Please don't respond to a bad comment by adding another bad comment. Nothing good can come of snarky swipes like this.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> I’m impressed by your post’s combination of cynicism

I'm impressed by your naivety. Where's the cynicism? I've worked on wall street/finance and I've read finance publications for decades. It's not cynicism, it's experience.

> conspiracy-theory-type reasoning

What's the conspiracy?

> compounded by the agency fallacy.

I'd advise you to give Logic 101 another try. Also look up ad hominem while at it.

We've banned this account for violating the HN guidelines.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

>>Simply put, when the big players want there to be a recession, there will be a recession.

>What's the conspiracy?

According to your first comment, the "big players" are conspiring to cause recessions when they see fit.

A more charitable reading would have recessions as inevitable (which, in fact, they are) with only the timing of them controlled by "big players".

Your Pavlovially conditioned denigration of quite believable assumption that some entities have huge amount of influence on the economy is even more impressive. Never tired of employing good old "it's a conspiracy theory" conversation stopper, do you?

You have to cut the young ones some slack on this. They're just modeling what they see from "those in the know", and the conventional wisdom narrative has been really heavy on conspiracy-shaming over the last few years. When they're older they'll see that there are other ways to discuss current events.