5 ms·

If the implication is that his statements in 2011 and 2013 were predictions that turned out to be false, I don't think these quotes are sufficient evidence. Th

by UVB-76 10y ago

If the implication is that his statements in 2011 and 2013 were predictions that turned out to be false, I don't think these quotes are sufficient evidence. That an inevitable correction has been delayed by sustained government efforts does not make predictions of a correction any less prescient.

greeneggs 10y ago
It is hard to call prescient or insightful a model of the economy that doesn't take into account government actions.
asdfologist 10y ago
No, his remarks have an obvious tone of urgency. If after 5 years nothing has happened (and actually the opposite has), then his credibility is damaged.
- aminorex 10y ago
  His money speaks louder and boosts his credibility more than do your misinterpretations.
  - asdfologist 10y ago
    So your argument is "he is rich therefore he is always right". That's some astute logic there, professor.
ddeck 10y ago
One doesn't need to be an economic historian to understand that the economy and market run in cycles. There is always an "inevitable correction" somewhere in the future, but in this endeavor, it's timing that matters. It’s probably not fair to pick on Icahn in particular, who is not really a perma-bear. There are far better examples (e.g. Marc Faber), who despite being demonstrably wrong year after year with their end of world predictions, are always welcome back on Bloomberg and CNBC explaining how the world markets are about to fall apart.
- Retric 10y ago
  If you actually look at economy's over long time periods they really don't have a cycle. It's much closer to a random walk than you might think. After the fact we simply define periods as good or bad based on what followed them. EX: People talk about Japan as if it was going though a bad time period vs. that just being the new normal based on it's demographics.
  - aminorex 10y ago
    As someone paid to do such looking for the past decade I can assure you that both econometric and market series' are subject to periodic, as well as quasiperiodic, chaotic, and exogenous forcing functions. Everything looks like white noise when your eyes are closed.
    - Retric 10y ago
      If there where real periodic cycles you could predict if the US economy where Up or Down with above random odds for July 4th, 2050. Nobody can, because what you call periodic is something else. Another way of saying it is there where say a X year cycle to the economy it would be a very famous result. (Ignoring seasonal variation.)
    - return0 10y ago
      Even the Black-scholes models it as random motion.
    - csomar 10y ago
      > are subject to periodic, as well as quasiperiodic, chaotic, and exogenous forcing functions. Isn't that what random is?
- cloakandswagger 10y ago
  You're correct, the US economy has a reliable boom/bust cycle that is caused in large part by monetary policy and started in earnest under Greenspan's tenure at the Fed. That we're in the midst of one of the largest and most artificial of those 'boom' periods is undeniable, owing to the Fed's injection of $4.5 trillion into equity markets. Icahn is banking on Newton's third law of motion applying to financial markets as well.

by UVB-76 10y ago

greeneggs 10y ago

It is hard to call prescient or insightful a model of the economy that doesn't take into account government actions.

asdfologist 10y ago

No, his remarks have an obvious tone of urgency. If after 5 years nothing has happened (and actually the opposite has), then his credibility is damaged.

aminorex 10y ago
His money speaks louder and boosts his credibility more than do your misinterpretations.
- asdfologist 10y ago
  So your argument is "he is rich therefore he is always right". That's some astute logic there, professor.

ddeck 10y ago

One doesn't need to be an economic historian to understand that the economy and market run in cycles. There is always an "inevitable correction" somewhere in the future, but in this endeavor, it's timing that matters. It’s probably not fair to pick on Icahn in particular, who is not really a perma-bear. There are far better examples (e.g. Marc Faber), who despite being demonstrably wrong year after year with their end of world predictions, are always welcome back on Bloomberg and CNBC explaining how the world markets are about to fall apart.

Retric 10y ago
If you actually look at economy's over long time periods they really don't have a cycle. It's much closer to a random walk than you might think. After the fact we simply define periods as good or bad based on what followed them. EX: People talk about Japan as if it was going though a bad time period vs. that just being the new normal based on it's demographics.
- aminorex 10y ago
  As someone paid to do such looking for the past decade I can assure you that both econometric and market series' are subject to periodic, as well as quasiperiodic, chaotic, and exogenous forcing functions. Everything looks like white noise when your eyes are closed.
  - Retric 10y ago
    If there where real periodic cycles you could predict if the US economy where Up or Down with above random odds for July 4th, 2050. Nobody can, because what you call periodic is something else. Another way of saying it is there where say a X year cycle to the economy it would be a very famous result. (Ignoring seasonal variation.)
  - return0 10y ago
    Even the Black-scholes models it as random motion.
  - csomar 10y ago
    > are subject to periodic, as well as quasiperiodic, chaotic, and exogenous forcing functions. Isn't that what random is?
cloakandswagger 10y ago
You're correct, the US economy has a reliable boom/bust cycle that is caused in large part by monetary policy and started in earnest under Greenspan's tenure at the Fed. That we're in the midst of one of the largest and most artificial of those 'boom' periods is undeniable, owing to the Fed's injection of $4.5 trillion into equity markets. Icahn is banking on Newton's third law of motion applying to financial markets as well.