Main Menu

Mr. Robert Prechter (the primary exponent of Elliott waves in the modern era - see his website http://www.elliottwave.com) was mostly wrong about the stock market for about 20 years, from about 1987 to 2007 - it went mostly up, he thought it would mostly go down. 

But he has, in fact, been mostly right about most other markets all along already - it is just that most people do not know that because most people focused on his results in the stock market. 

And the reason why he was wrong about the stock market until 2007 was because of the law against recessions and how that played out - but that is most easily explained in the context of the Kondratieff wave, not in the context of Elliott waves (not that Mr. Prechter is not familiar with the Kondratieff wave - he is). 

I projected to myself, once I found out about the law against recessions in the summer of 2001, that the market would probably drop a large amount sometime between 2007-2010 and when that happened, the economy would go down with it (this time) and that would be the end of the ability of the authorities to enforce the law against recessions - that is to say, that downturn would be just the beginning and there would be more (big ones) to come, although the rest of it might not start until after the beginning of 2010. 

In other words, once the market dropped again, even Elliott waves in the stock market would play themselves out as anticipated, rather than being stretched to the upside, to go along with future economic downturns - and that has happened so far, Elliott waves in the stock market have played themselves out as anticipated (in other words, also time-wise) since 2007. 

Note in early 2011 - but as it turned out, the economy was so sluggish for most of 2010 that the central bank decided to push really hard one more time to get things to go up and it did start happening.  I think what probably made more difference was that people were just tired of the gloom by the Christmas season and so they started going out and buying - usually on sale, which is not good for profit margins.  The net result was a pickup in sales that everyone started interpreting as the beginning of a real economic recovery - and so enthusiasm is way-high going into the spring of 2011 and Mr. Prechter is once again wrong about when the stock market will top out.  This is one reason why I do not use Elliott waves as my primary means of analysis over a time-frame of a year or two - in a law-against-recessions world, the authorities are going to keep pushing the stock market until they just can't push it anymore. 


What I offer that the people at EWI do not is a less technical approach to analyzing the markets (to the extent that I need to do it at all in the context of helping other people) and a more direct link to the news of the day so that people can more directly determine where we are in the big picture by just following the news of the day and my updates along with that, noting that my updates come as needed, at critical times there may be several a day and at very slow times, there might be several days (or even more days) in between.  There is a notification e-mail (sent automatically) every time I issue an update - and all of my updates are posted on the website (see Updates).  I also, as warranted, provide information in my updates about what is prudent to do with one's finances in light of circumstances so that people can actually take concrete action with their money in light of what I say.  But I do not provide specific individual investment advice (and not individual advice in general - I do not have time for that) and I am not responsible for what you do with your money.  The most basic information is actually presented on the free part of this website already or by telling you where else to find it (i.e., other websites). 


I present commentary that interprets the news in terms of what is really going on, that is to say, in the context of my model and, therefore, what the news really means (including news associated with the Federal Reserve, which is America's central bank) - so people can correctly interpret what is really going on and act on it accordingly. 


I agree with Robert Prechter about just about everything - but there are a few of his perspectives that I do not agree with.  I will quickly note here that some of the ones I do not agree with have to do with his very independent/libertarian views.  In particular, I do not agree that a totally unfettered free market system would be the best situation in society.  I think that, typically, not all members of a society are honest enough to make that work.  But there are some other aspects of his libertarian mindset that I do not totally agree with.  But specifically with regard to markets and the details of the economy, I have the following issues. 

One is his take that the Federal Reserve has no impact on the stock market - I agree that the Federal Reserve has no impact on the bond market, but I do not agree that the Federal Reserve has no impact on the stock market, and I think results of the past 20 years, as well as my explanation on this website, make clear why. 

I also do not agree with Mr. Prechter about his thesis that the stock market is always a reflection of mass social mood except maybe sometimes at the smallest degrees of trend.  The reason why I do not agree with him on that is because I think that things changed once mutual funds became a mass-scale phenomenon in recent decades.  Once the majority of people started investing through mutual funds (this did not even happen in the late 1920's, when only a minority of people invested in the stock market and mutual funds were called investment trusts), the traders of the mutual funds became more important for the stock market than the people investing in them.  That does not mean that the stock market is not still a barometer of mass social mood in the big picture - it is - but I think it does mean that on smaller time scales, the Wall Street traders can be more important than the mass social mood on the street, especially since these days the traders often seem totally divorced from what is going on on Main Street, and the evidence of how the market is trading at times in recent times seems to bear me out. 

I also do not agree with Mr. Prechter that the coming downturn will only be somewhat worse that the Great Depression in terms of unemployment (Prechter predicts about 33% at the peak). 

Unemployment peaked at 25% in the Great Depression - and I think it will go much higher than that in the worst of the coming downturn.  The reason why I think so is precisely because of the law against recessions and its impact over the past 20 years.  The law against recessions ultimately led to a huge bubble in the late 1990's - what I termed, at the time, a spend-a-thon. 

Consumer spending is already something like 2/3 of the total economy in modern times - and I saw estimates in the late 1990's that it actually went considerably higher than that during those years.  So if consumer spending is so important a part of the modern economy - and, therefore, retail will be in big trouble if a big downturn comes and consumers cut way back - I do not see how the unemployment can be limited to somewhat above 25%. 

If consumers cut way back, retail stores will go out of business all over the place - and then the affected retail employees won't be able to spend anymore, either, thus impacting much of the rest of the economy, as well.  I expect unemployment to go well above 25% as a result (I would not be at all surprised to see it go well above 50%). 

Part of my purpose in doing this website is that although you may not be able to keep your job, hopefully you will be successful enough with the rest of your money as a result of information I provide on this website that you will come out ahead, overall, anyway and won't be part of the great masses of people who will end up with essentially, or even virtually, nothing.