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 : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AllansAlias who wrote (32154)	3/1/2001 12:59:42 PM
From: Jill	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 65232

Greenspan would agree with this poster; in the profile in the New Yorker last year he said,"There's nothing wrong with a good recession." His rate hikes certainly ushered in the recession. Who knows if a good recession is necessary--these so-called "cycles". Its all economic theory & there are arguments on every side.

To: AllansAlias who wrote (32154)	3/1/2001 1:13:38 PM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 65232

>> From the Greek tragedies forward we see a common theme: hubris sows the seed of its downfall. Imo, you summed it up very neatly with that single sentence. Guilty as charged, but still ltb&h perma-bull <lol>. uf

To: AllansAlias who wrote (32154)	3/1/2001 3:09:59 PM
From: Jim Willie CB	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 65232

Allan, seriously, any student on monetary policy with half a brain could see: - Greenspan anticipated the need for a huge increase in liquidity at end of 1999 was NOT needed... no banking snafus happened, no run on banks - Greenspan anticipated the need for tightening liquidity in spring2000, hitting the brakes hard, citing unsustainable growth, citing energy costs, citing excessive consumer spending, citing everything as an inflationary threat capex spending was to come down on its own after Y2K transformation and spending ran its course energy costs were later seen to be "earnings recessionary", as AG admitted later it IS an academic exercise, but my view is very simple GREENSPAN HIT THE ACCELERATOR HARD WHEN MOMENTUM WAS ALREADY NATURALLY UPWARD, UNNECESSARILY SO GREENSPAN HIT THE BRAKES HARD WHEN MOMENTUM WAS SLOWING NATURALLY DOWNWARD, UNNECESSARILY SO he accentuates the direction of the natural equilibrium process, both up and down if you cannot comprehend this and admit this, then you have less insight than I attributed to you previously I think you DO comprehend this in accentuating and accelerating the process already underway, Greenspan wreaks untold unnecessary damage he allows for artificial temporary creation of wealth then he brings about overeager temporary destruction of wealth ALL DUE TO HIS EGOMANAICAL NEED TO CONTROL THE ECONOMY the equilibrium mechanisms are already in place for internal controls his policy is like a drunk driver, all over the road Greenman reminds me of my first attempt at a small airplane controls my roommate had a nice twin-engine Cessna, took me for a joy ride over eastern Mass2shits he told me to ease to the left, and I went way to the left, having to correct my move he told me to east to the right, and I went way to the right, having to correct my move he told me to come down 500 ft, and I went down more like 700 ft, having to correc my move finally he said "just stay the course, you are fine" smell the coffee, man I know you have in the past but establishing and declaring a scapegoat does not serve to help people people with real needs and real problems Congress treated Greenie a little rough yesterday but they have no oversight over him or the Federal Reserve NOBODY DOES sincerely, Jim