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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frank Ellis Morris who wrote (99483)	2/18/2000 4:45:00 PM
From: JDN	Respond to of 186894

Dear Frank: Either you did NOT watch the Humprey Hawkins testimony which I did completely or else you and I sure interpret things differently. I thought AG came out very strong for business, he basically said, at least to me, he is NOT going to do more than 1/4pt incremental increases and he advised the committee to cut capital gain taxes just couldnt pinpoint how much. If Republicans get elected you can bet they wont forget that. JDN

To: Frank Ellis Morris who wrote (99483)	2/18/2000 5:22:00 PM
From: Road Walker	Respond to of 186894

Frank, I agree with your post. Mr. Greenspan, in his testimony, essentially said that individual wealth was the enemy, and the stock market, coupled with increased productivity and the resultant high expectations, were the cause. He wants to decrease spending by making people less wealthy. And he is going to raise interest rates, increment by increment, until the market comes down. I had been a strong supporter of Mr. Greenspan, not any more. And you are right, these are new positions since he was re-appointed for a new term. John

To: Frank Ellis Morris who wrote (99483)	2/18/2000 6:25:00 PM
From: Harry Landsiedel	Respond to of 186894

Frank. OTOT Re: "I do not see anything to ease the fear." Hard to argue with your POV after today. Without reading too much into one day's action, particularly in light of recent volatility, my judgement is that the market is reacting to much higher UNCERTAINTY. It figured on at least two interest rate increases, and now it's not sure HOW MANY the Fed will engineer. Until there's a sense that we're near the end, I am doubtful of any rally having legs. Re: "I now believe that this may cost the Democrats any chance of winning the Presidential election." This is a tough call. Only if Greenspan throws the economy into a recession or a six month bear market will there likely be a "cause & effect" relationship between the Fed and the election IMHO. The real risk to me is that Greenspan keeps fighting phantom inflation and rather than slowing the economy he pushes it into a recession that is not felt until after the election. Then the tax cutters lose and the spenders win, so the vehicle to get us out of the recession is not available. This could lead to stagnant growth and most importantly a BIG loss of confidence, which would hurt the economy and the market. Judging by the market gains after the 1994 election, I think the market would react more negatively to having a Democratic House than having a Democratic President. JMHO HL

To: Frank Ellis Morris who wrote (99483)	2/18/2000 7:33:00 PM
From: kash johal	Respond to of 186894

Frank, You post this point of view on the threads on multiple sites after such a move. It's a free market. AG has told us what he is going to do. If you truly believe that this will "crash" the market in a "meltdown". THEN REJOICE. Sell your stocks and SHORT the market. You will make a BUNDLE and laugh all the way to the bank. Otherwise shut the f*** up and stop spamming the threads. Other folks might prefer a rational "jawing down of the market" before it goes onto higher levels. regards, Kash