> That such an elementary claim about a volatile asset is controversial almost says more than the article.
That it's such an elementary claim is the reason for the pushback. What's the point in saying something obvious?
That it's such an elementary claim is the reason for the pushback. What's the point in saying something obvious?
Saying something obvious (e.g. circles are round) isn't the same as refuting something obvious (e.g. circles are squares).