Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Igel

(37,568 posts)
1. Probably.
Wed Nov 23, 2016, 05:00 PM
Nov 2016

But then again, the evening of 11/8 there was a stock-market sell-off overseas, and first thing Wednesday morning causality was clear and the station I listen to was saying how there'd be a drop in the US market.

Wednesday evening there was a rise in the stock market, and the guy who claimed causality was obvious in the morning waved away any suggestion that the US stock market went up because of Trump, and sneered as he did so. Instead, he wanted to focus on the obvious causality in what bond interest rates had done.

First "there's causality" then "we can't even think of causality" followed up by "hey, look, there's causality over here!"

It pays to be cautious when we see things we already knew to be true. The initial claims of causality ignored a lot of factors, and the later claims of non-causality did the same. I often find that particular economic broadcast amusing for its closed-mindedness even as it says it's impartial. Not my job to take the 8' x 4' piece of plywood out of that guy's eye, though.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»the media is attributing ...»Reply #1