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 SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Carl Shaw who wrote (3435)	3/18/2002 11:25:31 PM
From: Dayuhan	Respond to of 21057

The dynamics of the cycle were interesting. I think one key factor was that the "experts" started proclaiming a bubble and anticipating a bust too soon. When the bust didn't come, and the defensive portfolios of the "experts" got clobbered by the aggressive ones of the aggressive individual investors, a lot of individuals that were new to the game concluded that they knew better than anyone else. Many also concluded that exponential returns were simply the normal order of the stock market, something to which they were entitled. Because they were making their own trades, traditional brokers, who could have counseled caution at some critical points, were out of the picture. All of these factors fueled the boom. The Fed was not very effective at controlling this, simply because the Fed is accustomed to using the traditional economic tools, and the boom was fueled more by mass hysteria than by economic factors. Of course there were also politicians in the picture, not wanting the Fed to piss on their parade, but that would be the case in any boom situation. JMO, of course.