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 : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: UnBelievable who wrote (15784)	9/3/2000 5:02:51 PM
From: AllansAlias	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

UB, Just listen to da chief? -g Seriously, permabulls have been better at predicting the market for a very long time. I think your question is not really about TA versus FA. Rather, it is about timeframes. I want to restate what I see as the only sensible approach: * In the widest possible timeframe one has to be bullish. * Inside that timeframe one can reasonably anticipate resolution of powerful factors that are being ignored by the market. We are in such a position now. Problem is, it is useless to assign a time scale to this event. Major and protracted down will come eventually, just don't waste too much money trying to time it. * Inside this timeframe one should be neutral and just play price action. E.g.: "Who cares if INKT should not be going up. It is going up and I will capitalize."

To: UnBelievable who wrote (15784)	9/3/2000 10:27:51 PM
From: CYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

One thing that was deeply planted in my mind after I read the book, "Devils take the hindmost," was that a sustained period of excessive speculation, or a bubble, came into existence because economic, societal, political, and psychological forces supported such phenomena through their cyclical natures, and intentional manipulation in some cases. Many theories that justify the high equity prices in US have been presented and sometimes with convincing arguments. Just the other day, it was mentioned that peace dividends serve to keep this wonderful prosperity afloat. When US and Soviet Union were engaged in the so-called cold war, Japan was taking advantage of the situation. With their abilities to produce energy-efficient cars and other consumer products that appeal to a broad base of customers, they quickly took over market shares. With a loose monetary policy, the whole nation became a money-making machine. The coordinated efforts between governmental institutions (MITI and such) and Japanese conglomerates, plus cross-holding assets, pushed their invulnerability to a very convincing level. All these factors ferment the bubble to an astonishing height. Not without questionable consequences, however. It popped when all the powerful forces did not resonate any longer. One can only relate the existence of excessive speculation and irrational exuberance to historical lessons. Asset values become detached from reality. Abnormal level of participation by the public. Political identities get involved in covering up truths. It is not surprising, at least to me, that we are hearing unrealistic reports of low inflation and high productivity at this stage. Is this about to be over? I though so two years ago and was proved terribly wrong. I do know though, that it will be. When you hear this bear talk philosophically, you know he is in deep sh&t with his attempts at shorts. -bg-

To: UnBelievable who wrote (15784)	9/5/2000 9:14:35 AM
From: pater tenebrarum	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 436258

let's put it this way: t/a is much more useful to trade an obvious bubble than f/a can possibly be. however, the strength of the US economy is built on an enormous amount of debt. its continued strength (and with it the continued inflation of the financial assets bubble) hinges mainly on the ability to expand this debt at ever increasing rates. imo it is pretty clear that there is a limit to this. it seems that in order to sustain the whole shebang debt must grow about five times faster than the economy itself (which has been the case since the bubble actually began, i.e. '95). therefore this is the only fundamental factor that should concern us: money supply growth must remain at an annualized rate of about 10-15% without igniting inflation in goods and services to a degree that can't even be covered up by the BLS anymore, to enable the bubble to keep on bubbling. the funding of the debt driving all this depends in turn on the continued willingness of foreign economies to export their savings...as no savings are available domestically. therefore stronger overseas economies are indeed dangerous for the bubble's health, as the competition for capital intensifies. consequently a small scale interest rate bidding war has already commenced. also, the increasing strain on scarce natural resources is becoming glaringly obvious, as the rally in energy prices and the plunge in LME metal inventories show. in other words, we are probably close to the point where the bill for the up until now free lunch will be presented. btw, the above points are not part of mainstream economic analysis...that seems to concern itself mostly with looking for shades that are dark enough to shield our eyes from the brightness of the future. the dangerous imbalances are not even part of the Fed chairman's vocabulary anymore....complacency rules. one last thing: if it were not possible to fool a great many people for long periods of time, the Nikkei would have never reached 40,000...