I found the example to be very clear. What exactly are you confused about?

Here is the summary from the GP.

>[An inverted yield curve] often indicates that investors think a recession is around the corner. The reason is that investors are betting that the prevailing interest rates will drop. If interest rates drop, then future bond purchases may have much lower interest rates than those bought today. It turns out you might like the idea of getting 2% interest for 10 years rather than 2.13% for 5 years and then 0.5% for the next 5 years.

A simple example is 3 or 4 sentences, not 5 paragraphs.

He didn't address what it means for the economy. What happened last time the yield curve inverted? The last 10 times? The headline implies recession by referencing 2007, is there a valid statistical correlation?

> A simple example is 3 or 4 sentences, not 5 paragraphs.

Where is that rule written? Where did those particular numbers come from?

> He didn't address what it means for the economy. What happened last time the yield curve inverted? The last 10 times? The headline implies recession by referencing 2007, is there a valid statistical correlation?

You want the answer trimmed down to 3 or 4 sentences, but you also want answers to multiple new questions. Which one would you rather have?

I don't want anything. I'm just holding the top comment to its author's own standards that he voluntarily stated in his first sentence.

Can you get it into three sentences? That do not assume the reader knows any financial jargon?

Yes.