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 : Stock Attack II - A Complete Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JRI who wrote (15675)	8/17/2001 5:41:34 PM
From: Trading Machine	Respond to of 52237

JRI, I don't disagree with your position with respect to AJC and analysts in general, butttttt..... If I look at the value added of CNBC/MSNBC, they do have a redundant channel for the DOW, S&P, and Nasdaq numbers. Other than that I see the "reporters", analysts, and commentators reading the same information I get off the Internet and commercially available news sources. They IMHO provide no value added unless you can't read. gggg Given that this is true, and I believe it is, you and others can vote with the on/off/channel selector switch and just say no! I may have the video on to make sure that my data feed is real time, but I turn the audio off! I see AJC, et al, but I don't hear them. I consider this a distinct advantage. (God bless the hearing impaired) ggg I also don't hear the COMMERCIALS! I know, I know, we are all kind of "addicted" to having the tube on and we tend to give these people credibility. Just remember that they put their pants on one leg at a time just like you and I! They have NO special insight. The one good thing that may come out of this market is alerting people to the fact that the folks on the tube may have high paying jobs but they are mere mortals, just like you and I. They can't predict the future or anything else. In fact I find it kind of mind boggeling that anyone would give any credence to what these people say! If I was going to vote for something, I would vote for requiring "analysts" to provide supporting documentation on their point of view. How many of us on this thread bang other posters around for not substantiating their claims? Well when someone appears on television and makes wild statements why don't we hold them to the same standard? Make them prove what they say with facts and statistics! If they were held to this standard of performance, I suspect they would have to take a pay cut!? Last evening I listened to the network news and I simply couldn't believe the bullish posture they portrayed. I told my wife, "boy my technicals sure don't paint that kind of a picture!" So it is not only the CNBC/MSNBC market reporters that are suspect in this business. I admire what you are trying to accomplish with Ted David or who ever he really is, but if CNBC rolled out AJC and previewed her real record and flatly stated that she was liable to be wrong in everything she said, just the fact that some people accept the "folks" on the tube as being credible would minimize the impact of such preview statements. A segment of the trading population would continue to absorb her every comment and perhaps commit substantial money to her theories. The bottom line is that we can't stop some folks from being (IMHO) bilked by the "analysts" that CNBC parades out in a never ending stream, but one must remember that the producer has a LOT of time to fill with something. So, I vote to support your endevours with Ted David (or whoever he is) but the real vote is to hit the volume control or the on/off switch. Good luck Monday regardless of what the analysts say. gggg Paul K.

To: JRI who wrote (15675)	8/17/2001 7:43:10 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52237

The Greenspan Recession by Jack Kemp "HELP WANTED": Fed Chairman who understands stable money. <<Thanks to deflationary monetary policy, the economy here and around the world is slipping into a deep freeze, and there is no prospect of a thaw any time soon. As George Gilder observed in the Wall Street Journal, the prices of gold and industrial staples such as steel are down more than 40 percent in four years. He wrote, "A high-tech depression is under way, driven by a long siege of deflationary monetary policy ... which has shriveled hundreds of debt-laden telecom companies and brought Internet expansion to a halt." Larry Kudlow recently reminded me, "Alan Greenspan told Congress in 1994 that commodity market signals provide more useful and timely information than the official government data on prices, unemployment, national income and so forth." Today, Greenspan is totally ruling out market signals, and he told me recently that he believes our current economic problems are simply "the working of the business cycle." That is preposterous. We are in the deflationary stages of a "go-stop" money cycle created by the Fed's discretionary monetary policy. For more than three years, the Fed has ignored all its supply-side friends who insisted that the chairman's fear of "irrational exuberance" was misplaced. We warned that it was misguided to raise interest rates with the express purpose of slowing down the economy, throwing people out of work and tanking the stock market. Once the Fed decided to try to reverse the economic slowdown it had intentionally engineered, Greenspan also ignored our warnings that targeting interest rates was starving the economy of liquidity even while interest rates were coming back down. We were right on all counts. Greenspan In spite of having reduced the Fed funds rate 225 basis points in only seven months, monetary policy remains too tight. The bottom of the yield curve is inverted with the interest rate on two-year federal notes lower than the overnight rate, the price of gold is no higher today than when the Fed began to lower interest rates and the dollar continues to appreciate against other major currencies. Since June, producer prices have plunged at an average annualized rate of 8.1 percent. When economist Art Laffer wrote to Nobel Prize-winning economist Bob Mundell recently seeking his opinion on my contention that monetary policy has been deflationary and that the only way to restore monetary stability is to anchor the dollar to the price of gold, Bob responded: "When the dollar price of gold is falling at the same time that the dollar is appreciating against other major currencies that do not have inflation problems, U.S. monetary policy is too tight." Unless the Fed abandons interest-rate targeting and adopts a commodity-price rule using gold as a reference point, the Fed will continue to put the U.S. economy and the world through a deflationary wringer until prices fully adjust downward. While the U.S. economy can survive this tortuous process, it will inflict needless torment and misery on a lot of Americans, and countries not as resilient as ours, such as Argentina, may well be crushed by the dollar deflation. Unfortunately, the confusion caused by the Fed's interest-rate targeting is distorting the way people think about the world economy, and it is leading to a false debate between a "strong dollar vs. a weak dollar." Manufacturers feel squeezed by the deflation and attribute it to a "strong dollar." A media frenzy forces our Treasury secretary into a corner where he feels he has to defend the strong dollar lest he provoke another market debacle like 1987. But the ever-strengthening dollar is the result of deflationary monetary policy, and our policy objective should be neither a strong nor a weak dollar but rather a stable dollar. At the end of August, second- quarter GDP growth will almost certainly be revised downward from 0.7 percent on an annual basis to close to zero or even into negative territory, and when that revision occurs, people will begin to talk about the Greenspan Recession and also to hold him responsible for the inevitable political fallout a year later if Republicans lose control of the House of Representatives, a distinct possibility if this economy does not recover soon. I once again urge Chairman Greenspan to abandon interest-rate targeting and begin buying bonds until the signs of deflation stop flashing red. The price of gold must rise back above $300 and commodity prices must rise off their bottoms, the yield curve must reassume a normal upward slope with a reasonable spread between the Fed funds rate and the two-year bond, and the dollar must stop appreciating ever higher against foreign currencies. This wouldn't require elaborate international negotiations if the chairman would seize the opportunity today to lead the Fed toward the adoption of a commodity price rule with gold as a reference point, which would eliminate Fed discretion and introduce automaticity to the conduct of monetary policy. If Greenspan would lead with a price rule at the Fed, the economy would quickly revive; Europe, Japan and the rest of the world would follow our lead; and history would smile upon the "Maestro" for his efforts.>> Jack Kemp is co-director of Empower America and Distinguished Fellow of the Competitive Enterprise Institute.