Hi MeDroogies,
<<I see you like to take much out of context.>>
You got that backward and reversed. I like to put matters in context, remember?
Message 15544909
<<You claim I point to one data point. In fact, I point to several.>>
You make it too easy for me to respond. Easier for other readers if you would reveal your allocation. Again, I am not inviting you to reveal you allocation, and thus psychological state, which no doubt partially explains your postings.
<<1. All major busts were coincident with economic weakness outside the market collapse. This one occurs with no such thing. Inflation is temperate, and unemployment is low. How's that for more than media spending?>>
Not good enough, as this will be the economic weakness caused by the bust of the equity market, not the other way around.
<<2. All major busts were coincident with a lack of movement on the part of the Fed in any meaningful way. We now have 1 1/2 points in 3 months, to real interest rates that are only SLIGHTLY above inflation. It took Japan 6 years to reach that point when their bubble burst.>>
So? It does not follow that therefore the market should rise, irrespective of the debt load already weighing folks down, and irrespect of the gathering pace of layoffs, and of valuation?
<<3. All major busts occurred in a situation where real estate was vastly overpriced. The US has several SMALL pockets of overpriced real estate, but by and large it has been rising slowly since the 80's real estate bubble burst after the '87 crash.>>
Change the asset class and you get the same poison. Stocks are grossly overpriced, as percentage of GDP, revenue, profit, loss, eyeballs, miles of fiber.
<<4. All major busts occurred in an environment which was followed by tightening of federal spending. Based on the current moves in Washington, spending may not rise, but money will be transferred to the populace...a much more effective means of stimulation.>>
You are no doubt receiving that largesse and do not need to give it back via health care, electricity, gasoline, or capital gains taxes on vaporized portfolio profit.
<<How is that for not relying on a single data point?>>
Like I prefaced earlier … not good enough. What do you think ?
<<As for psychology, you are using a tautological argument with my words. You are saying that because they came from me, they mean what I said. In fact, if you reread my post, which I have stated before you don't do well, I said that YOUR scenario leads to a psychological state of selling begetting selling. That is, the claim (as you did) that you shouldn't buy or hold means to sell leads to a psychological breakdown.>>
My psychology has not broken down and I am optimistic for what the future holds for all who is cautious. You simply countered every post along the way to the effect that “do not sell, because it would mean recognizing a loss of house money”.
<<I don't deny that psychology plays a role. Keynes was dead on about that. But to promulgate the psychological condition is something Keynes said was wrong. And your posts imply that engaging in selling is the best scenario.>>
No, I said engaging in “not buying and not holding”, and engaging in “not listening to CNBC like drivel”.
<<I disagree that the mistake was the original purchase. That is like saying that, after reviewing all the data, and purchasing my Apple G4 because it was the best computer made (which it is), I made a mistake because it isn't Wintel and nobody is buying the Apple.>>
In fact, that is exactly what I mean and I regret each and everytime I bought non-Microsoft ware and had to eventually capitulate. I have used copies of WordPerfect, WordStar, Visicalc, Quicken Financial, etc, but not operable on your MAC.
<<Simply put...I don't care what others do. And anyone who made the decision I did and suddenly cares about what others think didn't make the mistake when they purchased...they made the mistake when they suddenly cared what other people are doing.>>
That is apparent. So, what did you buy?
<<I made a number of those "qualitative" scenarios for your benefit, because it is entirely what you engage in, so I felt I should employ the same constructs you do. The concept that the bear will have arms that I will only see when it is too late is tautology at its finest. I dare you to point to the longest bear market on record and tell me how long it lasted. If you actually do your homework, you should have that answer.>>
Come on, do not work at this level. But if you must, here is one answer …
prudentbear.com
<<I have responded with fundamentals, because that is what IS the driver of markets. And the fundamentals remain in place.>>
You mean the fundamentals that valuation based on free cash flow is high or low, or you mean stuff like …
Message 15441875
Message 15443951
or
Message 15444567
If I wrote stuff like this, I would not want to go back and read them again.
<<I haven't denied the bastardization of fundamentals during the bubble.>>
No? What do you call this drivel …
Message 15443937
<<That occurs frequently. Look at railroads, radio, and biotech. The dotcoms were that in spades. But the selling is already overdone, and not just because I say it is.>>
Who then, Bill Gross, Warren Buffet, John Templeton? No oh oh, because Green$pan said so?
<<Should I be wrong...them's the breaks, and I can live with that. I happen to know that, as of now, I am not wrong.>>
Can the folks reading you “don’t sell” afford that?
<<All the information I use for macroeconomic analysis remains firmly intact. In order for it to fall apart will require a severe shock, I don't know what it would be...energy, perhaps?....but there isn't one on the horizon at this point. Energy is as close as you get, but I don't see it happening.>>
When the system is weak, almost anything can cause it to fry …
Message 15499316
<<Now....if that is refreshingly different, so be it. From what I can tell, it is common sense.>>
I said nothing about common sense. Only different.
<<I'll take my lumps with it. I've been right most of the time along the way, so I can afford a brief down period. As you point out, I will win in the long run, and life is a marathon - not a sprint.>>
You have been right during an extraordinary period, along with everybody else on these threads. Some of us are aiming to win both the marathon and the sprint.
Thanks for making it easy for me to respond so quickly.
Chugs, Jay |
