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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (2886)	7/22/2002 5:06:38 PM
From: abuelita	Respond to of 89467

jim, i found this: "Of all men's miseries the bitterest is this: to know so much and to have control over nothing." --Herodotus there's a lot of stuff on ludwig on google. rose

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (2886)	7/22/2002 7:27:52 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

Brazil's Elites Fly Above Their Fears Rich Try to Wall Off Urban Violence By Anthony Faiola Washington Post Foreign Service Saturday, June 1, 2002; Page A01 washingtonpost.com

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (2886)	7/22/2002 7:31:30 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Are we on the verge of a double bubble ? signonsandiego.com

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (2886)	7/22/2002 7:38:32 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Analysts Critical of Greenspan’s Role NewsMax Wires Monday, July 22, 2002 "Greenspan clearly was the lead character in the drama of the market's upside, and he's the lead now it's on the downside," Stephen S. Roach, chief economist at Morgan Stanley & Co. in New York, told the Los Angeles Times. Although Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan points the finger at "infectious greed,” Roach and other market observers focus blame on Greenspan and what they perceive as the key role he played in feeding the market bubble. That stock bubble drove share prices sky-high, partly fueled by "Greenspan's increasingly optimistic assessment of the economy during the late 1990s and especially its high-tech productivity gains,” according to the Times analysis. "His comments about productivity definitely were fuel for the bubble," Gail Dudack, chief investment strategist for SunGard Institutional Brokerage Inc. in New York told the Times. Dudack and other analysts suggest that Greenspan mistook some of the bubble's effects for evidence of a new economy. In any event, according to Sunday’s analysis in the Times, the central banker's reputation as an economic manager now faces a serious challenge. "Central banking was really invented to stand in the way of excesses, whether it's in the real economy or financial markets," said Morgan Stanley's Roach. "In this case, that didn't happen," he said. Analysts are critical of "the lengths to which the Fed chairman went after the early warnings of 1996 and 1997 to highlight positive economic developments, especially involving productivity,” noted the Times. ”What's also hard to understand -- or square with his current assessment -- is a slow shift in Greenspan's focus: from embracing the new economy notion that technology was transforming America, to a seemingly uncritical defense of sky-high and rising stock prices.” Greenspan acknowledged striking parallels between the years leading up to the 1929 crash and the late 1990s, qualifying, however, that if actions after the 1929 crash "were taken differently ... we would not have had the deep fall that we know as the Great Depression." The Times analysis chides Greenspan for an often unfathomable perennial optimism. Examples: When asked at a January 1999 congressional hearing how much of the dot-com boom was "based on sound fundamentals and how much is based on hype," Greenspan replied, "You wouldn't get hype working if there weren't something fundamentally, potentially sound under it." A few months later, Greenspan suggested that Wall Street analysts must have known what they were talking about when they predicted a historically unprecedented 15 percent annual growth in profits for the following five years because they were so close to the companies they covered. By June 1999, he was warning a congressional committee that markets know best. To conclude otherwise, he advised, "requires a judgment that hundreds of thousands of informed investors have it all wrong." However, noted the Times, the Fed chairman's defenders argue he was deterred from acting against the bubble by the intervention of the Asian currency crisis, Russian debt default and the collapse of hedge-fund giant Long-Term Capital Management. newsmax.com

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (2886)	7/22/2002 9:39:05 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Here's a great piece from Morgan Stanley's Stephen Roach... morganstanley.com July 22, 2002 <<...This is obviously an extremely painful period for equity investors. Oversold is an understatement in describing current market conditions. Yet experience has taught a generation of investors that such sell-offs should be treated as classic dip-buying opportunities. Such a chance may well be at hand. I’ll leave that to the strategists. But there’s one key premise in all this that continues to eat away at the economist in me: The current state of affairs is still diagnosed as the market’s problem, not as an economic problem. That’s where I continue to take issue. Until denial cracks on this pivotal presumption, I continue to fear that any trading rallies will be short-lived and that financial market conditions will remain exceedingly treacherous...>>