Recessions Necessary?

Mike Moffitt posted an article today which was a discussion of the necessity of Recessions. He basically found he could not find evidence of the Mark Rostendo argument that:

The "job" of a recession is to clean the "fat" out of the system, mop up excess, and pave the way for the next expansion. Until that process is complete, there isn't much from which a legitimate expansion can arise.
Recessions put weak companies out of business. In so doing, resources (skilled workers, capital) are freed up to be deployed more efficiently elsewhere. For example, Wall Street analysts who touted bankrupt Internet stocks are redeployed at local fast food restaurants to serve people in a capacity for which they are much better suited.
Stronger businesses that have used the contraction to firm up their bottom lines and grow more efficient are able to take advantage of these resources during the ensuing expansion. The economy emerges from a recession leaner, more efficient and in good shape for the next wave of growth and progress.
But in a mild, one-quarter downturn, many weak companies are able to pull through by the skin of their teeth. Thus they continue to suck up space and resources that could better be utilized elsewhere. For example, CNBC commentators, who should have been laid off, continue to prattle on and the dazed public continues to sit slack-jawed in front of the idiot box, hanging on their every word, doing nothing for the economy. Employees and capital are tied up in corporate time-bombs, just marking time before their inevitable demise. The excess that caused the recession remains in the economy, serving only as an anchor with which to weigh down future expansion.

Rostendo almost has it right, but fails in the analysis of what exactly has to be removed. What has to be removed is the excess Profits achieved by Business in the previous Boom. Excess Profits lead to too great a Draft upon Material resources; this generating artifically low-Profit enterprise as Businesses think to invest, and drain of Consumer financial state through the artificial generation of Demand through Advertising.

The Economist asserts that American Purchases currently are running about 106% of Gross Domestic Product. It contends rightly:

In principle, these purchases could fall by six percentage points of GDP, eliminating the deficit, without anyone in America needing to fall out of work. America would not suffer a recession. But it would feel like one: every man, woman and child would have to curtail their spending by $2,600 a year.

How could such a condition be created?
The Answer is simple, but perhaps beyond Economists. Recessions could be avoided by a simple expedient with the loss of fairly few Jobs. What We need is a national law simply stating no Goods can be sold outside of normal Business hours--9 a.m. Monday through 5 p.m. Friday--except for Groceries. What do We have here? We still maintain Services 24-7, still provide for all Temporary Consumers needs, but eliminate the prime Consumer purchase hours. The Result would be less Consumption except for pressing need, greater deliberation in Consumption decision, and less Business Profits. Consumption would decline by some amount, expected by this Author to be double the reduction necessary to reside within the GDP. Labor and Households would increase their Savings ratio, and Business would find less opprotunity to invest. Recessions are not necessary, but intelligence remains a criteria. lgl