Now that you finally understand that the sine wave was to illustrate one particular point alone, and no other points beyond that point, I challenge you to find any quote from me where I describe the economy as a smooth, repetitive oscillation.
I understand what it was intended to illustrate. I also understand that it bears absolutely no relation to reality with regard to economics. In the very same post where you gave us your sine wave illustration, you also claimed that we were in the Great Depression II, with no other support for the assertion other than the sine wave. If the economy cannot be described as a smooth, repetitive oscillation, then there is no fucking reason to post a graph of a smooth, repetitive oscillation to illustrate anything regarding the economy, it's really that fucking simple.
If you're not too embarrassed over thinking that my sine wave was to illustrate additional points, and not too embarrassed over thinking that I did actually say the economy was like a sine wave. I'm glad that you FINALLY understand the point I was making, perhaps you might wish to finally own up to your own error of not understanding it in the first place and thinking I was saying more than I actually was. You are the one who made the mistake of thinking that I said the economy was like a sine wave, even though you know better now. That's a mistake of yours that you need to confront.
Maybe you should own up to your error of asserting that we are in the second great depression with no evidence other than a sine wave. Either that, or give us an actual graph of current and recent economic activity that shows we are in the second great depression. You can't do that, so I expect you to continue to defend your irrelevant sine wave.
