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 Justa & Lars Honors Bob Brinker Investment Club -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: marc ultra who wrote (9315)	10/15/1999 2:23:00 PM
From: Allan Harris	Respond to of 15132

Part of the complacency in this market has been the false belief by many investors that the market can't get real bad since the Fed would jump in again and cut rates. I've mentioned the Long Waves thread a couple of times this week and this time I will quote from a post over there this morning. It is directly related to both Marc's post and the prevalent, complacent bearishness on that thread. But you don't have to go to that forum to read about pending financial ruin, it is all over cyberspace, wherever an investment forum can be found. I like Long Waves because most of the posters over there are egomaniacs and you know what happens when two or more of them get together.... My theory on dire predictions coming from would-be genius analysts is that in 1987 a few careers were made by the individual analysts' random accuracy in being bearish before the Great Crash (or was it the Great Buying Opportunity?). Ever since then, wannabe superstars have been trying to nail the next one, hoping that the wheel of random accuracy will stop on their number. In any case, here is the quote from Long Waves. A =============================================== A basic disagreement of philosophy here. Should people be forced to experience war to find out how terrible it is? If all you bears get your worst case scenario, the worldwide economic chaos could well lead to a major war, and this time around such an event would be nuclear or biological. Is that what you want THC? As the saying goes "Be careful what you wish for, because you may get it." This list, except for Jas and a couple of others, has tended to ignore the secondary consequences of economic collapse. This narrowness of thinking always amazes me considering how bright the participants here are. Real everyday policy makers have to be very very concerned about the secondary consequences of an economic collapse, which is why they will work their tails off to prevent one, which some posters here have seemed to resent since I have first participated in the list. I personally support efforts to avoid a complete, or even major economic meltdown, since the secondary ramifications are too scary for me. I am not picking on you specifically THC, just the general lack of concern by a vast number of the posters here for the secondary ramifications of what they sometimes appear to be leading the cheers for.

To: marc ultra who wrote (9315)	10/15/1999 2:34:00 PM
From: marc ultra	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 15132

Yardeni speaking on CNBC sees 8,000 by March Marc