But since I'm here, let me ask something.
Since most of the growth was artificially created by the government and is finance related, it is best to wait to see if it actually is real growth.So any growth created by the government doesn't count, by definition? If so, you've defined away the possibility of effective government intervention. But you don't seem to mind giving the government credit for a downturn. Why is that?
Or are you saying that finance related growth doesn't count? Because if that's true, we'd need to discount all finance related growth in the prior expansion. (Don't forget to also discount any economic activity driven by that artificial finance related growth.) Do that and tell me where the "real" peak was. And whether that peak was above or below where we are now.
Then explain why, after missing the housing bubble for the better part of a decade, "a majority of people knowledgeable in the field" should still be trusted to define what is and is not a recession.
And for bonus points, explain why the line, "Expansion is the normal state of the economy," isn't flagrant wish fulfillment. (AKA total bullshit.)