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 and Lars Honors Bob Brinker Investment Club Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MrGreenJeans who wrote (391)	7/20/2000 3:16:37 PM
From: Wally Mastroly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10065

Greenspan - full text of testimony: bog.frb.fed.us - I found the following paragraphs particularly interesting: "..But as I indicated earlier, it is much too soon to conclude that these concerns are behind us. We cannot yet be sure that the slower expansion of domestic final demand, at a pace more in line with potential supply, will persist. Even if the growth rates of demand and potential supply move into better balance, there is still uncertainty about whether the current level of labor resource utilization can be maintained without generating increased cost and price pressures. As I have already noted, to date costs have been held in check by productivity gains. But at the same time, inflation has picked up--even the core measures that do not include energy prices directly. Higher rates of core inflation may mostly reflect the indirect effects of energy prices, but the Federal Reserve will need to be alert to the risks that high levels of resource utilization may put upward pressure on inflation. Moreover, energy prices may pose a challenge to containing inflation. Energy price changes represent a one-time shift in a set of important prices, but by themselves generally cannot drive an ongoing inflation process. The key to whether such a process could get under way is inflation expectations. To date, survey evidence, as well as readings from the Treasury's inflation-indexed securities, suggests that households and investors do not view the current energy price surge as affecting longer-term inflation. But any deterioration in such expectations would pose a risk to the economic outlook..." - Bold sentence above is my editing

To: MrGreenJeans who wrote (391)	7/21/2000 8:19:35 AM
From: MrGreenJeans	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 10065

I am Surprised... 10:01 FED: GDP TO GROW 4-4.5% THIS YEAR, 3.25-3.75% NEXT YEAR 10:01 FED SEES UNEMPLOYMENT RATE REMAINING AROUND 4% THIS YEAR AND NEXT no one on the board picked up on the aforementioned. Seems to me Greenspan is comfortable with a GDP growth rate of 4% to 4.5% up from the 3% to 3.5% GDP growth most commentators say Greenspan would have been comfortable with and seems to me that he is comfortable with unemployment in the 4% range also contrary to most commentators. Is anyone here changing their forecast going forward? Or are we all waiting for that insipid inflation that has yet to appear and those monthly rate rises which were anticipated earlier in the year?