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 : Alan Greenspan MUST GO: -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: chojiro who wrote (235)	1/1/2001 1:04:41 PM
From: Master (Hijacked)	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 494

"Do you really need a cell phone the size of a pack of matches?" By the same reasoning, why didn't we stop with the Model T ? Do we really need computers that store 20 gigabytes? At what point do we stop progress? I'm sure that one hundred years ago a man with a couple of strong horses couldn't ask for anything more. But seriously, do you really realize what you're saying? Progress happens gradually. The benefits of the microchip weren't immediately apparent in the late sixties, yet today the microchip has affected the world around us. A small cell phone in itself is meaningless. What is important is the technology behind it. That technology will lead to other breakthroughs in the future. As ignorant and immature as I may be, I do know that you must NOT stop progress. Progress is the essence of human nature. Must go, the inlaws will be pissed. Have a good one. Vince

To: chojiro who wrote (235)	1/1/2001 1:20:36 PM
From: BWAC	Respond to of 494

<Do you really need a cell phone the size of a pack of matches?> Of course not. But if I had a huge old clunker, and it simplified my daily tasks to downsize, and it offered features that could help me be more productive, then I would switch to the newer and smaller and better. Especially if the price was right. And the price has been right given the competition that exists in the cell phone market. Take away the access to capital for this infrastructure buildout, competition is reduced, innovation is reduced, price competition is reduced, the informed consumer has fewer choices, and you NOW have a situation where inflation can exist and persist. In a bigger macro example. Take the whole retail sector. Did inflation exist there for the informed value seeking consumer? Of course not. There is too much competition between reatil chains to have the lowest and best price. Add a healthy mix of online retailers. And you have brisk competition. Inflation cannot exist. Bankrupt a few retail chains, bankrupt a few online chains, get down to one or two dominant category players and you will have all the ingedients necessary for inflation. Another example. Grocery Stores. Look at the competition there. New car rebates galore. Computers cheap compared to what they were a few years ago. Where was the inflation that Greenspan targeted? And please don't say oil or natural gas, as those are not free competition markets.

To: chojiro who wrote (235)	1/1/2001 1:46:59 PM
From: BWAC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 494

<But putting too much of one's portfolio in speculative stocks, regardless of the sector is a recipe for disaster. EDIT: BTW I was not immune to this either. In the second quarter of the year, I was buying on dips too. Not until August did I finally clean out my long positions and short them with a vengence.> What?!?!? Talk about a speculative recipe for disaster, picture the general public 'shorting stock' with a vengence? Is this what Greenspan intended? For Joe Six Pack to continue his specualtive investing frenzy by venturing into the even more highly speculative business of shorting stocks? J6P could loose even more in this game of power and leverage. Worst he could do buying URHooked.com is lose all his money. Worst he could do shorting it is end up owing his broker. A bunch. What if J6P shorted at the very point in time the URHooked.com became 100% overvalued? Watched in horror as it became 500% overvalued? Did Greenspan intend for the VERY SAME SPECULATIVE throw valuation metrics and caution to the wind momentum investors that ran these stocks up, to switch gears and short them into oblivion? Did he intend to give these speculators a license to raid the entire market? Greenspan targeted the wealth effect. And he suceeded. He provided the impetus and environment that set up one of the greatest transfers and destructions of wealth in history. Loser J6P. Winner Banks, Brokerages, Speculators. Now they can loan it all back out to J6P as the cycle is soon to be reversed somewhat. A terse speech from Greenspan about valuing companies with $1 Million in sales at $50 Billion dollars would have accomplished a much better result. He could have hit the speculators causing the bubble, and left the rest of the economy and middle class alone.