Part 1: How To Predict
My overall thesis is, whether there is economic collapse or not, is that America and China, economically, will continue to outperform the rest of the world. Europe, South America, Middle East, and Russia will remain weak relative to America, due to corruption, unrest, low growth, and high inflation. It has been this way since 2011, and will remain so for the foreseeable future.
If you believe in HBD as destiny (as I do), then America and China are predestined to rise above all. Although America has a lot of low-IQ groups and some social dysfunction, it also imports high-IQ talent from all over the world, as well as having a lot of high-IQ people of its own. America, through free market capitalism and its prestigious research institutions, rewards the talents of high-IQ people more so than any other country in the world, which is why America has become such a magnet for smart people the world over. Terrance Tao, possibly the smartest person alive, was born in Australia, but instead of teaching there, he teaches at UCLA.
I believe much of economics can be understood and predicted through pure reason alone, much in the same way as physics. Once one understands the underlying fundamentals and workings of the global economy and the trends and interactions that underpin it, predicting becomes a lot easier. Politics, unlike economics, is much harder to understand through pure reason. This is because the macro economy is controlled by huge funds that are also rational, and there are far fewer funds than there are individuals, so that means less chaos in economics than in politics.
Filtering out noise and knowing whose advice to heed or ignore, depending on the situation, is important.
Rationalism, to me, means evaluating a situation as objectively as possible, and with the totality of evidence, choosing what you hope is an optimal outcome. Some say people aren’t rational–but rather are guided by internal, primal desires that override ‘logic and reason’, but that doesn’t mean abandoning reason–to do so makes you prey to those who restrain such desire (as we see in the financial markets, where ‘smart money’ eats the lunch of ‘dumb money’ ).
One goes to Social Matter and Slate Star Codex for for political philosophy and social theory insight that can’t be found anywhere else on the internet. But in term of economics, Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger, for decades, have been correct abut everything. James Altucher is wrong about college and home ownership, was one of only a handful of people to correctly predict the post-2009 economic and stock market recovery.
Too many people have ulterior motives, usually motivated by personal profit or ego. Mark Spiegel, another loser of the left, has been wrong about Tesla for years. Most ‘experts’ such as Spiegel are useless and care more about advancing an agenda than providing genuine, objective advice and insight.
Although I don’t agree with Buffett’s politics, his advice is valuable. One of his insights is to only invest in what you understand. Buffett avoids tech because he doesn’t understand it. I understand it and have had good success investing in technology. Buffett in 2008-2009 was correct about buying stocks, based on his 60+ years of personal experience of how the US stock market and economy always recovers quickly from recessions. Who are you going to trust: someone who has decades of experience and has made billions of dollars applying his own advice, or some anonymous newsletter-peddler on Zero Hedge? Although Altucher didn’t have 50+ years of experience, his arguments made sense on an empirical level. Same for Barry Ritholtz, who in 2010 was also correct about the bull market.
 That’s not to say all markets are facsimiles of rationality. The high-end art market makes no sense to me, where a bunch of rich people have decided that a painting of a soup can is worth million of dollars.