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.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BGR who wrote (77036)	3/6/2000 11:43:00 AM
From: Mike M2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

BGR, good article for you to read gold-eagle.com ho ho ho Mike

To: BGR who wrote (77036)	3/6/2000 12:42:00 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

bgr, history isn't on your side given the current valuations. name a time when valuations were this high relative to growth where there wasn't a severe penalty. it doesn't exist. they all crumbled. some made it back (your apparent argument) and some didn't. my guess is that the us economy eventually will support current valuations. i also know a very high % of people who think like you now will change their minds. they will sell. some won't have to. they will have to sell due to their leverage. will you sell if your assets are down 60%? good thing you understand this market is liquidity driven and not valuation driven. can the fundamentals supporting our liquidity continue forever? tulips are relevant in that they were one of countless manias that seduced folks into being TRUE BELIEVERS.

To: BGR who wrote (77036)	3/6/2000 1:54:00 PM
From: Freedom Fighter	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 132070

BGR, >>The Great Depression was largely an issue of faulty Central Bank policy which decided to drain liquidity at the wrong moment (under public pressure).<< This is a widely believed and reported fantasy. I suggest that if you ever have a lot of free time that you read the NY Times from that period. No one was worried about the crash because everyone believed that the Fed could inflate. In fact, in the weeks after the crash they were flooding the system with money. There was never any effort to drain liquidity in the months or years after. The money supply collapsed because of the credit contraction of mal-investments that accumulated during the boom. It can be argued that the Fed didn't try hard enough, much as some people believe Japan is not trying hard enough now, but I think the phrases "pushing on a string" and "liquidity trap" came into being for a reason. There weren't enough willing borrowers because the returns on capital were low and the perceived risks were very high. I wasn't there so I can't say for certain that the Fed of that time did everything they could, but the idea that they tightened or didn't try to inflate is totally false. Wayne