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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (1983)	6/8/2003 12:47:17 AM
From: Michelino	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 795420

If I understand you correctly, you believe that the Nasdaq has been overvalued for at least 6 years, (current levels were first attained in mid 1997). When was the last date that the Nasdaq was at a level that you believe represented its fair value? You seem to imply that is a "natural" (or rather "fair" )level to the Nasdaq index and therefore we can expect the future to see a regression to the mean. While that does works for throwing dice and for measuring levels of radioactivity, market value is simply a point of view. By 2003 standards, the 1999 Nasdaq was certainly overvalued. By 1999 standards, the current price is a fantastic bargain. Personally, I don't believe in "fair values" but only that prices reflect a dynamic and arbitrary sense of worth. Relatively, however, long term changes in market levels offer direct evidence as to the state of the economy (and can be correlated with growth). And yes, when the country is undergoing difficulties, lackluster or downward markets can reflect failure in economic policy. Originally, if you trace my first appearance on the thread, I only intended to make a minor counterpoint about long term gain in the Clinton years....then the "bursted bubble" tangent unfolded. But now you ask for an explanation as to how Bush might bear responsibility for the malaise of the last two year...(please note that I did imply an answer before) Beyond the neo-fascism, the imperial arrogance, and the squandering of the good will of long time allies , Bush has also undone one of the few bipartisan and effective policies of the last ten years: the monumental progress towards reducing growth in the national debt. George used his war-time popularity (now THERE's a bubble) to undermine the country's greater good by ramming through tax cuts that will only benefit the richest of Americans. Sadly, History shows that this is completely in character for the man to put cronyism over country. It's a family thing. In any case, the cuts in dividend taxes (and capital gains for that matter), while currently fashionable in both parties, are simply wrongheaded. For one thing, lower rates on gains makes the honest wage earners among us look like chumps. It used to be that the hard working common man was taxed at much, much lower rate than those who spend their lives playing the market equivalent of black jack...and this era was accompanied by real growth , in real wages...but I digress...