Patriotic investors got fleeced
"On what do you base this supposition? The "1000 or so sleeper agents", are they the invention of your imagination, or do you have some unique information? "
The fallacy of the false dilemma. There are other ways to know this, such as by reading widely. Try it.
"That you call them "sleeper" implies that no one knows about them, except you."
This is a term of art. Do some reading on how many sleepers are projected to be amongst us.
"There have been two international events of terrorism on US soil in the last 10 years. Enforcement and awareness of terrorism is at an all time high, any suspicious activity is reported, you can't get on a plane with a tooth pick, we are as safe from a terrorist attack right now as we every have been. "
Which is why I said Round Two is very likely to be a different kind of attack, probably planned months or years ago. The attackers coordinated their 4-6 airliners (the Delta flights were not hijacked, for reasons as yet unpublicized) for the same hour precisely because they knew that Round One had to happen esentially simultaneously.
This implies strongly that Rounds Two and Three will differ substantially from Round One.
"If there are any terrorist cells in this country that haven't been compromised, then they are the ones that are hunkering down. "
They are sleepers, amongst us, and have _always_ been hunkering down. However, if they climb up on their apartment roof and use one of their 90 or so Stingers to down a 747 on takeoff from LAX, the "increased security" of banning fingernail clippers will be moot.
"You admit that the average American isn't at risk, yet you recommend that they hide out from your "1000 sleeper terrorists". You are right that the economy and the markets are at great risk, probably much greater than you realize. Yet you encourage irrational fear, and the exact hysterical reactions that were the terrorists goals, and that will effect the economy and markets. "
No, I have said that it is rational to reduce travel if it is not necessary, to reduce purchase of big-ticket items, and to contemplate issues of personal security.
Moreover, it is silly for a person to "go out and spend" so as to help the economy. It makes sense for public leaders to try to convince as many people as they can to resume flitting around the country on airliners, but it makes sense for any individual to ignore the advice.
Why this is so is a simple matter of economic game theory. Coupled with issues of causality, i.e., what any individual person does or does not do will not cause changes in what others do, to first order. Buying a new SUV will not cause others to. Not buying a new SUV will leave money in their pockets which they may need in a crisis. And so on. Think about this for a while and you'll see the logic.
"Rationality is the cure for our economic problems. You are the real victim of the terrorists, their real target. Their weapon was the people they killed in the WTC. They were not trying to punish those people, they were trying to terrorize the rest of us. That's what terrorism is all about. Fear of being killed, fear that freezes economic activity, one event creating an empathic over-reaction that destroys rationality."
Yes, which is why I acknowledge their success. They did several hundred billion dollars worth of overall damage at a tiny cost. A lot of bang for the buck, which means other vengeance-oriented groups will be thinking about the same thing (and maybe even some short sellers).
"They beat you Tim, I thought only "chicks" were cowards. Fortunately, I think most of us have the courage to get American commerce moving again. "
They have hardly beaten _me_. I'm enjoying my life in the way I usually do.
I'm just not listening to the advice from politicians and fund managers to "buy to help the economy!," a la the patriotic buying program of a week ago...where the institutions unloaded a lot of their shares in a falling market to "small investor patriots."
They got what they deserved.
--Tim May |
