Posted 2/13/2017 15:17 (#5837139 - in reply to #5836173) Subject: It is the argument I look for in an article, not the projection. projections are mostly worthless
Pittsburg, Kansas
Good post Dave.
I forget that some people take the predictions seriously. I pay no attention to predictions.
What I am looking at when posting some of these stories is the thinking and logic behind the predictions. The reasoning.
Now it makes sense why some bring up the legitimacy of a web site. If it is acceptible as a news source or if it is not. I believe some want some sort of acceptible legitimate news source so they can "believe" it.
I never approach it from that aspect so I never connected the dots of why it was such a big deal where the source came from. I always assume all sources are suspect and believe none of them. I came to the conclusion long ago (like you have explained) that I can't outguess the market.
So what I look for in articles is not something to believe or is tradable information. I look for the logic behind the explanation of why they are saying what they are saying. Then I decide for myself if the story is plausable. If it sounds plausable I seek out more jnformation to support or dismiss the idea.
I might give more or less credibility to someone I have followed for quite a while (like you on ag talk for instance compared to someone else) but in the end it is not the recomendation that means anything to me. It is the argument presented.
Jim Rogers and his macro outlook
