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.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (140014)	2/28/2002 11:47:22 AM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

The problem was the potential for a bubble, given the warning signs Lindsey noted, not that there was a bubble in place in September 1996. The problem they thought they should "keep an eye on" was that potential for a bubble, not an existing bubble. BTW, "out of context" here means "taking one select part of a longer statement or argument and misrepresenting the overall intent or meaning of the statement by excluding qualifying, clarifying, contextually necessary components." As for the "irrational exuberance" comment, the market had risen 10% between the meeting and the comment. But the internet bubble wasn't even really started yet. The early '96 i'net mini-bubble had already corrected and by the time it reinflated and became a real, widespread market bubble, we had global currency crises and fear of deflationary spiral to worry about. Investors blaming AG for the bubble is like a compulsive gambler blaming his shrink for not locking him up to keep him from pissing away his money. The shrink may see the potential for him to piss it away and may try to intervene, but the gambler is the one responsible for his behavior. JMO, Bob