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.

Strategies & Market Trends : MDA - Market Direction Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David W. Taylor who wrote (59656)	10/1/2000 4:23:27 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Respond to of 99985

David, I am not sure if we should fault AG for his three (four) money supply injections. Prior and after these events he has always tried to reign in the growth again. I think that for quite sometime, AG was actually keeping interest rates higher that would be indicated by the then reigning rate of inflation. I believe that his tactic was to make sure that in the event of a financial accident (a la 1987) he has the wherewithal ro step into the breach with ample ammunition. And indeed those three events (I am not sure about y2k, which I think was a false panic, or maybe his action prevented a panic), and actually four if you add the Asian melt down, called for ghis intervention to prevent financial markets maelt down. I think this is indeed part of the charter of the fed's. He is doing his job. No one benefits from financial panics, least of all the "big houses". They need slow "Chimese torture" like bear markets from time to time, panics do not provide them with enough time and market liquidity to bail out in time. Just a tought... Zeev