Nouriel Roubini: Don't Believe The Optimists
1–8 of 8 posts
Re: Nouriel Roubini: Don't Believe The Optimists
#2Re: Nouriel Roubini: Don't Believe The Optimists
#3Is this here because it was prescient and we're seeing exactly what was described in the article? Or is it here to show how wrong this guy was?
These aren't smart-mouthed internet questions. I really don't know where we stand now compared to this guy's prognostications of doom.
Any ideas?
Re: Nouriel Roubini: Don't Believe The Optimists
#4Re: Nouriel Roubini: Don't Believe The Optimists
#5This is dated May 21, 2009. Is this here because it was prescient and we're seeing exactly what was described in the article? Or is it here to show how wrong this guy was? These aren't smart-mouthed internet questions. I really don't know where we stand now compared to this guy's prognostications of doom. Any ideas?
It's good that 'reform' is a current idea in politics, even if surrounded by much posturing, but articles like 'stop asking when the recession will end' smack of an unwillingness to commit to anything for fear of being wrong...which might explain why Roubini is so popular among the sort of people who anticipate some vague catastrophe in 2012.
Re: Nouriel Roubini: Don't Believe The Optimists
#6This is dated May 21, 2009. Is this here because it was prescient and we're seeing exactly what was described in the article? Or is it here to show how wrong this guy was? These aren't smart-mouthed internet questions. I really don't know where we stand now compared to this guy's prognostications of doom. Any ideas?
http://www.economist.com/opinion/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_i...
U shaped recovery still seems more likely.
Re: Nouriel Roubini: Don't Believe The Optimists
#7I think reality is somewhere in between "V-shaped recovery" and his predictions of misery until the end of 2011.
Unemployment is well known lagging indicator. Its rise until at least 2010 is something widely accepted by governments and economists.
Re: Nouriel Roubini: Don't Believe The Optimists
#8This is dated May 21, 2009. Is this here because it was prescient and we're seeing exactly what was described in the article? Or is it here to show how wrong this guy was? These aren't smart-mouthed internet questions. I really don't know where we stand now compared to this guy's prognostications of doom. Any ideas?
The article was and still is mostly right: http://www.economist.com/opinion/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_i... U shaped recovery still seems more likely.
Given that at that point a serious depression was pretty much ruled out as well, he basically said that all possible responses were, in his opinion, possible... and then people read it and thought "wow, that horoscope was totally correct."