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: AllansAlias who wrote (78682)	3/12/2001 1:04:27 AM
From: UnBelievable	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

Not To Mention When Compared To The Real Rate Of Growth Of The Economy

To: AllansAlias who wrote (78682)	3/12/2001 1:16:08 AM
From: UnBelievable	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Did I Tell You I Bought 1000 Shares of GSCO's IPO LDCL Friday It was priced at $6 and it closed at 6 5/32 which was the price I paid after hours. It is not considered good for business if an IPO you bring to the market craters the first week, so I figure GSCO will do what it needs to so that doesn't happen. I was going to short GSCO as a hedge but while they are listed it doesn't look like they trade. Anyway, if it does tank there will be a certain amount of satisfaction knowing that GSCO is F#cked.

To: AllansAlias who wrote (78682)	3/12/2001 1:39:44 AM
From: Shack	Respond to of 436258

As Fleck recently said on CNBS, if we simply revert back to the mean then all the major indices would get cut in half, and it wouldn't even be a statistical anomaly. Nice close in Japan...Yikes. Hong Kong too.

To: AllansAlias who wrote (78682)	3/12/2001 7:11:08 AM
From: Haim R. Branisteanu	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 436258

Allan, there is a big difference between common sense valuations and the actual damage such a drop will do to the US and world economy. My argument is not about stock valuation but about a relative price of stocks to the health of the world economies NOW. My point is that the main damage was done in 1998 wen they bailed out LTCM and others with the FED intervention. The point I was trying to make was that the Bush administration is trying to push their agenda of tax cut for the rich by tanking the market and erase any resemblance of the previous administration. AG instead of being an independent thinker follows the orders of his masters, and that is why we are in such a mess . He got quiet after 1996 "exuberance" speech and that is why he saved LTCM, flooded the markets with unnecessary money in winter of 1999 and failed to adjust his mistakes in winter 1998. GW Bush was elected for tax cut to the rich and partially for his concept of putting Social Security money in the stock market, after his speech the market rallied over 10% and the "love" stocks 30%. Now he does it in reverse to force every one to beg for a tax cut even if not equitable and tank the markets. GW Bush et al is now in the middle of a big gamble WITH PEOPLES FINANCIAL HEALTH ON LINE not his. The proposed tax cut will only make US economic even more anemic paying down the national debt would have a more effective and broad based implication on household free cash than the tax cut from an illusionary long term budget surplus. BWDIK Haim