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.

Politics : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MetalTrader who wrote (7458)	9/6/2001 12:09:55 AM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

MetalTrader, you make some good points but I suspect you misread some of my assumptions. I am looking at changes on the margin so that for me the issues are not so much "yes or no" as they are "less or more." For instance on the question of trade barriers you wrote: <<With regard to the fundamental arguments you make, allow me to challenge some assumptions. First the growing backlash against globalization is by no means a dead issue. At the highest levels in government globalization is NOT taken as a fait accompli. Just as the assumed productivity gains in the U.S. over the past decade are now being called into question so too are some other assumptions. Thirty African countries including South Africa and Nigeria signed a declaration rejecting new powers for the WTO. Trade is not as free as you'd like it to be I assure you. As one who has testified repeatedly in Washington in anti-dumping procedings on this you'll just have to trust me.>> In my post, however, I referred to the LESSENING of trade barriers. I think you will agree that this has occurred and is occurring. There are bumps in the road and it may not be smooth sailing ahead but the fact is that trade barriers are lower now than they have ever been in the past. This is a good thing for many multi-national corporations who can leverage their capital and technology to effectively compete in world markets. This may not always be a good thing for the countries involved but it is usually a good thing for companies who have products to sell in new markets. I'm not sure what a "human development index" is and I apologize for my ignorance. I suspect it has something to do with some desired growth in the quality of life as measured by many factors, including economic ones. I am much more limited in the assertion I make. The point that I am making is that the communication and technological revolution will reach into all areas of the globe and that in many places it will find an eager market. This is good for tech stocks that can successfully compete here and abroad. You properly question whether multi year investments in equities is the best place to put assets and give examples of time periods where that would not be true. I think that there are many more instances where it was true and if not, the perception is that it is true. I think at least some portion of almost any portfolio will be devoted to equity investments and, on the margin, that is significant. With regard to orcl and whether it will recover, you say you will let the market tell you. It is difficult to argue with that thinking since it is a truistic argument. All that I can say is that if you watch how orcl moves in response to news and market information in its segment, the market is already telling you. It will survive and prosper unless something new comes up. It moves down grudgingly in the face of bad news, wants to move up with less bad news and occupies a niche that will be successful when its customers get that healthy glow again. I bought orcl at $12.08. I bought many oil service stocks at 20-30% above their lows and then again above their interim lows. I made a lot of money there and in tech. In the process I watched a lot of investors frozen with inertia while they waited for a sure thing. Risk creates gains and losses. No risk prevents losses and gains. I agree with lessening the risk. Each of us has our own way of doing that and a comfort with a certain level of risk. For me, I am comfortable with waiting it out and jumping before it looks like a sure thing. I would like to bet on sure things only, but I'm not that smart so I just start betting on the way down or the way up, never knowing whether I'm right or wrong. I feel that now is a time when I won't be too wrong so I'm starting to jump. Time will tell. I can see that TA is a viable and helpful tool in investing. I can't see how anyone could discount the value of FA in the investment decision making process. One does not invalidate the other. I'm sure there will be times and markets where one works better than the other, but I imagine that the information gleaned from both types of analysis would be valuable in every instance. If the market tells you that orcl will not make it, TELL ME IMMEDIATELY. I am not proud and would be grateful for the information. g. Ed

To: MetalTrader who wrote (7458)	9/6/2001 7:59:25 AM
From: Think4Yourself	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

MT, You have some very good points there. The following comment really made me think: If you began your multiyear period in 1965 you waited until the 1982 to recover your investment (Dow Industrial Average). I wonder what folks will be saying in 2020? Maybe it will go something like this: "If you began your multiyear period in 2000 you're still waiting to recover your investment (Nasdaq Index)." Then again, who actually "begins" holding at the top? Anyone who bought in 2000 and held all the way down has probably either killed themselves or is in a Sanitarium :o) We're also closer to a bottom than a top even if it is only because so many stocks are closer to 0 than to their 2000 highs.