Well, it looks like we survived (sort of). The unemployment rate did not leap up as predicted, although personally I believe this is because many people went from full-time to part-time work or at least had their hours reduced.
So, while we wait for the inevitable bleating from world governments regarding how they need to massively increase taxes to pay for their amazing stimulus packages, we watch as millions are wasted in Copenhagen.
The merry-go-round continues!
Everything we hear about is “the worst in 100 years”. So, are we just unlucky to be living through these times, or are we experiencing information overload?
It is undeniable that information sources have exploded in the past five years. We are now bombarded with more information every day than we used to get in a month.
In order for publishers to stand out from this ever increasing crowd, their headlines have become more and more sensationalist. This makes it very difficult for us, the readers/listerners, to differentiate fact from bloated fiction.
The saying “don’t believe everything you read” has never been more appropriate!
Over the past two years unprecedented international market volatility, caused by the Global Financial Crisis, have made all previous methods of predicting market directions obsolete.
Will this continue? If so, in what form? Has the market always been driven by media releases and the Global Financial Crisis has exposed this, or do ‘tested’ methods of market prediction such as charting still have a place in funds management, stock trading and currency movements?
Here in South Australia, where the full effect of this crisis has yet to be realised, will investors react to the media or market data? Or both? When the media is negative and market data positive which direction does the market move in?
The recent volatility has irrevocably altered how investors view market information, and the intellectual conundrum I intend to question is “In future will traders be swayed by analysis of market data or by collective media reports?’.