Armstrong has no views at all. It’s his computer, Socrates, that views the future. So far, Socrates has been on target.
Do you have links to forecasts and subsequent events where his computer has been accurate or as you say on target?
By accurate I mean forecasted exactly what happened not a vague forecast that can be interpreted to have been correct or in the ballpark.
Using a computer sounds like the “trust the science” b.s. the climate change know nothings use. Plus Armstrong talks financial as if the entire world is monolithically in step with the EU and the central banks. The formation of BRICS and MINT, the ruble being pegged to Gold and the Saudi’s contemplating dumping the petrodollar beg to differ.
Vague references to Sri Lanka mean nothing, everyone can make a “General” forecast than interpret the results to be whatever they want. The tipping point for Sri Lanka was not their financial system it was forcing their agricultural to go totally organic which resulted in starving citizens.
Computers are only as good as their code and believing them reeks of A.I. being better than humans IMO. They have some validity as a tool for modeling etc but are only as good as their code otherwise it is GIGO.
Armstrong saying his forecasts are based on his computer gives him a ready made out. If the computer is correct Armstrong can say “see”, if it is incorrect he can say it’s a computer and its code needs updating.
I see. So, iow....I discount it entirely.
I didn’t have time to explain. I discount Armstrong’s view of future because his computer, and I guess he himself, does not take into account people - Trump, for instance, or the Q team, their plans, and all the rest. There is more to shaping the future than economic forces.
Socrates. I wondered who Socrates was. His computer. Makes sense.