ahhaha's ahs Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : ahhaha's ahs

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: GraceZ who wrote (5717)	12/10/2002 3:20:51 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	Read Replies (3) of 24758

Why do you assume that interfering with the equities market directly is necessary to fit the definition of influencing the market? I believe that the fed money policy was instrumental in the creation of the late 90s bubble. More directly, I believe that there was a causal relationship between the fed money policy and equity prices, whether intended or unintended. In the past several years, Greenspan has made several direct statements regarding the equity markets. You stated in your response After 911 the Fed came out and stated that they would provide whatever liquidity that was needed to stabilize the markets and avert a panic. After 911 the Fed came out and stated that they would provide whatever liquidity that was needed to stabilize the markets and avert a panic. . This indicates to me that you understand that the Fed can influence the direction of the equity market. And since the FOMC does operate through banks and brokerages that are assigned as primary dealers by the FRB, doesn't it make sense that these activities can have a secondary result that effects the equities market in what appears to be a concerted effort? Do you think that that secondary effect on the equity market is ever intended by the FRB?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next