Topic: Martin Armstrong Discussion - page 375. (Read 647251 times)

pinched from the blog :

Believe it or not, I was at a family gathering and some were talking about the Triple Crown and said no one has won since 1978. I did the wave math in my head and said this year the horse will win. I do not follow horses. They just looked at me and asked you can forecast that too. I said this is the year. Pharoah won.

What was the math? The first wave group was 11, 5 and 2, 1919, 1930, 1935 and 1937 completing 18 years or (17.2). Then there was the typical 3 reaction followed by breaks of increments of 2 completing 11 bringing it 1948. Then we have a 25 year separation until 1973 (25.. Then the next reaction phase of 3 and 2 years bringing us to 1978. So why now? The next build up would be 37.33 (8.6 * 4.3). Hence the pattern 17.2, 25.8, and 37.33. Groups forming in alignment with 8.6.

Just a footnote to curiosity.

PS: I didn’t bet. It would not be fair to take their money.

...

Martin Armstrong is a financial, well, forecaster might be the right term, who has written extensively on historical patterns of economics.

He has a checkered past (I know that he went to jail for contempt of court, but what I have read it seems that was an injustice), but there is no doubt that he has introduced new concepts for us to read and analyze.  While in jail, he produced a number of interesting papers looking at asset prices through history, including from ANCIENT history.  He is one of the few who looks at cyclicality (time patterns) as well as a MACRO view of the markets (that is, he does not look at the price of gold alone, he looks at everything else too -- with a supercomputer).

He is now out of jail and has set-up shop as a macro-consulting company.  On most days (including today, Saturday) he publishes a few easy-to-digest items looking at various issues of the day.  His blog:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/armstrong_economics_blog

What finally moved me today to start this thread is his post was his very interesting piece (from today) "Money -- Credit -- Debt & Derivatives".  It looks like derivatives are as old as money itself (maybe older!), take a look at the article:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/archives/31401

*   *   *

I have been in various threads here at the forum where Armstrong's material has come up.

I look forward to reading your views on his ideas, and his proposed solutions (also controversial).