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 : Stock Attack -- A Complete Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (37738)	12/9/2000 10:25:10 AM
From: Roebear	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 42787

Haim, Don't take it personally, we agree on so many other things, but I must agree with L3 and disagree with you on this one. I've been watching the tape closely along with news on the "Unelection 2000" and the tape clearly responds positively to any positive Bush prospects. I am not alone in this observation, it is has been noticed by more posters on SD, I believe, than your view. As a partial explanation of this market reaction and an area I am familiar with, I wish to address US energy demand/supply and its economic implications of a Gore Presidency. I am familiar with the energy sector and believe it will have a significant economic effect over the next decade. It may explain some of the market gyrations and anti Gore market sentiment that I and others have noted. As for corporate hardship being a myth, read "The Color of Oil" for an understanding of how government intervention prolonged the oil crisis of the 70's. Our current energy situation nationwide has a lot to do with the Clinton administration energy policies (or rather lack thereof) in the late 90's, which practically resulted in the rebirth of OPEC. Currently we see that California's energy policies and regulatory morass have culminated in their NG/electricity prices today. Note this relevant post from a individual who was there: Message 14981450 Consider this as prologue for a Gore presidency, based on his stringent environmental stance and anti oil, anti mining past policy. When our Natural Gas needs in this country are analyzed, most would conclude this winter's energy problems are only a Prelude to coming years! Please go to the following free link, you may have to put your email in to register (no obligation) and then procede to the "Outlook For Natural Gas: Is A Train Wreck Pending?" link: simmonsco-intl.com OR simmonsco-intl.com Matt Simmons correctly forecast the current energy demand/supply situation when very few others saw it coming back in the days of ten dollar oil. Remember the oil glut?? In other articles available at the above link you will find some noting that despite increased drilling (currently 1000 rigs running and 80% of those are for NGas!)we are still in a depletion mode with NGas! Gore is no friend of the energy industry. His "Big Oil" statements, dusted off from the 70's gov't Crapaganda, and his actions over the last 8 years have proven that. Yet for the US to prosper in the future, there is no doubt that a lucid energy policy must be formulated and followed. We are currently suffering the consequences of an 8 year vacuum in that respect and I don't believe we can afford another 4 years of the same. If the next President of the US cannot form a realistic and effective energy policy, which I think Gore has little chance of doing, the US economy, the dollar and possibly even the peace, will be held hostage, like this election, in the future to that lack. I DO agree with Gore that alternative energy must be pursued. But I do NOT believe that these means will be sufficient to solve our energy needs over the next decade. Depletion rates in North America indicate no other avenue in the longer view, but that we need more effective exploration and production here and now just to get to 2011 and any possibilities of alternate energy adding sufficiently to our supply. I believe the energy facts rise above any partisan politics, but I also believe that Bush would have a much more effective energy policy than Gore in addressing the energy needs of the nation over the next four years. One thing is certain, the US will not overcome energy problems in the next decade by demonizing the very industry we depend on to supply that energy, as Gore has done during this campaign. Perhaps a large segment of market participants realize our economy needs energy to prosper and also are reminded of the last 8 years of failed energy policy every time they pull up to a gas pump or pay a heating bill! Best Regards, Roebear

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (37738)	12/9/2000 4:30:43 PM
From: James F. Hopkins	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42787

Hi Haim; <OT> About Politics I have my own ideas but not the words to express them as I would like to. Fairness and Justice and Democracy is really all a myth in the upper circles no matter the party. Power wants more of what it already has and the general rule is that it will do any thing it can to get more. The characteristic of Power is similar in it's addictive nature as much as any drug is. ----------------- I'm well traveled as mariner; and to not just bash our system I want make clear that "justice for sale to the highest bidder" is "unwritten" but a universal rule every where I've been, and it's not correct to justify the amount we sell as OK as we are not as bad as "them others". If people take the high ground they need to be judged with higher standards, and not excuse their own short comings by what "others do". ----------------- AS for the Votes in Florida , It make me question the sanity of all our leaders. All the nit picking is reported to now be down to 153 votes , I lack the words to express the depth of my disgust that none of them has been big enough to say hey lets just have a run off vote. Even my wife who is not prone to examine politics has said they could have settled it before now if they would have redone it. ----------------- For myself I have always hated the "popular" vote where there is not a run off to establish a clear "majority" as I have had first hand experience in the manner that the popular vote is abused in such a way to for a powerful minority to gain or maintain control; even against the wishes of the majority. Run offs should be held in any election where the winner does not establish over 50% of the votes cast for that particular office, and at all levels too. ---------------- The way they are nit picking over the Florida votes should make the above clear to any one who believes in a system where you elect your leaders. If we could all put all assumptions and suppositions aside and re-vote not just Florida but every state where there was less than a clear majority it would be a big step forward towards the Democracy our leaders Claim we have & fought to protect , but they still don't think we are ready for Democracy yet no matter that they warp themselves up in the garments of such in my eyes they are still pure pigs. Jim