I’m not saying they’re right or wrong with this. (Personally I think they’re probably correct). I’d just like to know in advance what would falsify their hypothesis. Macro forecasters get away with too much because attention spans are short and it’s impossible to keep track of all of their opinions.
Login to reply
Replies (1)
Agreed. There is so much macro slop that I just tune it all out now. I’ve heard them all say everything under the sun and be almost always wrong somehow.
But I do think QE / increased liquidity / money printing and lower rates are the true catalysts for NGU (along with adoption) and the opposite conditions catalyze big sell offs.
What would invalidate their liquidity thesis would have to be verifiable substantial liquidity entering the system and the sell off continuing right through it.