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 : MARKET INDEX TECHNICAL ANALYSIS - MITA -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SeachRE who wrote (15956)	1/30/2003 8:50:29 AM
From: David Howe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 19219

I find it interesting that most of the bears have been saying since the mid 90s that the market and the economy were going to take a huge hit at some point. They have always said that the bubble got so big that the bust will be just as big. They always say that the end result is unavoidable. If that's the case (and I believe it is for the most part) how exactly would Bush have been able to stop the "bust" that we are now experiencing? I like Bush, but when he was neck and neck with Gore I remember saying that it would be nice if Bush won, but I feel bad for him because he'll get blamed for the coming recession. That is essentially what is happening. It's not his fault. Almost every bear I've ever read has said that this recession and market bust was unavoidable. Does Fleck think this is Bush's fault? Of course not, he's been saying that "all tech stocks will fall to single digits" for years. He says it with authority and he never qualifies his comment with "unless the government does the right things". He simply says that the bubble has burst and equities are overvalued and they're going down. Why do YOU think it is Bush that makes the markets so shortable? Dave