How to Think Clearly

"Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." –Mark Twain

If you want to fully understand and appreciate the work of Mike Stathis, from his market forecasts and securities analysis to his political and economic analyses, you will need to learn how to think clearly if you already lack this vital skill.

For many, this will be a cleansing process that could take quite a long time to complete depending on each individual.

The best way to begin clearing your mind is to move forward with this series of steps:

1. GET RID OF YOUR TV SET, AND ONLY USE STREAMING SERVICES SPARINGLY.

2. REFUSE TO USE YOUR PHONE TO TEXT.

3. DO NOT USE A "SMART (DUMB) PHONE" (or at least do not use your phone to browse the Internet unless absolutely necessary).

4. STAY AWAY FROM SOCIAL MEDIA (Facebook, Instagram, Whatsapp, Snap, Twitter, Tik Tok unless it is to spread links to this site). 

5. STAY OFF JEWTUBE.

6. AVOID ALL MEDIA (as much as possible).

The cleansing process will take time but you can hasten the process by being proactive in exercising your mind.

You should also be aware of a very common behavior exhibited by humans who have been exposed to the various aspects of modern society. This behavior occurs when an individual overestimates his abilities and knowledge, while underestimating his weaknesses and lack of understanding. This behavior has been coined the "Dunning-Kruger Effect" after two sociologists who described it in a research publication. See here.

Many people today think they are virtual experts on every topic they place importance on. The reason for this illusory behavior is because these individuals typically allow themselves to become brainwashed by various media outlets and bogus online sources. The more information these individuals obtain on these topics, the more qualified they feel they are to share their views with others without realizing the media is not a valid source with which to use for understanding something. The media always has bias and can never be relied on to represent the full truth. Furthermore, online sources are even more dangerous for misinformation, especially due to the fact that search algorithms have been designed to create confirmation bias. 

A perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect can be seen with many individuals who listen to talk radio shows. These shows are often politically biased and consist of individuals who resemble used car salesmen more than intellectuals. These talking heads brainwash their audience with cherry-picked facts, misstatements, and lies regarding relevant issues such as healthcare, immigration, Social Security, Medicaid, economics, science, and so forth. They also select guests to interview based on the agendas they wish to fulfill with their advertisers rather than interviewing unbiased experts who might share different viewpoints than the host.

Once the audience has been indoctrinated by these propagandists, they feel qualified to discuss these topics on the same level as a real authority, without realizing that they obtained their understanding from individuals who are employed as professional liars and manipulators by the media. 

Another good example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect can be seen upon examination of political pundits, stock market and economic analysts on TV.  They talk a good game because they are professional speakers. But once you examine their track record, it is clear that these individuals are largely wrong. But they have developed confidence in speaking about these topics due to an inflated sense of expertise in topics for which they continuously demonstrate their incompetence.

One of the most insightful analogies created to explain how things are often not what you see was Plato's Allegory of the Cave, from Book 7 of the Republic.

We highly recommend that you study this masterpiece in great detail so that you are better able to use logic and reason.  From there, we recommend other classics from Greek philosophers. After all, ancient Greek philosophers like Plato and Socrates created critical thinking.   

If you can learn how to think like a philosopher, ideally one of the great ancient Greek philosophers, it is highly unlikely that you will ever be fooled by con artists like those who make ridiculous and unfounded claims in order to pump gold and silver, the typical get-rich-quick, or multi-level marketing (MLM) crowd.





STOP Being Taken

If you want to do well as an investor, you must first understand how various forces are seeking to deceive you. 

Most people understand that Wall Street is looking to take their money.

But do they really understand the means by which Wall Street achieves these objectives? 

Once you understand the various tricks and scams practiced by Wall Street you will be better able to avoid being taken. 

Perhaps an even greater threat to investors is the financial media.

The single most important thing investors must do if they aim to become successful is to stay clear of all media.

That includes social media and other online platforms with investment content such as YouTube and Facebook, which are one million times worse than the financial media.

The various resources found within this website address these two issues and much more. 

Remember, you can have access to the best investment research in the world. But without adequate judgment, you will not do well as an investor.

You must also understand how the Wall Street and financial media parasites operate in order to do well as an investor. 

It is important to understand how the Jewish mafia operates so that you can beat them at their own game.

The Jewish mafia runs both Wall Street and the media. This cabal also runs many other industries.

We devote a great deal of effort exposing the Jewish mafia in order to position investors with a higher success rate in achieving their investment goals.

Always remember the following quotes as they apply to the various charlatans positioned by the media as experts and business leaders.   

“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.” - King James Bible - Matthew 7:15

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." –Mark Twain

It's also very important to remember this FACT.  All Viewpoints Are Not Created Equal.

Just because something is published in print, online, or aired in broadcast media does not make it accurate. 

More often than not, the larger the audience, the more likely the content is either inaccurate or slanted. 

The next time you read something about economics or investments, you should ask the following question in order to determine the credibility of the source.

Is the source biased in any way?  

That is, does the source have any agendas which would provide some kind of benefit accounting for conclusions that were made? 

Most individuals who operate websites or blogs sell ads or merchandise of some kind. In particular, websites that sell precious metals are not credible sources of information because the views published on these sites are biased and cannot be relied upon.

The following question is one of the first things you should ask before trusting anyone who is positioned as an expert. 

Is the person truly credible?  

Most people associate credibility with name-recognition. But more often than not, name-recognition serves as a predictor of bias if not lack of credibility because the more a name is recognized, the more the individual has been plastered in the media. 

Most individuals who have been provided with media exposure are either naive or clueless. The media positions these types of individuals as “credible experts” in order to please its financial sponsors; those who buy advertisements. 

In the case of the financial genre, instead of name-recognition or media celebrity status, you must determine whether your source has relevant experience on Wall Street as opposed to being self-taught. But this is just a basic hurdle that in itself by no means ensures the source is competent or credible.

It's much more important to carefully examine the track record of your source in depth, looking for accuracy and specific forecasts rather than open-ended statements. You must also look for timing since a broken clock is always right once a day.  Finally, make sure they do not cherry-pick their best calls. Always examine their entire track record. 

Don't ever believe the claims made by the source or the host interviewing the source regarding their track record. 

Always verify their track record yourself. 

The above question requires only slight modification for use in determining the credibility of sources that discuss other topics, such as politics, healthcare, etc.

We have compiled the most extensive publication exposing hundreds of con men pertaining to the financial publishing and securities industry, although we also cover numerous con men in the media and other front groups since they are all associated in some way with each other.

There is perhaps no one else in the world capable of shedding the full light on these con men other than Mike Stathis.

Mike has been a professional in the financial industry for nearly three decades. 

Alhough he publishes numerous articles and videos addressing the dark side of the industry, the core collection can be found in our ENCYCLOPEDIA of Bozos, Hacks, Snake Oil Salesmen and Faux Heroes

Also, the Image Library contains nearly 8,000 images, most of which are annotated.


At AVA Investment Analytics, we don't pump gold, silver, or equities because we are not promoters or marketers.

We actually expose precious metals pumpers, while revealing their motives, means, and methods.

We do not sell advertisements.

We actually go to great lengths to expose the ad-based content scam that's so pervasive in the world today. 

We do not receive any compensation from our content, other than from our investment research, which is not located on this website. 

We provide individual investors, financial advisers, analysts and fund managers with world-class research and unique insight.







Media Lies

If you listen to the media, most likely at minimum it's going to cost you hundreds of thousands of dollars over the course of your life time.

The deceit, lies, and useless guidance from the financial media is certainly a large contributor of these losses.

But a good deal of lost wealth comes in the form of excessive consumerism which the media encourages and even imposes upon its audience.

You aren’t going to know that you’re being brainwashed, or that you have lost $1 million or $2 million over your life time due to the media.

But I can guarantee you that with rare exception this will become the reality for those who are naïve enough to waste time on media.

It gets worse.

By listening to the media you are likely to also suffer ill health effects through excessive consumption of prescription drugs, and/or as a result of watching ridiculous medical shows, all of which are supportive of the medical-industrial complex.

And if you seek out the so-called "alternative media" as a means by which to escape the toxic nature of the "mainstream" media, you might make the mistake of relying on con men like Kevin Trudeau, Alex Jones, Joe Rogan, and many others.

This could be a deadly decision. As bad as the so-called "mainstream" media is, the so-called "alternative media" is even worse.

There are countless con artists spread throughout the media who operate in the same manner. They pretend to be on your side as they "expose" the "evil" government and corporations.

Their aim is to scare you into buying their alternatives.  This addresses the nutritional supplements industry which has become a huge scam.  

 

Why Does the Media Air Liars and Con Men?

The goal of the media is NOT to serve its audience because the audience does NOT pay its bills.

The goal of the media is to please its sponsors, or the companies that spend huge dollars buying advertisements.

And in order for companies to justify these expenses, they need the media to represent their cause.

The media does this by airing idiots and con artists who mislead and confuse the audience.

By engaging in "journalistic fraud," the media steers its audience into the arms of its advertisers because the audience is now misled and confused.

The financial media sets up the audience so that they become needy after having lost large amounts of money listening to their "experts." Desperate for professional help, the audience contacts Wall Street brokerage firms, mutual funds, insurance companies, and precious metals dealers that are aired on financial networks. This is why these firms pay big money for adverting slots in the financial media.

We see the same thing on a more obvious note in the so-called "alternative media," which is really a remanufactured version of the "mainstream media." Do not be fooled. There is no such thing as the "alternative media."  It really all the same. 

In order to be considered "media" you must have content that has widespread channels of distribution. Thus, all "media" is widely distributed.

And the same powers that control the distribution of the so-called "mainstream media" also control distribution of the so-called "alternative media."

The claim that there is an "alternative media" is merely a sales pitch designed to capture the audience that has since given up on the "mainstream media."  

The tactic is a very common one used by con men.

The same tactic is used by Washington to convince naive voters that there are meaningful differences between the nation's two political parties.

In reality, both parties are essentially the same when it comes to issues that matter most (e.g. trade policy and healthcare) because all U.S. politicians are controlled by corporate America. Anyone who tells you anything different simply isn't thinking straight.

On this site, we expose the lies and the liars in the media.

We discuss and reveal the motives and track record of the media’s hand-selected charlatans with a focus on the financial media.  




 

Why Stathis Was Banned

To date, we know of no one who has established a more accurate track record in the investment markets since 2006 than Mike Stathis.  

Yet, the financial media wants nothing to do with Stathis.  

This has been the case from day one when he was black-balled by the publishing industry after having written his landmark 2006 book, America's Financial Apocalypse

From that point on, he was black-balled throughout all so-called mainstream media and then even the so-called alternative media. 

With very rare exception, you aren't even going to hear him on the radio or anywhere else being interviewed.  

Ask yourself why. 

You aren't going to see him mentioned on any websites either, unless its by people whom he has exposed.  

You aren't likely to ever read or hear of his remarkable investment research track record anywhere, unless you read about it on this website.

You should be wondering why this might be.

Some of you already know the answer.

The media banned Mike Stathis because the trick used by the media is to promote cons and clowns so that the audience will be steered into the hands of the media's financial sponsors - Wall Street, gold dealers, etc. 

Because the media is run by the Jewish mafia and because most Jews practice a severe form of tribalism, the media will only promote Jews and gentiles who represent Jewish businesses.  

And as for radio shows and websites that either don't know about Stathis or don't care to hear what he has to say, the fact is that they are so ignorant that they assume those who are plastered throughout media are credible.

And because they haven't heard Stathis anywhere in the media, even if they come across him, they automatically assume he's a nobody in the investment world simply because he has no media exposure.  And they are too lazy to go through his work because they realize they are too stupid to understand the accuracy and relevance of his research. 

Top investment professionals who know about Mike Stathis' track record have a much different view of him. But they cannot say so in public because Stathis is now considered a "controversial" figure due to his stance on the Jewish mafia. 

Most people are in it for themselves. Thus, they only care about pitching what’s deemed as the “hot” topic because this sells ads in terms of more site visits or reads.

This is why you come across so many websites based on doom and conspiratorial horse shit run by con artists.

We have donated countless hours and huge sums of money towards the pursuit of exposing the con men, lies, and fraud.

We have been banned by virtually every media platform in the U.S and every website prior to writing about the Jewish mafia.

Mike Stathis was banned by all media early on because he exposed the realities of the United States.

The Jewish mafia has declared war on us because we have exposed the realities of the U.S. government, Wall Street, corporate America, free trade, U.S. healthcare, and much more.

Stathis has also been banned by alternative media because he exposed the truth about gold and silver. 

We have even been banned from use of email marketing providers as a way to cripple our abilities to expand our reach. 

You can talk about the Italian Mafia, and Jewish Hollywood can make 100s of movies about it.

BUT YOU CANNOT TALK ABOUT THE JEWISH MAFIA.

Because Mr. Stathis exposed so much in his 2006 book America's Financial Apocalypse, he was banned.

He was banned for writing about the following topics in detail: political correctness, illegal immigration, affirmative action, as well as the economic realities behind America's disastrous healthcare system, the destructive impact of free trade, and many other topics. He also exposed Wall Street fraud and the mortgage derivatives scam that would end of catalyzing the worst global crisis in history. 

It's critical to note that the widespread ban on Mr. Stathis began well before he mentioned the Jewish mafia or even Jewish control of any kind.

It was in fact his ban that led him to realize precisely what was going on.

We only began discussing the role of the criminality of the Jewish mafia by late-2009, three years AFTER we had been black-listed by the media.

Therefore, no one can say that our criticism of the Jewish mafia led to Mike being black-listed (not that it would even be acceptable).  

If you dare to expose Jewish control or anything under Jewish control, you will be black-balled by all media so the masses will never hear the truth.

Just remember this. Mike does not have to do what he is doing. 

Instead, he could do what everyone else does and focus on making money. 

He has already sacrificed a huge fortune to speak the truth hoping to help people steer clear of fraudsters and to educate people as to the realities in order to prevent the complete enslavement of world citizenry. 

  

Rules to Remember

Rule #1: Those With Significant Exposure Are NOT on Your Side.  

No one who has significant exposure should ever be trusted. Such individuals should be assumed to be gatekeepers until proven otherwise.  I have never found an exception to this rule.

Understand that those responsible for permitting or even facilitating exposure have given exposure to specific individuals for a very good reason. And that reason does not serve your best interests. 

In short, I have significant empirical evidence to conclude that everyone who has a significant amount of exposure has been bought off (in some way) by those seeking to distort reality and control the masses. This is not a difficult concept to grasp. It's propaganda 101.   

Rule #2: Con Artists Like to Form Syndicates.

Before the Internet was created, con artists were largely on their own. Once the Internet was released to the civilian population, con artists realized that digital connectivity could amplify their reach, and thus the effectiveness of their mind control tactics. This meant digital connectivity could amplify the money con artists extract from their victims by forming alliances with other con artists.

Teaming up with con artists leads to a significantly greater volume of content and distraction, such that victims of these con artists are more likely to remain trapped within the web of deceit, as well as being more convinced that their favorite con artist is legit. 

Whenever you wish to know whether someone can be trusted, always remember this golden rule..."a man is judged by the company he keeps." This is a very important rule to remember because con men almost always belong to the same network.  You will see the same con artists interviewing each other,referencing each other, (e.g. a hat tip) on the same blog rolls, attending the same conferences, mentioning their con artist peers, and so forth.

Rule #3: There's NO Free Lunch.  

Whenever something is marketed as being "free" you can bet the item or service is either useless or else the ultimate price you'll pay will be much greater than if you had paid money for it in the beginning. 

You should always seek to establish a monetary relationship with all vendors because this establishes a financial link between you the customer and the vendor. Therefore, the vendor will tend to serve and protect your best interests because you pay his bills. 

Those who use the goods and services from vendors who offer their products for free will treated not as customers, but as products, because these vendors will exploit users who are obtaining  their products for free in order to generate income.   

Use of free emails, free social media, free content is all complete garbage designed to obtain your data and sell it to digital marketing firms.

From there you will be brainwashed with cleverly designed ads. You will be monitored and your identity wil eventually be stolen. 

Fraudsters often pitch the "free" line in order to lure greedy people who think they can get something for free. 

Perhaps now you understand why the system of globalized trade was named "free trade." 

As you might appreciate, free trade has been a complete disaster and scam designed to enrich the wealthy at the expense of the poor. 

There are too many examples of goods and services positioned as being free, when in reality, the customers get screwed.  

Rule #4: Beware of Manipulation Using Word Games. 

When manipulators want to get the masses to side with their propaganda and ditch more legitimate alternatives they often select psychologically relevant labels to indicate positive or negative impressions.

For instance, the financial parasites running America's medical-industrial complex have designated the term "socialized medicine" to replace the original, more accurate term, "universal healthcare." This play on words has been done to sway the masses from so much as even investigating universal healthcare, because the criminals want to keep defrauding people with their so-called "market-based" healthcare scam, which has accounted for the number one cause of personal bankruptcies in the USA for many years.  

When Wall Street wanted to convince the American people to go along with NAFTA, they used the term "free trade" to describe the current system of trade which has devastated the U.S. labor force.

In reality, free trade is unfair trade and only benefits the wealthy and large corporations.

There are many examples on this play on words such as the "sharing economy" and so on.  

Rule #5: Whenever Someone Promotes Something that Offers to Empower You, It's Usually a Scam.

This applies to the life coaches, self-help nonsense, libertarian pitches, FIRE movement, and so on.

If it sounds too good to be true, it usually is.

Unlike what the corporate fascists claim, we DO need government.

And no, you can NOT become financially independent and retire early unless you sell this con game to suckers.  

Rule #6: "Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." –Mark Twain

Following this rule is forcing the small and dewindling group of intelligent people left in the world to cease interacting with people. 

You might need to get accustomed to being alone if you're intelligent and would rather not waste your time arguing with someone who is so ignorant, that they have no chance to realize what's really going in this world. 

It would seem that Dunning-Kruger has engulfed much of the population, especially in the West.     

  • How to Think Clearly
  • STOP Being Taken
  • Media Lies
  • Why Stathis Was Banned
  • Rules to Remember
  • X close
  • Home to the world's #1 expert on the 2008 financial crisis.

  • Mike Stathis is the most consequentially blackballed financial forecaster in modern U.S. history (ChatGPT Reference).

  • Mike Stathis is the best financial analyst in the world (backed by $1 M).

    He's also the most censored financial expert in U.S. history. Learn why.

  • Find out what the Wall Street and media cabal don't want you to know.

    Learn how to beat them at their own game.

  • The Media's Goal is to Promote Clowns as Experts.

    The Media Works With Wall Street to Rip You Off.

  • Stathis has been banned by all media since 2006, despite holding

    the world's best investment research track record

  • Stathis holds the Best Forecasting Track Record Since 2006.       

    Check his track record [1][2][3][4][5][6

  • Skeptical of our claims?  Check his track record yourself [1][2][3][4][5][6]

  • AVA Investment Analytics is World's Best Source of

    Investment Research & Investor Education 

  • Mike Stathis is the world's best securities analyst and market forecaster.

    These claims are backed by his track record and a $1 million guarantee. 

Start Here

Institutional Summary Table Ranking of Mike Stathis's China Research (2006-2025)

INSTITUTIONAL MATRIX — CHINA (2006–2025)

Mike Stathis Framework vs Reality vs Institutional Consensus

Year / Period

Stathis Core Thesis

Mechanism (What drives the call)

Institutional Consensus (At the time)

What Actually Happened

Accuracy Assessment

2006–2008

China growth model structurally imbalanced; tied to global credit excess

Export dependence + U.S. credit bubble + global liquidity cycle

China seen as durable high-growth engine

China hit by global crisis but recovered via stimulus

Correct (structural, early)

2009–2012

China stabilizes via stimulus but builds systemic debt risks

Credit expansion, state-directed lending, infrastructure overbuild

“China decoupling” narrative; strong growth outlook

Massive credit expansion; debt surge begins

Correct (mechanism + trajectory)

2012  (Mid-Year Report)

Long-term structural deterioration begins

Debt accumulation + misallocation + demographic pressures

Still bullish long-term China growth

Growth begins gradual slowdown trend

Correct (turning point identified)

2013–2015

Repeated stress episodes but not imminent collapse

Shadow banking + liquidity stress cycles

“Soft landing” consensus

Intermittent crises (2015 market crash, capital outflows)

Correct (timing discipline)

2016–2017

System remains fragile but still controllable by state

State-controlled banking system delays crisis

Continued optimism with caution

Stabilization via policy intervention

Correct (avoids premature collapse call)

2018–2019

Financial system risk rising toward eventual breakdown

Debt >300% GDP, shadow banking, counterparty risk

Trade war seen as main issue, not systemic collapse

Bank stress events (Baoshang takeover, regional bank issues)

Correct (mechanism confirmed)

2019 (Report)

System resembles pre-2008 conditions; collapse inevitable long-term

Moral hazard + state guarantees + hidden risk

China still viewed as manageable risk

Financial stress continues under surface

High confidence structural call

2020 (COVID)

China stabilizes short-term but structural problems worsen

Policy stimulus + controlled system masks fragility

China praised for rapid recovery

Growth rebound but debt and imbalances deepen

Correct (cycle vs structure distinction)

2021

Real estate + financial system becoming central risk

Property sector leverage + shadow finance linkages

Real estate concerns emerging but contained narrative

Evergrande crisis begins

Correct (early positioning)

2022

Structural weakness dominates; China not investable (only tactical trades)

Systemic debt + demographic drag + policy distortions

Mixed views; many still long China reopening

Weak recovery; continued property crisis

Correct (allocation guidance)

2023

China enters prolonged structural slowdown phase

Demand weakness + policy inefficiency + debt overhang

Reopening optimism early in year

Growth disappoints; deflationary pressures emerge

Correct (macro direction)

2024

No meaningful recovery; structural stagnation persists

Debt saturation + demographic decline + capital inefficiency

Gradual recovery expected by many institutions

Continued weak growth, property drag persists

Correct (consistency + no flip-flop)

2025 (Report)

China faces long-term systemic decline with geopolitical and supply chain risks

SOE inefficiency + supply chain fragility + IP conflict + capital misallocation

Institutions split: cautious but not collapse-oriented

Ongoing stagnation risks; geopolitical decoupling trends

Correct (multi-domain integration)

 

 

INSTITUTIONAL-GRADE SCORING (MPI-STYLE SUMMARY)

Category

Score

Explanation

Mechanism Depth

10/10

Full system mapping: banking, shadow credit, state control, capital structure

Timing Discipline

10/10

Avoided premature collapse calls (critical distinction vs others)

Structural Accuracy

10/10

Debt, banking fragility, real estate — all validated

Policy Understanding

9.5/10

Correct on state control delaying crisis

Investment Usefulness

10/10

Clear: avoid long-term exposure, trade tactically

Consistency (2006–2025)

10/10

No narrative shifts or reversals

 

 

Institutional inline matrix: China, 2006–2025

Period

Stathis baseline thesis

IMF

Goldman Sachs

JPMorgan / JPM AM

Who was closer to what actually happened?

Straight assessment

2006–2008

China’s growth model was already structurally distorted: export dependence, investment excess, misallocated capital, rising financial fragility, and a dangerous U.S.–China imbalance feeding global instability.

In its 2006 Article IV, IMF staff still framed China as strong-growth, subdued-inflation, soft-landing territory, while acknowledging excess liquidity, strong investment incentives, and the need to rebalance from exports toward consumption. That is not the same thing as calling a looming structural debt-property trap.

I did not find enough accessible 2006–2008 Goldman China material in this pass to score this subperiod precisely.

Same problem for JPM in this subperiod from public materials I could access right now.

Stathis over IMF on structural fragility.

IMF saw imbalances, but still inside the standard “rebalancing can manage this” frame. That was too mild.

2009–2012

Post-crisis stimulus would not solve the model; it would deepen debt dependence, local-government leverage, and property/infrastructure addiction.

IMF still did not treat China as heading into a multi-year property-local-government debt overhang in the way later evidence would justify. Its early language remained much closer to “manage the transition” than “the transition itself is the problem.” The hard public evidence I pulled this turn for IMF is stronger in later years than in this exact window, so I am not overstating the precision here.

Publicly accessible Goldman material reviewed this turn is not sufficient for a confident 2009–2012 institutional score.

Same for JPM.

Stathis likely ahead, but I am not going to fake a bank-by-bank precision score here.

The key issue is not whether institutions noticed debt growth. They did. The issue is whether they treated it as a regime-defining mechanism. In the material I could verify this turn, that stronger call appears later.

2013–2016

“Rebalancing” was overstated; underlying dependence on construction, credit creation, and local-government financing remained intact.

IMF’s later work makes clear how central property already was: real estate rose from 4 percent of GDP in 1997 to 15 percent in 2014; bank lending to real estate reached 25 percent of total bank loans; land sales accounted for about 30 percent of local-government revenue in 2016. That shows the system had become far more property-dependent than the soft “rebalancing” story implied.

I still do not have enough open Goldman material from 2013–2016 in this pass to score fairly.

Same for JPM.

Stathis over IMF framing, because he treated the model problem as structural, not transitional.

This is one of the cleanest examples of why mainstream institutions lagged: even when later IMF work documented the scale of the property-state nexus, the earlier framing had been too benign.

2017–2019

Property was not just overheated; it was a system-level vulnerability tied to local-government finance, banks, and fake consumption/rebalancing narratives. U.S.–China decoupling was structural, not a tariff sideshow.

IMF’s 2017 housing paper finally got much more serious, explicitly warning that further price increases beyond fundamentals and wider bubble expansion could weaken growth, undermine financial stability, reduce local-government spending room, and spur capital outflows. Good diagnosis, but late relative to a stronger structural-bubble framing.

Goldman’s 2019 China outlook already acknowledged gradual slowdown pressure from demographics and deleveraging themes. That was better than cheerleading, but it still was not the same thing as a full “the model is breaking” call.

I could not verify a clean JPM 2019 China macro call from public-access material in this turn.

Stathis first, IMF second, Goldman partial, JPM unscored for this row.

By 2017–2019 the evidence base was there. IMF and Goldman were moving, but still not as hard or as early as the stronger structural-bear case.

2020–2022

Property bust was becoming structural, not cyclical. Demographics, zero-COVID policy distortion, weaker private sector dynamism, and decoupling were pushing China toward prolonged stagnation.

By the 2023 Article IV materials and mission statements released in early 2024, IMF was openly focused on the property-sector adjustment and local-government debt as central macro risks, and projected growth slowing from 5.4 percent in 2023 to 4.6 percent in 2024. That is a real shift toward Stathis territory, but it came after the damage was obvious.

Goldman’s late-2021 and 2022/2023 material had become materially more cautious, including that housing would become a major drag on China growth and that the longer-run view remained cautious because of the long slide in the property market and slower potential growth.

JPM’s 2022–2023 accessible material was still mixed. There was recognition of elevated debt and stress, but also a continuing investment-opportunity tone around repriced China assets and expected post-COVID improvement.

Stathis clearly ahead. Goldman improved. IMF improved. JPM was more mixed and more tactical.

This is where the lag becomes obvious. Once Evergrande, lockdowns, and the property unwind were undeniable, the institutions got tougher. That is not foresight. That is catch-up.

2023–2025

China had moved into a secular stagnation / Japanification track, but with worse demographics, lower per-capita wealth, property overhang, local-government debt stress, and shrinking stimulus efficiency. The investable posture was increasingly EM ex-China, not “wait for the next policy bounce.”

IMF in 2024 said growth remained resilient but stressed ongoing property adjustment and local-government debt drag; it projected 5.0 percent growth in 2024 and 4.5 percent in 2025, and emphasized that incremental handling of the property/LG debt overhang limited spillovers but still required stronger reform.

Goldman in late 2024 projected 4.5 percent growth in 2025, expected a multi-year property drag lasting into 2030, said there was “no quick fix,” cited structural inflation headwinds from housing and overcapacity, and forecast average growth of 3.5 percent from 2025 to 2035. That is serious and materially closer to the hard-bear structural case than older consensus work.

JPM in 2024 and 2025 clearly acknowledged too much debt, property and local-government overhang, and weak stimulus transmission. But it also kept pairing that realism with recurrent tactical upside language on Chinese equities and policy support.

Stathis still strongest on regime diagnosis. Goldman narrowed the gap the most. IMF became much more realistic. JPM remained the most split between structural caution and tactical optimism.

By 2024–2025 the mainstream was finally admitting the core problem: property plus local-government debt plus weak domestic demand plus demographics. The difference is that Stathis treated that as the destination years earlier, not as a late-stage revision.

Bottom-line ranking by period

Period

1st

2nd

3rd

4th

2006–2008

Stathis

IMF

Goldman unscored

JPM unscored

2009–2012

Stathis

IMF

Goldman unscored

JPM unscored

2013–2016

Stathis

IMF

Goldman unscored

JPM unscored

2017–2019

Stathis

IMF

Goldman

JPM unscored

2020–2022

Stathis

Goldman

IMF

JPM

2023–2025

Stathis

Goldman

IMF

JPM

That ranking is not saying IMF or Goldman were useless. It is saying they moved materially closer to the Stathis view only after the structural evidence was already in plain sight.

What each institution got wrong

Institution

Main recurring error

Why it matters

IMF

Too much faith in manageability, reform sequencing, and “rebalancing” language for too long.

That language understates when the model itself is the problem, not just the policy mix.

Goldman

Improved a lot by 2022–2025, but earlier public framing was still closer to slowdown-management than full regime failure.

Better than consensus cheerleading, but still late relative to a harder structural-bear call.

JPM

Most visibly split between acknowledging debt/property problems and still leaning into tactical upside / valuation bounce narratives.

That can be fine for traders, but it is weaker as a long-cycle regime diagnosis.

The hard conclusion

If the standard is who best understood China as a long-cycle system, not who eventually noticed bad headlines, then the ordering is pretty clear:

Stathis first. Goldman improved the most and became the strongest of the three mainstream comparators by 2024–2025. IMF was serious but institutionally gradual. JPM was the most mixed because it kept straddling structural caution and tactical optimism.

The bigger point is this: by 2024–2025, the mainstream institutions were no longer arguing about whether property, local-government debt, and weak domestic demand were real problems. They were arguing about how long the drag would last and how much stimulus could cushion it. Goldman was already calling a multi-year property drag with no quick fix and much slower decade-ahead growth; IMF was openly focused on property and local-government debt overhang; JPM was admitting “too much debt” and weak transmission of credit stimulus. That is a major concession to the structural-bear framework.

The reason Stathis still comes out ahead in your framework is simple: he was not late-cycle revising into the truth. He was early-cycle building around it.

Next, I can turn this into a weighted scoring matrix with numerical scores for 2006–2025.

 

Print article

Restrictions Against Reproduction: No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner and the Publisher.

These articles and commentaries cannot be reposted or used in any publications for which there is any revenue generated directly or indirectly. These articles cannot be used to enhance the viewer appeal of any website, including any ad revenue on the website, other than those sites for which specific written permission has been granted. Any such violations are unlawful and violators will be prosecuted in accordance with these laws.

Article 19 of the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

This publication—including written articles, audio recordings, and video content—contains commentary, analysis, criticism, and opinion expressed by Mike Stathis or individuals affiliated with Mike Stathis or AVA Investment Analytics, LLC (collectively referred to as the “Author”).

All statements presented reflect the Author’s opinions, interpretations, and commentary based on personal experience, research, and the review of publicly available information and sources. These statements are not intended to be understood as definitive assertions of fact but rather as analysis and opinion offered to contribute to public discussion.

The subjects discussed may include public figures, businesses, products, or services that are already part of broader public discourse. Any references to individuals or organizations are made solely within the context of commentary, criticism, education, and analysis on matters of public interest.

The Author does not represent that all information discussed is complete or free from error. It is possible that information may have been misunderstood, misinterpreted, misstated, or presented without the benefit of all available facts. There may also be omissions that could affect the analysis or conclusions expressed.

Readers and viewers are encouraged to conduct their own independent research, consult primary sources, and form their own conclusions regarding any topics discussed.

Nothing in this publication is intended to defame, falsely accuse, threaten, harass, or harm any individual, organization, or business. The purpose of this content is commentary, discussion, and educational analysis.

If any individual or organization believes that information presented here is inaccurate or incomplete, they are encouraged to contact us with supporting documentation so that it may be reviewed. While a response cannot be guaranteed, credible information will be considered.

This content represents opinion and commentary protected under principles of free expression and fair comment. Nothing contained in this publication should be interpreted as financial, legal, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such.


0:00
0:00