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 : The Justa and Lars Honors Bob Brinker Investment Club Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MrGreenJeans who wrote (1153)	5/16/2001 3:53:26 AM
From: Math Junkie	Respond to of 10065

Twenty five years doesn't really seem like an adequate statistical sample to be be basing such conclusions on.

To: MrGreenJeans who wrote (1153)	5/16/2001 4:07:00 AM
From: marc ultra	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 10065

I think the things the Fed seems to be targeting recently are all the things directly related to the market in general and even technology in particular to some extent. That surprise inter-meeting cut in April along with activity into the present cut and Fed statements indicate concern about the lack of capital spending, poor earnings and a negative wealth effect Ever since Larry Ellison said suddenly nobody wanted to commit money to close deals and then was parroted by similar language by numerous other tech firms about hitting a brick wall, along with the collapse of software and B2B, it became obvious there was a problem that could not be readily cured by the usual gradualist action. The lack of IT spending would also inevitably affect productivity at some point as much of the lock down was in technology that were productivity enhancers. Regardless what happens in the short term the table has been set for the next cyclical bull. however as the money supply continues to power forward we are likely also setting up conditions for the next bear as well. This could very well be the continuation of a secular bear as by the time the economy gets going strong so much money may be swishing around that increasing inflation/inflationary expectations along with a growth spurt could set the Fed raising again. I agree when the new bull comes those who wait for a turn in the economy will be left behind. With this aggressive monetary expansion I would not be surprised if it could leave some timing models missing the bottom. Marc

To: MrGreenJeans who wrote (1153)	5/18/2001 9:22:41 AM
From: Boca_PETE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10065

RE: BUSH PROPOSED ENERGY POLICY Any comments on it ? cnn.com It seemed well thought out and practical to me. Of course the usual suspects were there to bash it before the ink was dry, and the media played way more of these comments than any objective reactions. As for California's immediate squeeze, what comes to mind as a possible solution in addition to loosening regulatory hurdles are Federal loan guarantees in exchange for evidence that contracts have been entered into to construct power generation facilities, fuel cell manufacturing plants and research facilities, hydroelectric generation projects, geothermal and other alternative energy development projects... have been entered into. After all, the FED's bailed out New York, Mexaco, .... IMHO, we are fortunate to have elected leaders with such vast experience and knowledge in the energy industry. Too bad most don't realize this and see it immediately as a liability and assume the worst. After-all, if the energy industry is blocked from earning profits, where will the incentive come from to invest in needed energy generation facilities ? P