271–280 of 313 posts
Ray Dalio’s talks on YouTube, and his most recent TED talk are great for context around economic downturns.
Real Vision and Anthony Pompliano’s podcast are good for deep dives into what’s going on with a bit of an alternative take.
Consider a subscription to the British newspaper The Economist. It began publication in 1848 in protest against the British corn laws. The writing is superlative written with a rather sly sense of humor. In particular, they collect and graph enormous amounts of data to augment their articles. It's much better than random posts found on the internet.
I think the economist is great in how broad the coverage is, it's a great way to keep up with what's happening around the world. But it tends to have a very ideologically driven narrative, I think of it as basically neoliberal propaganda, so I always read it with a hefty helping of salt.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very well written indeed, unfortunately owned by globalists since 2015 (check out the ownership change, if you are interested [1]) I had been an avid reader for 30 years, cancelled my subscription around 2015-2016, and I was not even aware of the new ownership at the time, I just sensed the change of their ideological orientation and did not like it one bit. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economist_Group
so where do we go now?
So to answer your question: if you want what the Economist gives, you don't need to go anywhere else.
Marx
the Bible
Bogleheads
Newspaper titles (you read that right, not the content, titles)
"nothing, I just bought a piece of land to grow potatoes and beans"
Comparative study of the black death
Raw St. Louis Fed data
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What? They bought up another company in 2015. Not the other way around. Why would that even be a bad thing?
Please read carefully. The Agnelli family owns 43.4%, members of the Rothschild family own 21%, other big corporate/rich families interests own the rest. Lots of "Sirs", "Ladies" and "Baronesses" on the board of directors, as you can see below. From the Wikipedia page: Pearson PLC held a 50% shareholding via The Financial Times Limited until August 2015; at that time Pearson sold their share in the Economist. The Agn…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree 100%. The whole reason why market economies - economies based on the decentralized mechanism we call "prices" - work better than any other economic system is because they're decentralized. If one person or group of experts could know the current wants/needs of millions of individuals, we wouldn't need prices and that person/group could predict the direction of the economy. Similarly, say all you care about is p…
> That was a lesson to me: conventional wisdom about the economy, even "wisdom" from "experts" in a segment of the economy, can be wildly inaccurate. Conventional wisdom is wrong about all kinds of things, all the time. "Forecasts have been wrong, therefore forecasting is pointless" is the wrong lesson to take.
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your reply or I wasn't clear in my original post. The history of failure of expert consensus forecasts is one reason why we should be highly skeptical. That's why I said such a forecast, and you yourself quoted, "...can be wildly inaccurate" and not, as you suggest I said "...is pointless."
Macroeconomic forecasting is indeed pointless, but for a different reason. Some might say it's pointless because the economy is a (1) complex and (2) chaotic system. The economy is indeed complex and chaotic, but so is the weather... and we can forecast the weather with accuracy and precision macroeconomic forecasters drool over. The economy has two additional and overlapping factors making forecasting effectively impossible: (3) two-way causality between the forecast and the economy (the forecast is based on the predicted behavior of individuals and individuals will change behavior depending on the forecast) and (4) the free will of humans.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're talking about the U.S. that's mainly due to our reserve currency status and nothing else. And the money printing has driven certain sectors higher even in the face of low / stagnant growth. Stocks, real estate, etc being some of them. But you gotta understand that we export a great deal of our inflation. One day those dollars will come home to roost, but until then, Germany's balance sheet looks a hell of a…
That sounds like a very ad hoc explanation, what about Japan then?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Effectively shutting down more than half of all business is slightly more than bursting a bubble. It is world war II scale event, But let's not forget that this wasn't caused by the virus itelf, it was consciously decided by politicians to trade an (unknown in magnitude) risk for a huge recession.
That seems a bit semantic given that even cartel run Favellas quarantined and they are money over life. It is a bit "I didn't murder the person I kidnapped, they committed suicide." Technically true but the responsibility is the same as if they had.