Well, aren't you just precious. You must be a fiction write of little to no note.
You obviously skipped it since I explained how each definition does not point to two data points being a trend. You asked a question. I answered in detail. You ignore my answer, refuse to respond to it and instead simply ask the question again. Eight sentences is the length of a novella? Are you sure you are a writer? Of do you consider the start of your post to be a novel?
That's funny. The first 2 links show that the market doesn't consider November's numbers to be a trend. The FED white paper directly answers your question of why 2 data points don't make a trend.
I guess I could take a cue from you and simply say CBSnews is staggeringly corrupt. That is what you have done with my sources without presenting any reason for why they are corrupt other than they point to you being wrong. Are you sure you took economics courses? You are now saying macroeconomics is bullshit and corrupt and yet your degree is in economics?
Most people didn't see the Great Recession coming. Most investors didn't see it coming. Have you read "The Big Short?"
There are three things that the market respond most to; government numbers as put out by BLS and Census, the FED's statements or actions, and earnings reports. You are claiming that 2/3s of what moves the market is corrupt and not to be believed. I don't think the market is as stupid as you think it is.
Since you refuse to read any and all sources I provide, I see no reason to provide you with any new sources. When you have read the FED white paper and wish to discuss a two-variable vector autoregression (VAR) get back to me. The answer is obvious, you are asking me to prove a negative in that any source that says 2 data points is not a trend is not enough for you as you have moved the goal posts to now requiring I prove NEVER. I have already shown that 2 data points within the margin of error are not a trend. That is what you were attempting to claim was a trend.
I will ask you again. Did you ever take statistics when you got your degree in economics? Why can't you answer this simple question?
She's loads of fun.
It's a good thing you don't use ad hominems like your first 5 sentences in this post I am responding to.
3)
Not only do you not read anything I link to, it's clear you don't read anything I write. Go back and read my previous post then come back and apologize for asking the same question repeatedly.
You didn't answer either of my questions by responding True of False. Based on the way you demand I answer yours with only those words that would mean you didn't answer either of my questions.
"Probably" is more weaselly than any answer I gave to your questions.
A little self reflection on your part might be a good thing. I am curious how you can claim I used a strawman when you admit you didn't bother to read my answers. You also don't seem to know precisely what a strawman argument is.
Please point to where I changed your argument to something else and then argued against that instead of responding directly to what you said. Your preferred way to debate seems to be to use the poison the well fallacy. You accuse any sources I use of being corrupt without providing evidence. You accuse me of using logical fallacies without providing evidence.
I will.