jobs and hundreds of billions of dollars in lost economic output and tax revenues. After Trump left the White House in January 2021, Powell successfully lobbied Joe Biden for a second term. Throughout that year, the Powell-led Fed kept interest rates near zero, even as inflation surged past 5 percent by mid-year. Embracing the Biden-Yellen line that inflation was merely 'transitory,' the pandering Powell refused to act. Despite growing warnings from economists and business leaders, Powell waited until March 2022 — more than a year after inflation had begun accelerating — before implementing the first interest rate hike since 2018. By then, the damage was done. The Fed was forced into one of the most aggressive tightening cycles in history — 11 hikes in 12 months — all to combat the inflation that Powell's inaction had helped unleash. Powell's second major blunder here wasn't just his late policy; it was his silent permissiveness. While a Democrat-controlled Congress passed over $2 trillion in unneeded and wasteful spending bills — in no small part to boost the Biden reelection campaign — Powell failed in his ethical duty to warn the White House and Democrat-controlled Congress that this spending would worsen inflation. Instead, he let loose monetary policy and partisan fiscal profligacy collide, accelerating the very inflation he would soon be forced to chase. Today, with inflation returning to target and disinflation gaining traction, Powell is well on his way to his third blunder with his stubborn refusal to lower interest rates now. Powell seems incapable of recognizing that Trumponomics — driven by pro-growth deregulation, productivity-enhancing tax cuts, strategic tariffs, and America First supply chain policies — is again delivering strong GDP growth and low unemployment without fueling inflation, just as in Trump's prosperous first term. Powell's misguided fixation on so-called tariff 'uncertainties' as a rationale for 'prudently' holding rates steady is particularly imprudent. Let's remember clearly: during President Trump's first term, we imposed tariffs strategically and aggressively — and the predicted inflation never materialized. Powell's hesitation reflects a failure to learn from recent economic history, needlessly stifling growth, undermining American competitiveness, and harming millions of Americans. At its next meeting July 29-30, the Fed must immediately begin cutting rates. If Powell won't adjust course, he will indeed have earned the sobriquet of worst Fed chair. Peter Navarro is White House senior counselor for trade and manufacturing. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
02-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
‘Irrational Exuberance' Stock Gauge Sparks Fresh Bubble Worries
(Bloomberg) -- Wall Street speculators have returned in full force: US stocks have snapped back from the throes of April's tariff selloff, hovering near record highs, the pipeline of new SPACs is rebounding and Cathie Wood's flagship fund is on a historic tear. Struggling Downtowns Are Looking to Lure New Crowds Sprawl Is Still Not the Answer California Exempts Building Projects From Environmental Law What Gothenburg Got Out of Congestion Pricing That's sparked a swift jump in a Barclays Plc measure of the market's 'irrational exuberance' — a phrase coined by former Federal Reserve Chair Alan Greenspan for when prices exceed assets' fundamental values. The one-month average on the proprietary gauge has swung back into the double-digits for the first time since February — reaching levels that have signaled extreme frothiness in the past. The bank noted that the measure, which is calculated from derivatives metrics, volatility technicals and sentiment signals inferred from options markets, has historically averaged around 7%, but occasionally it peaks above 10% as during the Dotcom era of the late 1990s, and the meme-stock frenzy of 2021. The gauge currently sits around 10.7%, data compiled by Barclays show. 'Fundamentals have taken a back seat again as stocks with hot narratives are trading like lottery tickets,' said Dave Mazza, chief executive officer of Roundhill Investments. He points out sentiment gauges like relative strength readings and valuation multiples are once again looking extended. 'That sets the stage for a sharp air-pocket on the next bad headline.' Animal spirits have been revived on optimism that the US is making progress on reaching trade deals with key partners — or that President Donald Trump will at least postpone his July 9 tariff deadline. There's also speculation the Federal Reserve will cut interest rates. The upshot is that stocks set a record high on Friday for the first time since February. Frothy Signals Barclays sees abundant signs of froth, with listings of new blank-check companies in 2025 already surpassing the last two years combined. Meanwhile, Cathie Wood's ARK Innovation ETF (ARKK) — a proxy for profitless technology firms — posted one of its best rallies in history, second only to the post-Covid surge. In the second quarter, Bitcoin-linked firms rallied 78%, while quantum computing shares climbed 69% and meme stocks advanced 44% — all volatile corners where investors are betting on future returns that may not materialize. A basket of highly shorted securities rallied 29%. 'Elevated readings of the indicator suggest that investors may be overly exuberant, which could lead to increased market volatility,' said Stefano Pascale, head of US equity derivatives strategy at Barclays. Pascale described the exuberance measure, which the firm dubs its Equity Euphoria Indicator, as measuring the proportion of euphoric stocks within a universe of US equities that have liquid options. It correlates with other popular metrics that measure retail investing, such as the net debit position of margin accounts, which shows the amount of borrowed money for a trade. Despite elevated levels, Pascale argues that bubbles are difficult to time and can expand for extended periods before correcting. As such, he recommends riding the wave for now and hedging with options to curb potential losses if things go awry. --With assistance from Jan-Patrick Barnert. SNAP Cuts in Big Tax Bill Will Hit a Lot of Trump Voters Too How to Steal a House America's Top Consumer-Sentiment Economist Is Worried China's Homegrown Jewelry Superstar Pistachios Are Everywhere Right Now, Not Just in Dubai Chocolate ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Bloomberg
14-06-2025
- Business
- Bloomberg
Dollar Ructions Lay Groundwork for a ‘Global Euro Moment'
When the euro was born more than a quarter century ago, it arrived with much fanfare. Even the US Federal Reserve chair of the time, Alan Greenspan, was excited. 'To the extent the euro becomes a far more formidable force in the world economy, it's a benefit to everybody, especially the US,' he said in January 2000. Today, while undoubtedly the second-most important reserve currency in the world, the euro holds a shadow of the dollar's influence. European economic policymakers, with plenty of intra-region challenges and crises to keep them busy, had little reason to imagine the euro's global role might do anything other than fade. Until Donald Trump's White House return, that is.
Vox
11-06-2025
- Business
- Vox
Can pop music actually predict a recession?
is the host of Explain It to Me, your hotline for all your unanswered questions. She joined Vox in 2022 as a senior producer and then as host of The Weeds, Vox's policy podcast. But how do we really know if there's an impending economic contraction? 'There's a super wide variety of what qualifies as a so-called 'recession indicator' on the internet,' Wall Street Journal markets reporter Hannah Erin Lang told me in the latest episode of Explain It to Me, Vox's weekly call-in podcast. 'Economists and investors are often looking at these offbeat sources of data or offbeat trends. Former Federal Reserve chair Alan Greenspan famously looked at sales of men's underwear with the idea being that if you have to cut back, this might be a place where nobody else is going to know but yourself.' There's another alleged recession indicator taking the internet by storm: music. People are now referring to the late-aughts and early 2010s dance hits as 'recession pop.' But is there any credence to this supposed harbinger of economic downturn? That's the question posed to Switched on Pop cohost Charlie Harding on this week's episode of Explain It to Me. Below is an excerpt of our conversation, edited for length and clarity. You can listen to the full episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get podcasts. If you'd like to submit a question, send an email to askvox@ or call 1-800-618-8545. Does music change with the economic outlook? We're all looking for a crystal ball, and music feels like it's got to be it because that's where we go to get into our feelings. So are our playlists indicating larger economic trends? I don't think so. That's interesting because lately there's been all this talk of recession pop. What is recession pop referring to? Recession pop is a made-up, after-the-fact genre, referring to upbeat, bubblegum pop music from the time of the Great Recession. We're talking about Black Eyed Peas, Lady Gaga, Kesha. I think that Katy Perry's whole oeuvre represents that era better than any other. We're talking about songs like 'Teenage Dream,' a song which has this ongoing chord progression that never resolves, that makes you have the feeling of the teenage life that will just never end, you're never going to grow up, and it has this wonderful nostalgic quality to it. Or 'Last Friday Night': the party that is the rager that you're gonna go all-out in. Those songs had a light, effervescent, post-disco, very poppy programmed music kind of vibe. I want to go back in time to the time of bolero jackets and statement belts... You do? Well, okay, not literally. But we're going to go on this journey. What was the sound of that time? It has to sound a little over-polished, really well-made, programmed music. Meaning drum machines, synthesizers, guitars in the line of like Nile Rodgers from Chic — but not nearly as well done — sort of funk-style, disco-style guitars. You might have some really cheesy programmed strings in the background. Then the lyrics have to be either 'Party, party all night forever!' or larger platitudes about being a girlboss. What else was going on in music during that time? Other than these fun, poppy, 'we're going to party all night long' songs. Music had been going through a recession for half a decade at that point. Ever since the turn of the millennium and Napster, the illegal downloading market basically had eviscerated the music industry. It saw its revenues cut in half. Business was in freefall, to the degree that they thought that their future was in downloadable ringtones. Indie music was really big as the mainstream labels were struggling to figure out how to make sales. Hip-hop was going through a bling and party era. There was a lot of upbeat music during these uncertain times, that's certainly true, [but] I think it's important to note as well that during the Great Recession there was plenty of music which didn't reflect an upbeat attitude. One of the biggest songs of 2007 was 'What Goes Around Comes Around' by Justin Timberlake. [There's also] 'Umbrella' by Rihanna. I don't think of those as upbeat, happy songs. If you have to protect yourself from the rain under an umbrella, this is more acknowledging our deep upset at the national condition. I think that even in the recession pop era, there's music of all kinds: upbeat, downbeat, sad, happy. And so I actually think that the genre is a very slippery one that represents a lot of different kinds of music. Are we hearing that sound pop up now? Some people have said that Chappell Roan and Charli XCX are digging into the recession era in their new music. I'm a little more skeptical. If recession pop were doing really well right now, Katy Perry's 'Woman's World' would have been a huge hit, and it has been a real stinker for her. Why are we talking about recession pop right now? Everyone's looking for vibes of what's going on in the larger economy, but I think more largely, millennials are aging out of being cool. Oh, no. You stop listening to new music usually between 25 and 30 years old. And then when you get into a position of power where you become a curator of culture, now it's your time to assert: The thing that was good when I was young is still good. So this could be less about the economy and more about like those of us born in the '80s and early '90s kind of having a midlife crisis. Absolutely, I think there was a huge cultural midlife crisis and a claiming of power. I've seen tons of bars and clubs during these recession pop dance parties and I'm hearing like all these samples in music from current artists from that era. How do you explain all this? Recession pop is very much a real thing and it's completely made-up. There was no such thing as recession pop during the recession. It's a term that was made up only very recently.
