Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Goss who wrote (62641)	6/17/1999 2:01:00 PM
From: Tommaso	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 132070

I noticed during the questioning that Greenspan confirmed what some of us on this thread have surmised: that the three rate cuts, and the added liquidity, last fall were more than enough to avoid a banking crisis and that now the thing to do was to pull in some of that liquidity. This came out in a somewhat adversarial exchange with one congressman whose name I did not get--a not-too-bright fellow who seemed to feel that Greenapsn was thinking about hurting all the little people by tightening up credit somewhat. He refused to let Greenspan respond, and when he got through, Greenspan said "I am speechless" because he had been interrupted so many times. Anyway, what he was saying, using his ever-cinreasing capacity for multiple qualifications and triple negatives, was that money was getting tighter and that it was continuing to get tighter. And his remakrs on stock prices seem to indicate that he is saying that he is not concerned if they decline, because that damage can be contained. Yet there seem to be lots of speculators who have heard Greenspan saying that the good times will continue to roll. What I hear is: "We are tightening and we don't care what it does to the stock market." Although he has not said so, I think he realizes that those rate cuts were not a good idea.