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: AllansAlias who wrote (46510)	7/19/2002 10:33:03 PM
From: marginmike	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 209892

allan the bear market really started in 1998 for the broader market. Outside of the nifto 50-100 most stocks were down from 98-2000, they had a rally from 2000-2001 now they are back down. So we probably have 5 years done.

To: AllansAlias who wrote (46510)	7/20/2002 12:16:26 AM
From: NOW	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 209892

good post AA. You think the credit bubble is in trouble based on the valuations of the credit bubble stocks i take it? anyhting else?

To: AllansAlias who wrote (46510)	7/22/2002 10:50:51 PM
From: Perspective	Respond to of 209892

I agree that the credit bubble is the Big Event here. In 1998 when I first started noticing the unusual behavior of the stock indicies on the long-term charts, I knew I'd identified a stock market bubble. I watched in disbelief as it outgrew even my worst expectations, eclipsing the 1920s and the Nikkei event both. It was not until long after the bubble burst, however, that I began to understand that the stock market bubble was not the disease, but only a symptom of the disease. The disease is (quite possibly) the biggest credit bubble the world has ever witnessed, aided and abetted by what I believe is a Fed that is trying to fight what he knows is K-winter. Had an interesting lunch with a fellow bear. We discussed the fact that the K-winter is a natural stimulus to the system. The Fed can choose the overdamp the system, resulting in smaller economic swings. Or, it can decrease the damping factor, magnifying the swings. Or, if it's really nuts, it can add enough positive feedback that the system becomes completely unstable, and the market response becomes totally detached from the applied inputs (an electronics designers' nightmare - keep those poles in the left half of the s-plane!) The third is what Al has chosen, and the ramifications are a loss of control over the system response, and horrendous overshoot in both directions. Al hasn't done us any favors; he will go down in history as the worst Fed chairman to date. While I believe the economy is only correcting the run from 1974, I think Greenspan's positive feedback will cause us to correct far longer and deeper than would be indicated by such an expectation. In Elliot terms, it will undoubtedly be a sharp correction. I expect it to take over a decade to complete, although price targets will likely be hit earlier rather than later thanks to the immense positive feedback introduced to the system by the Fed. BC