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 : Classic TA Workplace -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Shack who wrote (34358)	3/18/2002 12:33:14 AM
From: John Madarasz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 209892

I agree, i think it's impossible to argue definitively for any collapse. What i found particularly interesting about that Neely interview was how bear markets, and bull markets for that matter, are self fulfilling by their very nature. Massive debt issues, terrorism, and world unrest and war notwithstanding, in a fragile bear market environment events tend to build upon themselves, snowball...or just get plain sold, of course the opposite is true for secular bull markets, so invariably the chance of some "collapse" event is a much higher probability now than 3 years ago. Neely contends that if those terroists had hit the WTC during the roaring bull only a few short years ago, the markets would have shrugged off the shock more or less pretty quickly, i agree. There is another argument floating around that adversaries of the U.S have been waiting to strike when conditions are most favorable...ie: a bear market, and weak debt riddn economy, i have to lend creedence there as well. It's a bitter pill, but a convincing assertion none-the- less. Suffice to say it's a stock pickers market here, up and down<gg>...until the next shoe falls. But for me, here, now, the risk is far greater being long in the wider frames.