3 ms·
1. Correlation is not causation 2. The "cause" of 2008 was not media reports, but years of actual bad behavior by banks. Now if you want to rewrite history, a
by bb88 8y ago
1. Correlation is not causation
2. The "cause" of 2008 was not media reports, but years of actual bad behavior by banks. Now if you want to rewrite history, awesome, but be transparent about it.
- umanwizard 8y agoI don't think GP's post implied that the link is causal.
- bb88 8y agoThen why bring it up without saying that? It sparked an entire thread about what makes a "causal" relationship.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- masklinn 8y agoI mean, assuming economists know what they're talking about (which is a big ask) it would make sense that a looming recession causes articles about a looming recession, so the correlation makes sense. A complete lack of correlation would be one hell of an indictment, as it'd mean recessions out of nowhere and nobody having the remotest of clues.
- bb88 8y agoThen why bring it up? Either it means economists were right about 2018 (correlation) or it means they caused the recession -- indirectly or directly -- by warning people about it (causation).