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 : Ahh Canada - 2 out of 3 ain't bad -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cush who wrote (767)	2/28/2001 11:55:13 AM
From: Shack	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5144

Hi Cush, I find this really scary You should find this scary. I don't know why he says things like this. Does nothing for his credibility. My god, has he seen the track record of these fucin' analysts. Could it be that analysts (who represent investment banks in many cases) have a vested interest in making things look less bad than they are? Duh ... ya think? Oh yeah..I Think! You hit the nail on the head Cush. And the tightness of Greenspan to the investment banks is kept quiet but there are conflicts of interest to the nth degree there. Greenspan is indeed a moral hazard but as I've said before, it was the free and easy money of the 1990's which created this bubble and it was doomed to collapse no matter what Greenie did with rates afterwards. The contraction we are seeing has nothing to do with tight monetary policy and everything to do with mal-investment of the cheap money which Greenie made so readily available. The only question remains, does he prolong the pain like Japan or does he do the right thing and let the economy purge the excesses NOW and save us ten years of bullsht.

To: Cush who wrote (767)	2/28/2001 12:19:17 PM
From: Shaw	Respond to of 5144

I have very little respect for him, Cush. Altho, I'm sure that doesnt matter much to him <g>. He reminds me of some of my old biz U professor's. Too concerned with theory and very little 'ear to the ground' smarts. I am still stuck on his statement in early December that the wealth effect loss from the stock market appears to be having an impact on consumer demand. All he had to do was ask us in May when he was raising rates if this was a possibility. We were living it at the time weren't we?