@Gumbi

I get that the ECM is a global economic cycle, so the US would be affected as would the US stock market. Historically, the stock market DOES go down with recession as this chart proves from 1947-present:



MA predicted US RECESSION 2015.75. That never transpired, nor did any "crash" in the markets. Your claim that there was a "crash" into October is absurd and not truthful. The biggest "crash" that year was August 2015 as the chart I posted in my previous post proves.

There isn't even an argument:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stock_market_crashes_and_bear_markets

2015: China stock market crash starts in June and continues into July and August. In January 2016, Chinese stock market experiences a steep sell-off which sets off a global rout.
and
2015: The Dow Jones fell 588 points during a two-day period, 1,300 points from August 18–21. On Monday, August 24, world stock markets were down substantially, wiping out all gains made in 2015, with interlinked drops in commodities such as oil, which hit a six-year price low, copper, and most of Asian currencies, but the Japanese yen, losing value against the United States dollar. With this plunge, an estimated ten trillion dollars had been wiped off the books on global markets since June 3.

But MA explains his model predicts major (global) economic flashpoints to the day? 2015.75 is not July or August 2015. Markets regained quickly - within months - and continued rising from there on.

The ambiguity in your wording is also similar to MA:
"the market was crashing going into the ECM date and this is what we can expect going into 2020 if we are going to see new highs into 2024"

So if there is no "crash" into 2020, then we WON'T see new highs into 2024. But if we do, then we WILL see new highs? Meanwhile, in your most recent posts, MA blogged the following:
Goldman Sachs’ share price is going down hard INTO 2019. The 159 level will be critical on a closing basis for the year. If that is breached, then we could see very major implications for the firm whereby it may no longer survive.

You defended this MA claim, explaining: "'not in 2019' but GOING INTO 2019 you can't make such a mistake like that and we never closed below 159 for the year 2018."

You have just contradicted yourself, as MA does.

The economic decline of the West started with TWO key flashpoints and only those with rudimentary understanding of economics would fail to realise the colossal mess of Western economics courtesy of, and since, these dates:
Repeal of Bretton Woods (1971)
And
Repeal of Glass Steagal (1999)

That is long before MA's phantom date of 2015.75, where nothing significant happened. Even from a legal or legislature stand point, there is nothing significant that year, that may cause major economic problems years or decades later, as the repeal of the above caused - and GLOBALLY.

MA never called for new highs, he was quite adamant up to 2015.75 that there would be serious economic strife. When his prediction failed to materialise, he then swept it under the carpet and shifted the date forward another 5 years. And if as you claim, MA meant that was the start, remember his most recent hysterical claim that Europe was heading into political, banking and economic CHAOS come May 2019:
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/europes-current-economy/financial-political-banking-chaos-in-europe-going-into-may/

It never happened.

I hazard guess come Jan 2020 when nothing happens, the next major date will be 2025...

And no, I never mentioned anything about the business cycle, nor denied its existence. I agree with MA: everything in this universe is cyclical and there is bizarre patterns - like a Mandelbrot Set - across totally unconnected things. So MA is onto something with that, but then no more than any physics teacher. It's not a new discovery nor groundbreaking work. He's just repeating known science.

Is price movement random? I don't know and nor does MA. If it isn't, we simply do not have the computing power, technology nor the energy required to compute it all to forecast future movements precisely. It's as if there is a "blockchain" baked into nature, and some things are not supposed to be understood or discovered. Like how a dog will never understand why a computer exists or how to use one, the human mind has the same limitations built into it by nature that even evolution won't solve when it comes to more complex systems and concepts.

Like predicting the lottery numbers, the stock market or, as MA has proved in recent years, the economic history of mankind - some things are just not possible and if they were, the reverse of that paradigm would then exist, and then that too would be "unsolvable". And that nicely ties in to the duality of this universe, another thing I agree with MA. I do believe we live in a duality, but that too is not a new concept. For those that like to think, it is quite an obvious conclusion to draw about the universe we live in.

It is also why a model that predicts future price movements cannot exist, otherwise everyone would make the trade or take the opposite of that trade waiting for the inevitable sell off, and then the REVERSE of that scenario would play out, rendering the model or system defunct and useless. It would be no different than everyone at a poker table knowing everyone's cards. Were that to happen, either no one would play, or different tactics would be found. The game would evolve to take the opposite side of that new reality. That's the "blockchain" of nature at play, and evidence of the duality of our existence.