3 ms·
Anyone in the prediction business will make lots of mistakes. If we discount anything a person says because they made incorrect predictions in the past then we
by syzarian 4y ago
Anyone in the prediction business will make lots of mistakes. If we discount anything a person says because they made incorrect predictions in the past then we will have to discount what everyone says. We should judge the statement on its merits.
- piva00 4y agoIf the signal-to-noise ratio is so low, why even care about the "prediction business"? It's worse than nothing, the noise is too high to be of any value...
- syzarian 4y agoYes, but that hasn’t been established in the case of Cramer. That is, it hasn’t been shown that he is worse than other knowledgeable people. People need to be in the prediction business because it is prudent to try to plan for foreseeable outcomes or likely outcomes whilst knowing that things are always murky and the prediction can be wrong.
- piva00 4y agoIsn't that the problem? If he's the best we can get in the prediction business there's simply no value in that business, the noise is too high to any signal to be of value. I'd like to see examples of me being wrong, where Cramer got predictions right and better than other actors in this "prediction business"...
- syzarian 4y agoI don’t know about him but the argument that he sucks because of the examples given is not valid reasoning. How do you know he is so bad? You made a claim that if he is the best then there is no value in that business. Do you have more than the two examples given?
- pcaharrier 4y agoIt's not merely that "Cramer has made bad predictions in the past," but something more like "Cramer has made bad predictions in the past that are very similar to the current predictions and he does not seem to have reevaluated the underlying assumptions that led him to make those past bad predictions."
- syzarian 4y agoThat sounds reasonable. Thanks for the clarification.