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: yard_man who wrote (80805)	3/15/2001 9:22:22 AM
From: Box-By-The-Riviera™	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

that's not true dude on the meehan thingy and get over it <ng>

To: yard_man who wrote (80805)	3/15/2001 9:40:09 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 436258

The WSJ article may have been motivated by reverse psychology, in that it does suggest capitulation is taking place, which seems to be something that would be welcomed. I think that it did capture the disillusion that many are expressing about whether rate cuts will have that much of an effect on investor expectations and, thereby, the market. If I were writing the piece I would have included more of the "AG is a senile old fool and should be fired" type of comments, that gives more of the real flavor. The fact that everyone knows the name of the Fed Chairman has received quite a bit of news coverage, as has the fact that individual investors are far more aware of the operations of the Federal Reserve than in times past. If I were a journalist I'd do a piece about unreasonable expectations and naivete (e.g., Greenspan was reappointed in 2000 to a four year term as Fed Chairman and can't be fired) with respect to the powers and operations of the Fed - sort of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" piece. Maybe lace in a bit about how Greenspan makes a convenient whipping boy for investors, maybe because they are hoping for a repeat of the LTCM bailout, only for them. Throw in something about the dangers of moral hazard. If I were doing a lengthy piece, I'd throw in some stuff about how popular the Federal Reserve is as a villain among conspiracy theorists, and speculate why. It is, after all, one of the most powerful institutions on earth, yet there is no direct oversight from the people, which is irksome in a democracy. We can't vote them out of office if we don't like what they do. The reason, probably, is that bankers, economists and central planners think they are smarter than we are, and who knows, they may well be right. But then, I would also like to do a piece about the belief that capitulation is a sign of a bottom. During the 1929 crash, there was lots of capitulation along the way, but the bottom wasn't reached until 1932.