3 ms·
The economist had e.g. a leader like this: https://www.economist.com/leaders/2005/06/16/after-the-fall https://www.economist.com/leaders/2005/06/16/after-the-fa
by tobias3 8y ago
The economist had e.g. a leader like this: https://www.economist.com/leaders/2005/06/16/after-the-fall https://www.economist.com/leaders/2005/06/16/after-the-fall
It is possible to call bubbles, especially if they are as large and data is transparently available. It is really hard to tell the moment when it will pop, especially if it is connected with the government like in the soviet union or in China.
- close04 8y agoI'm not arguing the possibility of seeing them but whether you visibly flag them or not. A bad prediction might turn into a self fulfilling prophecy. At the very least it could make a dent in the people's trust. You do this on an election year and you'll pay for it. You might get the shaft regardless if your prediction makes someone powerful look bad. So when you're playing close to home positive stuff gets the fanfare, negative predictions are underplayed. You're talking about your own market after all. Why do you think it's so easy for these publications to hit at anything that's not domestic? The further away, the less friendly the player, the more scathing the prediction.
- azernik 8y agoThe Economist was generally quite consistent about it, including in its American publishing (which is mostly written by American authors). I was reading The Economist at the time, and so the housing bust did not really surprise me; and I don't remember any false positives at the time. (They called it a little too early, though, as a lot of the "smart" money did.)