<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: My highest recommendation
Review: I give my highest recommendation to this book. I found it to be well-researched, very rigorous, and the conclusions very convincing.As also stated in his previous book "Stock Cycles...", he said (paraphrase) that the true test of the validity of his conclusions is to observe how events in the future unfold. So far, he is right on!! Michael, if you're reading this, will you please write another book or offer those of us who admire your work a means to keep up with your current thinking? Jim
Rating:
Summary: My highest recommendation
Review: I give my highest recommendation to this book. I found it to be well-researched, very rigorous, and the conclusions very convincing. As also stated in his previous book "Stock Cycles...", he said (paraphrase) that the true test of the validity of his conclusions is to observe how events in the future unfold. So far, he is right on!! Michael, if you're reading this, will you please write another book or offer those of us who admire your work a means to keep up with your current thinking? Jim
Rating:
Summary: A valuable contribution to the long-cycle literature
Review: If successful prediction is a sign of good science, Michael Alexander, who in his previous book "Stock Cycles: Why Stocks Won't Beat Money Markets over the Next Twenty Years" predicted poor stock market returns for twenty years beginning in 2000, has impressive scientific credentials. In his second book, he synthesizes the theory of stock cycles and innovation waves developed in his first book, with a generational cycle based on the idea of birth cohort peer personalities, a Kondratieff social stress cycle, a world power cycle and a political cycle to describe a single operative cycle that is currently approximately 72 years. The analysis is very quantitative (but fairly easy to follow) and relies quite a bit on statistical significance testing, something that is understandably lacking in most long cycle research (there aren't generally enough cycles to test for statistical significance). Alexander's tying together of several independently constructed cycles to rise to statistical significance is perhaps his most important contribution. But there are several other contributions here including his use of a tool called reduced price that he uses to show that the Kondratieff Cycle that appeared to have ended around mid-century 20th century is actually still operative. I highly recommend this book for investors, history buffs or anyone who loves a good intellectual puzzle. Some readers may be put off by the more speculative arguments, but the scope of subjects covered here should appeal to almost anyone.
Rating:
Summary: A valuable contribution to the long-cycle literature
Review: If successful prediction is a sign of good science, Michael Alexander, who in his previous book "Stock Cycles: Why Stocks Won't Beat Money Markets over the Next Twenty Years" predicted poor stock market returns for twenty years beginning in 2000, has impressive scientific credentials. In his second book, he synthesizes the theory of stock cycles and innovation waves developed in his first book, with a generational cycle based on the idea of birth cohort peer personalities, a Kondratieff social stress cycle, a world power cycle and a political cycle to describe a single operative cycle that is currently approximately 72 years. The analysis is very quantitative (but fairly easy to follow) and relies quite a bit on statistical significance testing, something that is understandably lacking in most long cycle research (there aren't generally enough cycles to test for statistical significance). Alexander's tying together of several independently constructed cycles to rise to statistical significance is perhaps his most important contribution. But there are several other contributions here including his use of a tool called reduced price that he uses to show that the Kondratieff Cycle that appeared to have ended around mid-century 20th century is actually still operative. I highly recommend this book for investors, history buffs or anyone who loves a good intellectual puzzle. Some readers may be put off by the more speculative arguments, but the scope of subjects covered here should appeal to almost anyone.
Rating: 
Summary: pseudo-science presented as science
Review: it is fascinating that the K cycles coincide, perhaps coincidentally, with the generational cycle as popularized by a couple pseudo-scientists (strauss and howe). half the book is to explain why the cycle lengths change over time, and explaining away any differences or "the anomaly of the civil war period". the real meat of the argument could be presented - and the "predictions" as well - in a chapter or two. the prediction is simply that the bear market will continue. ok, thanks. while the observation that the K cycles coincide with one of the many theories of generational cycles is appreciated, if the Strauss&Howe cycles had not matched up, he could have merely found some other data to fit the theory of his choosing.
<< 1 >>
| 
