Hacker News Reader

Comment by Phiwise_ | Hacker News Reader

Car crashes are also identified after the fact. Doesn't make it unreasonable to declare one when you first notice your wheels have lost traction on the ice. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/T10Y2YM

View on HN

One way to read the negative spread between the 10 year Treasuries and the 2 year Treasuries is that at some point beyond 2 years the Fed will lower the rates and keep them low for a while. That's consistent with a recession. But not in 2023. Maybe in 2025.

Something tells me the Centre for Economic and Business Research is looking at slightly more information than the single graph I bothered to pull off fred for the sake of an internet comment implying we weren't going to have a recession period.

Plenty of people spin out without hitting anything.

You should probably click through the link before trying to extend the metaphor.

Does it explain why someone would say their car crashed without it having crashed

It explains why you should try to learn anything about a subject before trying to comment on it.

Jesus I need to stop expecting better from this website.

It doesn't inspire confidence that you refuse to make comments that can stand up logically without adding a context dump link. Hard pass

>It doesn't inspire confidence that you think my aggressive misreading of your statement matters less than your ability to back it up empirically that I don't know how to read

Oh how will I ever live with myself

>I need to stop expecting better from adult /g/

You are correct, but technology generally necessitates an almost ideological commitment to optimism. Therefore I blame the subject matter instead of myself.

If a car is 5 meters from a wall going at 80mph straight into it, the car will 100% crash into a wall.

No ice conditions needed.

The example with icy conditions though is that once your car noticeably lost traction you know perfectly well you are no longer in control and that there's nothing you can do to save yourself rather than betting on getting lucky.

Do you think this analogy captures the nuances of this situation? Or is it just vaguely aligned with your opinion?

The nuances of this situation is that the yield curve hasn't been this inverted in 40 years, and successfully indicated every actual recession in that time. Like I said to the other user, you should click through to the link.

There's something deeply troubling about this pattern of response:

>>>>We're headed for a recession.

>>>Are you sure you don't just wish we were headed for a recession, for vindication of your opinion?

>>I derived this opinion from a longstanding indicator, which you can see here: [LINK]

>Are you sure you don't just wish that was a longstanding indicator, for vindication of your opinion?

Then share your opinion, share your evidence, explain and Your thinking instead of providing a dumb analogy that gets people debating the nuances of the ANALOGY instead of the actual issue.

Are you just blind to text in the form of a url? I did both. It's not my fault you, or anyone else, finds it convenient to pretend I didn't.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com