SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Brian Sullivan who wrote (44080)3/20/2001 4:59:04 PM
From: daryll40  Respond to of 70976
 
While I am certainly as anxious about my portfolio as the next guy, I vote "plus" on Greenspan. I agree that had he not "pricked" the bubble, it could have gone on and become something even more ugly. And I agree that if he "gives the market" what it wants, the market will just assume a Greenspan "put" and keep soaring. I think 1/2 pt today was the right thing to do, followed by another cut sometime soon but not "on demand" by the market.

On the other hand, this should not be allowed to spin out of control like the 1929 Fed did or like the Japanese did. At some point, Uncle Alan MAY and SHOULD respond directly to the market if the market looks like it will kill the economy otherwise. It's ugly, but I don't think we're at that point (yet...hopefully we won't get there either).

Daryll40



To: Brian Sullivan who wrote (44080)3/20/2001 5:45:41 PM
From: mitch-c  Respond to of 70976
 
Sort of. I vaguely recall an imbalance between the funds rate and the discount rate (if I have the language correct) where one of them was a 1/2 and 1/2 cut, and the other was a 3/4 and 1/4 cut. The January total was a full point for each.

My observation was intended more for rhetoric and perspective than strict accuracy. Sorry for the confusion.

- Mitch