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: pater tenebrarum who wrote (55768)	1/9/2001 12:32:51 PM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Covered much of my GE for a nice profit.... so we KNOW that's going lower -ng- I'm currently short SOIZE LEH and pretty big C & FNM...... don't want to go too balistic as the market looks like a bounce but will pick on the financials at the cycle turn once again. DAK

To: pater tenebrarum who wrote (55768)	1/9/2001 1:00:17 PM
From: Lucretius	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 436258

yo yo.. i'm back from the dead... i'm sellin this mofo...

To: pater tenebrarum who wrote (55768)	1/9/2001 1:03:49 PM
From: timers	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 436258

in light of that, you still thinkin to buy later?

To: pater tenebrarum who wrote (55768)	1/9/2001 1:35:51 PM
From: Don Lloyd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

hb - mises.org "...So why do so many "free-marketers" have such difficulties when the fall in prices occurs in the stock market, instead of in the market for agricultural commodities or personal computers? When stock indices fall, we hear repeated worries that "wealth is being wiped out." On the surface, this seems too obvious to argue. With the NASDAQ plunging from 5100 to 2400, the total capitalization of the index has shrunk by over three trillion dollars. It looks as though this wealth has simply vanished into thin air. However, as we have seen above, this view is the result of confusion between the money prices of goods and the amount of wealth in the economy. The NASDAQ decline has not leveled any buildings or rendered any machines inoperable. America is just as full of farms, warehouses, railroads, and oil wells as it was when the NASDAQ was at its peak. The dot-com wipeout has not sucked the knowledge of Java programming out of anyone's head. Certainly, some companies have shut down. But these were the companies that, in light of the new configuration of market prices, it no longer seemed worthwhile to operate. The stock market decline represents a shifting of wealth. Those who were holding cash, bonds or gold are now wealthier, as their assets can buy a greater share of various corporations. Those who were short shares of companies they judged to be over-priced are wealthier. The largest group made better off by the decline is the non-stock-holding consumer. The stock-rich have been bidding up the price of various goods. (Try, for instance, hiring a building contractor in Fairfield County, Connecticut, where one of us lives.) Those whose assets have declined will no longer be able to bid as much, making these items more affordable for others. Cries for the government to stop the market decline are no less special interest group pleading than are attempts by farmers to boost wheat prices. Those holding stocks have come to expect that they have the right to see the prices of their assets at a certain level, and call for the government to intervene when this expectation is disappointed. A campaign pitch designed to appeal to the "investor class" is essentially promising that stock prices will remain high and only go higher. Such a political pitch is, in essence, no different from a campaign that promises farmers higher wheat prices or labor unions higher wages. It is a promise to use political muscle to redistribute wealth to the favored group...." Regards, Don