A famous economist named David Rosenberg thinks that in 2024, there might be a big problem with the economy. This could make people have less money and businesses struggle. He says this is because the government won't give as much help to the economy, and the people who control interest rates will make them higher. This would not be good for stocks or other things that people invest in. David Rosenberg has been warning about this possibility for a while now, and he thinks we should pay attention to how the economy does in 2023 to see if his prediction might come true. Read from source...

- The article starts with an attention-grabbing headline that implies David Rosenberg is a top economist and his predictions are credible. However, the article does not provide any evidence or sources to support this claim. It also does not mention any alternative views or counterarguments from other experts in the field.
- The article relies heavily on anecdotal evidence and speculation, such as Rosenberg's reference to election years typically seeing strong stock market gains due to the "election effect". This is a vague and subjective term that has no clear definition or empirical basis. It also ignores the fact that past performance does not guarantee future results, and there may be other factors influencing the market in 2024.
- The article uses emotional language and exaggeration to convey Rosenberg's views, such as "echoes of 2007 and 2000", which are both associated with major financial crises. This creates a sense of fear and urgency among the readers, without providing any factual or logical support for his predictions.
- The article also makes inconsistent statements, such as saying that fiscal stimulus was largely responsible for the economy's robustness in 2023, but then claiming that it could reverse in 2024 and cause a decrease in economic growth. This implies that fiscal stimulus is both beneficial and harmful, depending on the time frame and context, which does not make sense logically or economically.
- The article ends with a vague statement about Rosenberg's previous warnings and predictions, without providing any concrete evidence or outcomes to show whether he was correct or not. This leaves the readers with an incomplete and unreliable impression of his credibility and track record.