Looking at history and the long waves of demographics is a great and fine thing. It can tell you a heck of a lot. It’s frequently the case that history is driven by large, abstract, impersonal forces rather than singular decisive events. But…
…to start forecasting equity markets using these metrics is a perilous thing. And it’s becoming all the rage lately.
The problem with demographics as equity market forecasters is that, first, in order for you to be right, you might have to wait, you know, a generation or more. Also, even if you can shoehorn a theory to explain all, at best you only have a few good data points to support the correlation tied to equity markets. That’s not much to stake a +20 year forecast on.
It’s an old adage: Investors have short memories. Another: the market discounts the future.
Here’s some interesting psychological research as to one reason that may be: Yesterday came suddenly
“Because future events are associated with diminishing distance, while those in the past are thought of as receding, something happening in one month feels psychologically closer than something that happened a month ago.”
The next time an investing guru presents you with ironclad statistical results, remember this article:
Unreliable neuroscience? Why power matters – Suzi Gage
In a paper published today in Nature Reviews Neuroscience we reviewed the power of studies in the neuroscience literature, and found that, on average, it is very low – around 20%. Low power undermines the reliability of neuroscience research in several important ways.
One of the great illustrators of American myths has died—Carmine Infantino. Many won’t know the name, but it would be almost impossible that one of his images hasn’t passed your eyes at some point or another in your life. Batman, Superman, the Flash…you name them, he left an indelible mark on the American consciousness with his artistry and helped bring the medium forward into more cinematic and dramatically resonant stories.
I admit—freely—often my biggest hang-up with Ms. Rand was that she’s too pure, too idealistic, advocating a worldview not possible in this world. Charles Johnson’s recent IBD piece puts such anxiety to rest.
“My personal life is a postscript to my novels,” she wrote in the afterword to “Atlas Shrugged.” “It consists of the sentence: ‘And I mean it.’ I have always lived by the philosophy I present in my books — and it has worked for me, as it works for my characters.”
As with so much of her work, Deirdre McCloskey has penned a biting and powerful critique of today’s economic study of “happiness”.
This stuff is worth being aware of because it’s popping up in political discourse regularly. In particular, note the creeping paternalism lately becoming a full infestation in behavioral economics.
Just about everywhere I go, I meet investors who tell me so-called core inflation is a dumb metric and food inflation is very high. Check out this recent graphic from Bloomberg Businessweek by Dorothy Gambrell.
“In 1984, the average U.S. household spent 16.8 percent of its annual post-tax income on food. By 2011, Americans spent only 11.2 percent. The U.S. devotes less of its income to food than any other country—half as much as households in France and one-fourth of those in India.”
In the words of Stan Lee, ‘nuff said.