To: pbull who wrote (8585 ) 8/4/2002 9:49:44 AM From: Sig Respond to of 13815 <<<The Fed said, way back in '97, that most mutual funds would not survive this. They weren't kidding. Yes, it's a long way down. But more importantly, to most, is the amount of time it is taking us to get there. <<This has dragged on and on because of all these funds who have to stay fully invested all the time no matter what. On a personal note, where I live, there are literally thousands of houses for sale. Unfortunately, as you might imagine, there are not thousands of buyers. I signed a sales contract on mine today, and consider myself lucky. We're due to close on 9/16. I will take the proceeds and invest it in the next human genome IPO that hits the market. <ggg> >>>> Nobody could sum the situation better than you have. Time is of the essence. Time is used against the public in all ways The banks who used to wait up to 30 days for out-of -state checks to clear ( forced to reduce that in these days) which gave them the interest on billlions $'s If you cash a CD too early, a mighty deduction on the principal (over 10% in one case- and they kept all the interest earned.) Now the downward drift in stocks as companies unload shares or sell calls on the bear rallies under the forever discussed imminent and historically certain(?) recovery "recovery". The Feds have acted and talked in a manner designed to prevent a total collapse of the market ( and the US economy) whereas a rapid collapse as you note would have been in some ways far less painful than what is occuring. Time is required for the funds , the big banks, the hedgers, the coal, oil, and utilities who sold production at a fixed price for the next few years, or bought energy at at fixed rate to unload their commitments and survive in this new environment. In view of all thats going on in the market, the economy, and possible wars, it is most difficult for private investors to see a clear opportunity for profit or even find a stock that assures a 6% return. Sig . PB