The end of the year is nigh and it is time to own up to my mistakes. There is nothing wrong with making a prediction that turns out to be off the mark; I do not put this in the category of a punishable crime. I have made my assertions in good faith based on the evidence I had to hand, after all. Still, if there is a shortage of people to make fun of this festive season, I am willing to put myself forward.
With hindsight, I also add that I have done an about-face on some issues that I previously felt strongly about. This is perhaps to be expected, given the uncertainty of the times. It worries me, though, that flip-flopping will become more usual the deeper into economic crisis we fall.
This preamble said, on to the terrible truth:
First, Goldman Sachs appears to have weathered the financial crisis better than other investment houses. Its economic assessments are to be respected even more because of this. I am nonetheless one of the wary ones. Goldman's prediction in March that oil might climb to US$200 a barrel was bought royally by me; so convincing was the manner in which the argument was made that I took it a step further and contended that US$250 was not out of the question. Oil is now hovering around US$40 or so, and some analysts contend that US$10, as in 1999, is conceivable given the manner in which global demand is sinking. My mouth is firmly shut.
Second, from the day in March 2003 that the US and its allies invaded Iraq, I have been a fervent opponent of such intervention. Nothing good can come from such craziness, I have repeatedly thundered. Even into this year, I was haranguing US President George W. Bush for his stupidity. Then, a few months ago, I stumbled upon American think-tank the Brookings Institution's Iraq index. It shows that life has improved immeasurably for Iraqis this year; a situation that would certainly not have happened were Saddam Hussein still in power. The manner in which the invasion took place - without international approval - is still to be condemned. To say it's wrong to use military intervention to remove a despot is quite another matter.
Third, unusually for someone who is somewhat left of centre in their political thinking, I have never been entirely enamoured of Barack Obama. Perhaps it is because he has gone out of his way to be a centrist and is therefore too right-wing for my liking. I predicted that Hillary Rodham Clinton would become the Democratic Party's presidential candidate. After she was defeated, I believed John McCain would be the next US president. My reasoning was that Senator Clinton and Senator McCain were more 'human' - by which I mean liable to make mistakes. I have learned the lesson that, as in president-elect Obama's case, it is not bad to be perfect.