A question is, how do you know this. The answer is, how can you not when it’s laid bare. MIT math courses are hard. This stuff, by comparison, is not.
It’s easier to predict things where a lot of capital is at stake, but social predictions are also possible using these methods. The idea is extremely simple: capital will always flow along a gradient that maximizes its risk-adjusted returns, among alternatives, with some spillover for diversification. There is no second or third place in post-2008 winner-take-all capitalism, meaning that only the cream of the crop (the very best companies, neighborhoods, currencies, countries, etc.) get inflation-adjusted inflows of capital; everything else is either stagnant or sees outflows. And it just so happens that high-IQ investments are the ones getting the most inflows, although I don’t think this is a coincidence. This is related to the late stage/asset-based capitalism many are talking about these days. Silicon Valley and Manhattan real estate ,for example, have posted substantial REAL returns since 2004; less intelligent areas such as Salt Lake City, Arizona, and Colorado have not:
Also related: Silicon Valley Home Prices, Stock Prices & Bitcoin