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.

Pastimes : The Naked Truth - Big Kahuna a Myth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pater tenebrarum who wrote (59266)	8/30/1999 11:53:00 AM
From: MythMan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 86076

I agree. He is totally wrong. Not sure why he is even saying crap like that.

To: pater tenebrarum who wrote (59266)	8/30/1999 11:55:00 AM
From: Amelia Carhartt	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 86076

Heinz: You're nuts. Everything is s'wunnaful, s'wunnaful. Pop those champagne corks.

To: pater tenebrarum who wrote (59266)	8/30/1999 12:09:00 PM
From: TheStockFairy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86076

If you stick to his thesis that the wealth effect alone is not propelling the US economy, I would have to agree. You must separate out the rise in stock prices with the wealth effect, unless you are submitting that corporation's buying habits also are subject to the wealth effect. An example of this would be that company with a higher stock price is more likely to purchase more high quality washing machines than they were before their valuation had risen. I would agree that a company with a lofty valuation would be more likely to make an acquisition, but I would shudder to think that a company would make more outstanding purchases based on the assumption that their stock price was going to remain stable or at a "permanately high plateau."