- This topic has 495 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 7 months ago by
equalizer.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 4, 2008 at 1:55 PM #298867November 4, 2008 at 2:09 PM #298458
xironman
ParticipantPup,
I guess we will agree to disagree. Fivethirtyeight is pretty cool in how they weight polls to account for errors. I just like stats, what are the chances of that. Let’s see how it goes, if it goes bad for me then I will certainly come back on for a nice dish of crow.
November 4, 2008 at 2:09 PM #298808ParticipantPup,
I guess we will agree to disagree. Fivethirtyeight is pretty cool in how they weight polls to account for errors. I just like stats, what are the chances of that. Let’s see how it goes, if it goes bad for me then I will certainly come back on for a nice dish of crow.
November 4, 2008 at 2:09 PM #298819ParticipantPup,
I guess we will agree to disagree. Fivethirtyeight is pretty cool in how they weight polls to account for errors. I just like stats, what are the chances of that. Let’s see how it goes, if it goes bad for me then I will certainly come back on for a nice dish of crow.
November 4, 2008 at 2:09 PM #298835ParticipantPup,
I guess we will agree to disagree. Fivethirtyeight is pretty cool in how they weight polls to account for errors. I just like stats, what are the chances of that. Let’s see how it goes, if it goes bad for me then I will certainly come back on for a nice dish of crow.
November 4, 2008 at 2:09 PM #298882ParticipantPup,
I guess we will agree to disagree. Fivethirtyeight is pretty cool in how they weight polls to account for errors. I just like stats, what are the chances of that. Let’s see how it goes, if it goes bad for me then I will certainly come back on for a nice dish of crow.
November 4, 2008 at 3:03 PM #298538partypup
Participant[quote=cooperthedog][quote=partypup][quote=esmith][quote]I bet if you reviewed some of the wagers placed on Intrade you would find that this time last year the chance of a recession was almost nil because the sheep were going on the phony, published, flawed data issued by our government.[/quote]
Actually, this time last year the chance of a 2008 recession on Intrade was just below 50%. It was above 50% throughout most of September ’07.
I should have been more clear. I was thinking more about Spring 2007, when it really became clear to me that things were going to hell. Can you get the numbers for that period? Everyone was telling me I was nuts back then.
But look at this chart — there’s something else that’s pretty telling here. These fools actually thought the chances of a recession were DROPPING in May – August of this year! Correct me if I’m mis-reading this, but weren’t they putting the odds of a recession at 10% at the beginning of September ’08? After the Bear Stearns collapse and the IMF issuing warnings about a global depression? What does that tell you? Gamblers, like stock investors, can be complete and total idiots if they are working with bad data.
What are the odds of a Depression? Is there an index for that, esmith? I have to create an account ASAP and start making some bank. I may not be able to naked short financials, but I can still take advantage of some fools on Intrade :-)[/quote]
partypup:
Two issues with your logic; first the “bad data” is what Intrade futures contracts are based on (the underlying), so the “real data” is irrelevant.
Second, to win the bet you will need two consecutive quarters of negative gdp growth (as compiled by the govt, the same ones supplying the bad data). As of May, with a positive quarter in the books, plus stimulus checks to affect 2nd quarter growth, the chances of a technical recession were receding, so odds went down. As of September their were two known quarters of positive growth in the books, with another two + months of “relative calm” before the financial meltdown. If the meltdown had occurred later, consumers may have spent enough in the 3rd qtr. to have flat to slightly positive gdp (vs. the barely negative .3% decline for Q3), and the chances of technical recession in 2008 would be zero.
[/quote]
Coop, all I’m saying is that in May of this year, in May of last year, in May of the prior year, I was seeing a 100% chance of a recession. The “two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth” model is stagnant and irrlevant now because GDP data is blatantly manipulated by the artificially low inflation rate proferred by the *official* data. If you have eyes and ears and can look around and use some common sense, anyone could have easily seen — before the all-knowing Intrade gamblers — that a recession was imminent 2 years ago: higher home inventory, more store closings, more of your friends and family who are unemployed are barely employed.
It’s just common sense. Sometimes you need to look beyond the *data*. That’s all.
November 4, 2008 at 3:03 PM #298888Participant[quote=cooperthedog][quote=partypup][quote=esmith][quote]I bet if you reviewed some of the wagers placed on Intrade you would find that this time last year the chance of a recession was almost nil because the sheep were going on the phony, published, flawed data issued by our government.[/quote]
Actually, this time last year the chance of a 2008 recession on Intrade was just below 50%. It was above 50% throughout most of September ’07.
I should have been more clear. I was thinking more about Spring 2007, when it really became clear to me that things were going to hell. Can you get the numbers for that period? Everyone was telling me I was nuts back then.
But look at this chart — there’s something else that’s pretty telling here. These fools actually thought the chances of a recession were DROPPING in May – August of this year! Correct me if I’m mis-reading this, but weren’t they putting the odds of a recession at 10% at the beginning of September ’08? After the Bear Stearns collapse and the IMF issuing warnings about a global depression? What does that tell you? Gamblers, like stock investors, can be complete and total idiots if they are working with bad data.
What are the odds of a Depression? Is there an index for that, esmith? I have to create an account ASAP and start making some bank. I may not be able to naked short financials, but I can still take advantage of some fools on Intrade :-)[/quote]
partypup:
Two issues with your logic; first the “bad data” is what Intrade futures contracts are based on (the underlying), so the “real data” is irrelevant.
Second, to win the bet you will need two consecutive quarters of negative gdp growth (as compiled by the govt, the same ones supplying the bad data). As of May, with a positive quarter in the books, plus stimulus checks to affect 2nd quarter growth, the chances of a technical recession were receding, so odds went down. As of September their were two known quarters of positive growth in the books, with another two + months of “relative calm” before the financial meltdown. If the meltdown had occurred later, consumers may have spent enough in the 3rd qtr. to have flat to slightly positive gdp (vs. the barely negative .3% decline for Q3), and the chances of technical recession in 2008 would be zero.
[/quote]
Coop, all I’m saying is that in May of this year, in May of last year, in May of the prior year, I was seeing a 100% chance of a recession. The “two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth” model is stagnant and irrlevant now because GDP data is blatantly manipulated by the artificially low inflation rate proferred by the *official* data. If you have eyes and ears and can look around and use some common sense, anyone could have easily seen — before the all-knowing Intrade gamblers — that a recession was imminent 2 years ago: higher home inventory, more store closings, more of your friends and family who are unemployed are barely employed.
It’s just common sense. Sometimes you need to look beyond the *data*. That’s all.
November 4, 2008 at 3:03 PM #298899Participant[quote=cooperthedog][quote=partypup][quote=esmith][quote]I bet if you reviewed some of the wagers placed on Intrade you would find that this time last year the chance of a recession was almost nil because the sheep were going on the phony, published, flawed data issued by our government.[/quote]
Actually, this time last year the chance of a 2008 recession on Intrade was just below 50%. It was above 50% throughout most of September ’07.
I should have been more clear. I was thinking more about Spring 2007, when it really became clear to me that things were going to hell. Can you get the numbers for that period? Everyone was telling me I was nuts back then.
But look at this chart — there’s something else that’s pretty telling here. These fools actually thought the chances of a recession were DROPPING in May – August of this year! Correct me if I’m mis-reading this, but weren’t they putting the odds of a recession at 10% at the beginning of September ’08? After the Bear Stearns collapse and the IMF issuing warnings about a global depression? What does that tell you? Gamblers, like stock investors, can be complete and total idiots if they are working with bad data.
What are the odds of a Depression? Is there an index for that, esmith? I have to create an account ASAP and start making some bank. I may not be able to naked short financials, but I can still take advantage of some fools on Intrade :-)[/quote]
partypup:
Two issues with your logic; first the “bad data” is what Intrade futures contracts are based on (the underlying), so the “real data” is irrelevant.
Second, to win the bet you will need two consecutive quarters of negative gdp growth (as compiled by the govt, the same ones supplying the bad data). As of May, with a positive quarter in the books, plus stimulus checks to affect 2nd quarter growth, the chances of a technical recession were receding, so odds went down. As of September their were two known quarters of positive growth in the books, with another two + months of “relative calm” before the financial meltdown. If the meltdown had occurred later, consumers may have spent enough in the 3rd qtr. to have flat to slightly positive gdp (vs. the barely negative .3% decline for Q3), and the chances of technical recession in 2008 would be zero.
[/quote]
Coop, all I’m saying is that in May of this year, in May of last year, in May of the prior year, I was seeing a 100% chance of a recession. The “two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth” model is stagnant and irrlevant now because GDP data is blatantly manipulated by the artificially low inflation rate proferred by the *official* data. If you have eyes and ears and can look around and use some common sense, anyone could have easily seen — before the all-knowing Intrade gamblers — that a recession was imminent 2 years ago: higher home inventory, more store closings, more of your friends and family who are unemployed are barely employed.
It’s just common sense. Sometimes you need to look beyond the *data*. That’s all.
November 4, 2008 at 3:03 PM #298915Participant[quote=cooperthedog][quote=partypup][quote=esmith][quote]I bet if you reviewed some of the wagers placed on Intrade you would find that this time last year the chance of a recession was almost nil because the sheep were going on the phony, published, flawed data issued by our government.[/quote]
Actually, this time last year the chance of a 2008 recession on Intrade was just below 50%. It was above 50% throughout most of September ’07.
I should have been more clear. I was thinking more about Spring 2007, when it really became clear to me that things were going to hell. Can you get the numbers for that period? Everyone was telling me I was nuts back then.
But look at this chart — there’s something else that’s pretty telling here. These fools actually thought the chances of a recession were DROPPING in May – August of this year! Correct me if I’m mis-reading this, but weren’t they putting the odds of a recession at 10% at the beginning of September ’08? After the Bear Stearns collapse and the IMF issuing warnings about a global depression? What does that tell you? Gamblers, like stock investors, can be complete and total idiots if they are working with bad data.
What are the odds of a Depression? Is there an index for that, esmith? I have to create an account ASAP and start making some bank. I may not be able to naked short financials, but I can still take advantage of some fools on Intrade :-)[/quote]
partypup:
Two issues with your logic; first the “bad data” is what Intrade futures contracts are based on (the underlying), so the “real data” is irrelevant.
Second, to win the bet you will need two consecutive quarters of negative gdp growth (as compiled by the govt, the same ones supplying the bad data). As of May, with a positive quarter in the books, plus stimulus checks to affect 2nd quarter growth, the chances of a technical recession were receding, so odds went down. As of September their were two known quarters of positive growth in the books, with another two + months of “relative calm” before the financial meltdown. If the meltdown had occurred later, consumers may have spent enough in the 3rd qtr. to have flat to slightly positive gdp (vs. the barely negative .3% decline for Q3), and the chances of technical recession in 2008 would be zero.
[/quote]
Coop, all I’m saying is that in May of this year, in May of last year, in May of the prior year, I was seeing a 100% chance of a recession. The “two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth” model is stagnant and irrlevant now because GDP data is blatantly manipulated by the artificially low inflation rate proferred by the *official* data. If you have eyes and ears and can look around and use some common sense, anyone could have easily seen — before the all-knowing Intrade gamblers — that a recession was imminent 2 years ago: higher home inventory, more store closings, more of your friends and family who are unemployed are barely employed.
It’s just common sense. Sometimes you need to look beyond the *data*. That’s all.
November 4, 2008 at 3:03 PM #298962Participant[quote=cooperthedog][quote=partypup][quote=esmith][quote]I bet if you reviewed some of the wagers placed on Intrade you would find that this time last year the chance of a recession was almost nil because the sheep were going on the phony, published, flawed data issued by our government.[/quote]
Actually, this time last year the chance of a 2008 recession on Intrade was just below 50%. It was above 50% throughout most of September ’07.
I should have been more clear. I was thinking more about Spring 2007, when it really became clear to me that things were going to hell. Can you get the numbers for that period? Everyone was telling me I was nuts back then.
But look at this chart — there’s something else that’s pretty telling here. These fools actually thought the chances of a recession were DROPPING in May – August of this year! Correct me if I’m mis-reading this, but weren’t they putting the odds of a recession at 10% at the beginning of September ’08? After the Bear Stearns collapse and the IMF issuing warnings about a global depression? What does that tell you? Gamblers, like stock investors, can be complete and total idiots if they are working with bad data.
What are the odds of a Depression? Is there an index for that, esmith? I have to create an account ASAP and start making some bank. I may not be able to naked short financials, but I can still take advantage of some fools on Intrade :-)[/quote]
partypup:
Two issues with your logic; first the “bad data” is what Intrade futures contracts are based on (the underlying), so the “real data” is irrelevant.
Second, to win the bet you will need two consecutive quarters of negative gdp growth (as compiled by the govt, the same ones supplying the bad data). As of May, with a positive quarter in the books, plus stimulus checks to affect 2nd quarter growth, the chances of a technical recession were receding, so odds went down. As of September their were two known quarters of positive growth in the books, with another two + months of “relative calm” before the financial meltdown. If the meltdown had occurred later, consumers may have spent enough in the 3rd qtr. to have flat to slightly positive gdp (vs. the barely negative .3% decline for Q3), and the chances of technical recession in 2008 would be zero.
[/quote]
Coop, all I’m saying is that in May of this year, in May of last year, in May of the prior year, I was seeing a 100% chance of a recession. The “two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth” model is stagnant and irrlevant now because GDP data is blatantly manipulated by the artificially low inflation rate proferred by the *official* data. If you have eyes and ears and can look around and use some common sense, anyone could have easily seen — before the all-knowing Intrade gamblers — that a recession was imminent 2 years ago: higher home inventory, more store closings, more of your friends and family who are unemployed are barely employed.
It’s just common sense. Sometimes you need to look beyond the *data*. That’s all.
November 4, 2008 at 3:18 PM #298573cooperthedog
Participantpartypup – I agree with your distrust of the official data, and your analysis is one that many on this board (including myself) espoused to lock in gains in real estate and/or the market. My point is that the Intrade gamblers are betting on the official data (thats what the contract is using), and thus your view of the actual economy, even if correct may not win the bet (just like shorting the market in May of 2006 would have been disasterous, even with the writing on the wall).
November 4, 2008 at 3:18 PM #298923Participantpartypup – I agree with your distrust of the official data, and your analysis is one that many on this board (including myself) espoused to lock in gains in real estate and/or the market. My point is that the Intrade gamblers are betting on the official data (thats what the contract is using), and thus your view of the actual economy, even if correct may not win the bet (just like shorting the market in May of 2006 would have been disasterous, even with the writing on the wall).
November 4, 2008 at 3:18 PM #298934Participantpartypup – I agree with your distrust of the official data, and your analysis is one that many on this board (including myself) espoused to lock in gains in real estate and/or the market. My point is that the Intrade gamblers are betting on the official data (thats what the contract is using), and thus your view of the actual economy, even if correct may not win the bet (just like shorting the market in May of 2006 would have been disasterous, even with the writing on the wall).
November 4, 2008 at 3:18 PM #298950Participantpartypup – I agree with your distrust of the official data, and your analysis is one that many on this board (including myself) espoused to lock in gains in real estate and/or the market. My point is that the Intrade gamblers are betting on the official data (thats what the contract is using), and thus your view of the actual economy, even if correct may not win the bet (just like shorting the market in May of 2006 would have been disasterous, even with the writing on the wall).
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.