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.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (67001)	2/16/2000 1:32:00 AM
From: DOUG H	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

<<<There's nothing personal in what he's doing, though; he just doing an incredibly complex job better than anyone has ever done before.>> I'll second that unq.

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (67001)	2/16/2000 8:54:00 AM
From: RocketMan	Respond to of 152472

OT OT Well, we will just have to agree to disagree on this on, Uncle. I do agree that there is nothing personal in what he does, nor have I ever infered that there is. I agree he is doing what he honestly thinks is the correct thing to do. And I think he is an intelligent, capable, and honest economist and banker. The world is full of individuals who were trying to do the right thing, according to their views, but had the wrong effect. But even that is OK with me, as long as he is working within his charter. The problem I have is that he is working outside of his charter by trying to manage the stock market, the most efficient free-market economic process that has ever evolved, in ways that are outside of his charter. Yes, his charter includes protection of the US dollar, in the sense of promoting sustainable international trade and payments. His charter is also to promote economic growth, full employment, and stable prices. If he stuck to these things, he would at least be working within his charter, whether or not we agreed with his policies. But when he talks about irrational exhuberance in the market, when he talks about internet bubbles, when he makes fun of internet investing (even if he later takes it back, or even if he is right in many cases), and when he focuses on an index that contains 100 mainly tech stocks as an indicator of where he should take interest rates, I think that is well outside of his charter. I am not only saying this because of the techs. I think he has been hurting the smokestack businesses even more. The Dow has not moved in the last 10 months. And the American worker is working longer hours, being more productive, and is going to get squeezed out of his/her job because AG is going to force that company to pay even more for their capital. That is not right. I think the market does a pretty good job of finding its fair value in the long run and adjusting when needed. I was short the market in Oct 98 when I saw the world economy putting a real drag on our own economy. I felt the right level was 6500-7000 at the time. We never got there, because AG cut interest rates and pumped money into the economy, and caused an unjustifiable expansion that drove the stock market to new highs, and we are still feeling the effects of that. Now he wants to drive it down to whatever level he thinks is right. Well, he should look at what he has caused. He has caused a divergence in the market where certain sectors are doing very well, while the average stock is down in the dumps. How does he correct that? If he brings techs down, the money may or may not flow into those beaten down companies. Instead they might just fold. Is that how he's going to fix it? Well, enough ranting... gotta get to work.... :-)