Cycle slowdown theorists, which proliferated on the *tube, have a bit of the problem:

If we 'slow down' to just 2x this cycle, but will be on a 70% downturn afterwards (from $137.8K to $41.3K) as projected by a relatively slow decline in this parameter (from 94 to 84% to 77% in the past and, I guess, 70% is expected next time), this would mean that we would NEVER get back to that $137.8K number as long as upward bounces are declining faster in proportion to slowly declining plunges.

Basically, to avoid the negative scenario shown above, something got to give: either upside slow downs would not happen or declines would have to be shallower.

TL;DR: slowdown theories are bs, most likely