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 : All Clowns Must Be Destroyed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sammaster who wrote (5782)	2/1/2000 4:03:00 PM
From: clochard	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42523

I was wondering if the fed even mattered anymore. Since they don't borrow money anymore, what is their effect on the markets anyway. They can set interest rates that the banks get, but do they really lend them that much? When all the short term debt out there needs to be refinanced, its not the fed that's lending, its the rest of the world, and they will want a higher rate parting with their government paper.

To: sammaster who wrote (5782)	2/1/2000 4:09:00 PM
From: pater tenebrarum	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42523

<<he may even slow the money spigot in terms of overnight repos...>> dream on...<ggg> bubble boy isn't going to disturb the mania...after all, "millions of informed investors can't have it wrong". in other words, tulip mania was perfectly rational, or perhaps it was handicapped by being driven by only thousands of well-informed investors? note that on the occasion of the past three hikes there was nothing but the usual mumbo-jumbo coming out of the FOMC and back door liquidity stuffing was going on at full speed. the market was rising into all three meetings. why should it be any different this time? granted, i think we'll sell off. but not because of anything likely to emanate from the FOMC.