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 : ahhaha's ahs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Keith Monahan who wrote (2061)	4/18/2001 8:39:51 PM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24758

You can't short and hold. Let the 4,000 boutique firms which have been set up since 1998 engage in that kind of idiocy. You can imagine how all pumped up about their prowess they are after the last 1 1/2 years. It may be the sole reason AG decided to pull the surprise. It wouldn't be any more arbitrary than the reasons given. What I said is the market will rise up until it sets an appropriate down trend. I don't know if it will be major or not. That's what you should have questioned. During this period you will see the conversion of the true bear believers back into roaring bulls. Price has this mesmerizing effect. The trick is to be indifferent to whatever kind of market it is, because odds are good that the market will now proceed to decline which will get the bears roaring again. After all, the FED started easing in January, continued with intense RP actions and repeated coupon passes in the interim with additional easing in the core rate, and the market responded by losing 30%. And consider, they're running out of real estate just like the BOJ. How bearish is that? Bet you haven't considered that possibility. It's called pushing on a string and it isn't supposed to happen in demand oriented economies. It's also referred to as a "liquidity trap", more and more money doesn't get things going much. How is that possible? Fear of the future with banks maintaining the absurd spreads that currently exist. I still hold that more and more money produces greater price increases than it creates greater output at this stage of things. For this thesis to be wrong the world will have had to subtly reverted back to intrinsic or overt deflation. There is support for that view in the dollar and gold, if not in Japan. I have always maintained that goods essentially cost nothing to produce, so there is no money in producing them. Our economic world depends on childish attachments to goods. If that's changing due to the fact that goods are cheap so everyone has all they want, then the world is on the wrong economic structure and everything, both goods and intangibles like stocks, is way overpriced. The only way to get the price down is to have a depression, because the prices in most cases are protected by law, and so the law must be refuted by economic reality.