That is actually still good. If you can't understand why that's on you:"The markets have successfully predicted 9 of the last 5 recessions."
Paul Samuelson, MIT professor, 1970 Nobel Prize laureate in economics.
Ultimately, CNBC research raises questions about Samuelson's quip in the first place. In any given year, the economy has a random chance of being in recession about 20 percent of the time. But if it's 9 out of 5 or 13 out of 7, it's right more than half the time. A gauge that offers a success ratio greater than 50 percent is better than a so-called random walk.
the market PREDICTED the economy tanking, or instead whether it caused it?
That is actually still good. If you can't understand why that's on you:
I can tell from several threads that you're looking for some kind of holy grail "leading indicator" that simply doesn't exist. The economy and the market are inextricably linked, it's hopelessly naive to ask if one predicted or caused the other as there are dozens and dozens of factors that influence the answer to that question. Again, I highly recommend a Finance 101 MOOC, it will answer many of your questions and given your interests expressed here I think you'll find it very interesting and enjoyable. Getting a finance education in dribs and drabs from a bunch of jackasses on the internet who may or may not know wtf they're talking about is madness when there are so many high quality free options available.
Pray tell, which of his books have you read, to inform your opinion?Paul Samuelson was a keysian [sic] hack
Is there any evidence as to, when the market goes into bear mode, and a few months later the economy tanks, the market PREDICTED the economy tanking, or instead whether it caused it?