Yes Jerry... quite sometime....
Yup, doing Okay.... catching the speed bumps pretty well... <smile>
Hope the same is true for you....?
What's my take....?
Into mid Sept:
SPX 1,020
DOW 10,000±
Then more problems...
Macro:
I'm bothered by the prospects of deflation, and the lack of any growth engine..... America’s dip could easily be the world’s dip.
At least the Clinton team understood the potential of the "New Economy" as a driver..., even if it was a Wild Bill Cody traveling circus. Complete with stage coach bandits, bank robbers, gold miners and salon girls.... Oh Yes, and the clowns....!
We could be in this traders market for a number of years and the tedium of bearishness could be with us as well....! But their's been some solid returns in defense industry, water utility stocks, and bond markets. <smile>
I'm also bothered by the dry markets in corporate lending by the banks.
I like what this guy says:
Fed Focus
Paul McCulley | August 2002
Time to Roto Rooter the Lender-of-Last-Resort Function
pimco.com
Quote:
"... Rather, I advocated that the Fed hike margin requirements for the (initial) purchase of stocks on debt.
And my rationale was simple: the equity bubble was a New Economy affair, in which stocks were valued as lottery tickets, while Old Economy stocks - and the Old Economy itself - were not bubbling, but actually languishing in the deflationary wake of the 1997-98 collapse in emerging market countries. Thus, I believed then, and believe now, that hikes in the Fed funds rate were the wrong tool to arrest irrational exuberance in New Economy stocks, carrying unnecessary "collateral damage" for the Old Economy.
Or, as I testified before Congress:
"I know of no economic model that postulates a high interest elasticity of demand for lotteries! Virtually every economic model incorporates, however, a high interest elasticity of demand for the goods and services of the Old Economy."
Thus, using the interest rate tool exclusively to thwart wealth creation in New Economy stocks carries grave risks for the Old Economy. It makes no sense to try to get the attention of gluttons by starving anorexics. It's bad macroeconomic policy, and it is also morally wrong."
Bottom Line
Further cuts in the Fed funds rate would/will certainly stimulate housing, as housing financing runs through a too-big-to-fail conduit. Further cuts in the Fed funds rate would not/will not, however, materially abort the risk of a debt-deflation meltdown in a corporate sector suffering from Post Bubble Disorder. Cutting that risk would/will require that the Fed roto rooter the conduit through which its lender-of-last- resort function is supposed to flow: bank liquidity lending, and most importantly, banks' commitment to liquidity lending. " |
