As can be seen in the ranking of GDP of the 196 nations that we publish, the United States is the world’s top economy in terms of GDP. The United States’ GDP increased in absolute terms.
What caused the GDP to fall in 2009?
There are various “narratives” seeking to put the causes of the recession into context, some of which overlap. The following are five examples of similar stories:
- The shadow banking sector, which includes investment banks and other non-depository financial organizations, experienced the equivalent of a bank run. Although it had developed in size to rival the bank system, it was not subject to the same regulatory safeguards. Its failure halted the flow of credit to both consumers and businesses.
- The housing bubble in the United States was driving the economy. Private residential investment (i.e., housing building) plummeted by almost 4% of GDP when the bubble burst. Consumption slowed as a result of the housing riches acquired by the boom. This resulted in a nearly $1 trillion deficit in annual demand (GDP). The US government refused to compensate for the gap in the private sector.
- Once property prices began to collapse in 2006, record levels of household debt accumulated in the decades preceding the crisis resulted in a balance sheet recession (akin to debt deflation). Consumers started paying off debt, which decreased their consumption and slowed the economy for a while while debt levels were reduced.
- Government policies in the United States encouraged people to buy homes even if they couldn’t afford it, resulting in loose lending rules, unsustainable housing price hikes, and debts.
- Property flippers with good to excellent credit produced a speculative bubble in house prices, then devastated local housing markets and financial institutions when they defaulted on their loans in droves.
Growing income disparity and wage stagnation, according to narratives #13, pushed families to expand their household debt in order to maintain their desired living standard, hence fueling the bubble. Furthermore, the growing share of revenue flowing to the top enhanced commercial interests’ political power, which they exploited to deregulate or limit control of the shadow banking sector.
Narrative #5 refutes the widely held belief (narrative #4) that subprime borrowers with bad credit created the financial crisis by purchasing homes they couldn’t afford.
New study backs up this narrative, indicating that people with strong credit scores in the center and top of the credit score distribution grew the most mortgage debt during the housing boom in the United States, and that these borrowers accounted for a disproportionate share of defaults.
What was the state of the economy in 2009?
The Great Recession lasted from December 2007 to June 2009, making it the longest downturn since World War II. The Great Recession was particularly painful in various ways, despite its short duration. From its peak in 2007Q4 to its bottom in 2009Q2, real gross domestic product (GDP) plummeted 4.3 percent, the greatest drop in the postwar era (based on data as of October 2013). The unemployment rate grew from 5% in December 2007 to 9.5 percent in June 2009, before peaking at 10% in October 2009.
The financial repercussions of the Great Recession were also disproportionate: home prices plummeted 30% on average from their peak in mid-2006 to mid-2009, while the S&P 500 index dropped 57% from its peak in October 2007 to its trough in March 2009. The net worth of US individuals and charity organizations dropped from around $69 trillion in 2007 to around $55 trillion in 2009.
As the financial crisis and recession worsened, worldwide policies aimed at reviving economic growth were enacted. Like many other countries, the United States enacted economic stimulus measures that included a variety of government expenditures and tax cuts. The Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 were two of these projects.
The Federal Reserve’s response to the financial crisis varied over time and included a variety of unconventional approaches. Initially, the Federal Reserve used “conventional” policy actions by lowering the federal funds rate from 5.25 percent in September 2007 to a range of 0-0.25 percent in December 2008, with the majority of the drop taking place between January and March 2008 and September and December 2008. The significant drop in those periods represented a significant downgrading in the economic outlook, as well as increasing downside risks to output and inflation (including the risk of deflation).
By December 2008, the federal funds rate had reached its effective lower bound, and the FOMC had begun to utilize its policy statement to provide future guidance for the rate. The phrasing mentioned keeping the rate at historically low levels “for some time” and later “for an extended period” (Board of Governors 2008). (Board of Governors 2009a). The goal of this guidance was to provide monetary stimulus through lowering the term structure of interest rates, raising inflation expectations (or lowering the likelihood of deflation), and lowering real interest rates. With the sluggish and shaky recovery from the Great Recession, the forward guidance was tightened by adding more explicit conditionality on specific economic variables such as inflation “low rates of resource utilization, stable inflation expectations, and tame inflation trends” (Board of Governors 2009b). Following that, in August 2011, the explicit calendar guidance of “At least through mid-2013, the federal funds rate will remain at exceptionally low levels,” followed by economic-threshold-based guidance for raising the funds rate from its zero lower bound, with the thresholds based on the unemployment rate and inflationary conditions (Board of Governors 2012). This forward guidance is an extension of the Federal Reserve’s conventional approach of influencing the funds rate’s current and future direction.
The Fed pursued two more types of policy in addition to forward guidance “During the Great Recession, unorthodox” policy initiatives were taken. Credit easing programs, as explored in more detail in “Federal Reserve Credit Programs During the Meltdown,” were one set of unorthodox policies that aimed to facilitate credit flows and lower credit costs.
The large scale asset purchase (LSAP) programs were another set of non-traditional policies. The asset purchases were done with the federal funds rate near zero to help lower longer-term public and private borrowing rates. The Federal Reserve said in November 2008 that it would buy US agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and debt issued by housing-related US government agencies (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan banks). 1 The asset selection was made in part to lower the cost and increase the availability of finance for home purchases. These purchases aided the housing market, which was at the heart of the crisis and recession, as well as improving broader financial conditions. The Fed initially planned to acquire up to $500 billion in agency MBS and $100 billion in agency debt, with the program being expanded in March 2009 and finished in 2010. The FOMC also announced a $300 billion program to buy longer-term Treasury securities in March 2009, which was completed in October 2009, just after the Great Recession ended, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research. The Federal Reserve purchased approximately $1.75 trillion of longer-term assets under these programs and their expansions (commonly known as QE1), with the size of the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet increasing by slightly less because some securities on the balance sheet were maturing at the same time.
However, real GDP is only a little over 4.5 percent above its prior peak as of this writing in 2013, and the jobless rate remains at 7.3 percent. With the federal funds rate at zero and the current recovery slow and sluggish, the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy plan has evolved in an attempt to stimulate the economy and meet its statutory mandate. The Fed has continued to change its communication policies and implement more LSAP programs since the end of the Great Recession, including a $600 billion Treasuries-only purchase program in 2010-11 (often known as QE2) and an outcome-based purchase program that began in September 2012. (in addition, there was a maturity extension program in 2011-12 where the Fed sold shorter-maturity Treasury securities and purchased longer-term Treasuries). Furthermore, the increasing attention on financial stability and regulatory reform, the economic consequences of the European sovereign debt crisis, and the restricted prospects for global growth in 2013 and 2014 reflect how the Great Recession’s fallout is still being felt today.
What caused the high unemployment in 2009?
The housing bubble burst in 2007 and 2008, triggering a protracted recession that saw the jobless rate rise to 10.0 percent in October 2009, more than double its pre-crisis level.
What was the solution to the 2008 financial crisis?
1 Congress approved a $700 billion bank bailout in September 2008, which is now known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Obama proposed the $787 billion economic stimulus package in February 2009, which helped avert a global depression. The following is a timeline of key events during the Great Recession of 2008.
How long did it take for the economy to recover after the financial crisis of 2008?
- The stock market rose by 158 percent in the year leading up to the 1929 crash, and by around 33 percent in the year leading up to the Great Recession of 2009.
- In the 12 months leading up to the Coronavirus outbreak, stocks had only risen by about 14%.
- After bottoming out during the Great Depression, the markets took around 25 years to recover to their pre-crisis peak.
- In comparison, the Great Recession of 2007-08 took around 4 years, while the 2000s catastrophe took nearly the same amount of time.
- During the Great Depression, GDP decreased by around 27%, and during the Great Recession of 2007-08, it shrank by about 5%.
How did Procter & Gamble stock do against the S&P 500 in the 2007-08 and 2020 crises?
How Did Colgate Palmolive Stock Fare Against the S&P 500 in 2007-08 vs. 2020 Crisis?
How Did Netflix Stock Perform Against the S&P 500 in 2008 vs. 2020 Coronavirus?
How Did Exxon Mobil Stock Perform Against the S&P 500 in 2007-08 vs. 2020?
How Did The Walt Disney Company Stock Fare Against The S&P 500 During The 2007-08 vs. 2020 Crisis?
What’s the story behind Trefis? For CFOs and finance teams, see how it’s enabling new collaboration and what-if scenarios | Product, R&D, and marketing teams
In 2009, how much did global GDP fall?
GDP plummeted by 2.6 percent in a single quarter (Q1 2009) at the height of the recession, the same proportion by which the economy increased throughout 2007. Since quarterly data were first released in 1955, the recession was the ‘deepest’ in the UK (in terms of lost output).
What led to the global financial crisis of 2008 and 2009?
The Great Recession, which ran from December 2007 to June 2009, was one of the worst economic downturns in US history. The economic crisis was precipitated by the collapse of the housing market, which was fueled by low interest rates, cheap lending, poor regulation, and hazardous subprime mortgages.
In 2009, what happened to the unemployment rate?
It reached 9.5 percent at the end of the recession, in June 2009. The unemployment rate peaked at 10.0 percent in the months following the recession (in October 2009).