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 : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: regli who wrote (57353)	4/3/2006 5:32:25 PM
From: benwood	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

I see Heinz and others post this same chart over and over. Was there really just one pm stock that did this? Was it the Google of the early 30s? I just know if there's just 1 stock that goes way, way up, like Homestead, I'm not likely to be in the right place at the right time, or my stake will be so small as to make the gain inconsequential overall.

To: regli who wrote (57353)	4/3/2006 8:54:22 PM
From: Perspective	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

Funny you should post that. I actually think there's a pretty good argument for conditions now being similar to 1936. Just add 70 years to the 1930s cycle and you see pretty similar behavior. Similar moves in gold stocks as measured by $HUI as well. I think we've seen the reflationary effort you refer to, now the question is how bad the next leg of the deflationary bust will be. Prolonged bear lasted until 1942 - and I think a similar five year period could lay dead ahead for us. BC

To: regli who wrote (57353)	4/3/2006 9:00:05 PM
From: Perspective	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

I also see strong parallels to Japan, just ten years ago: finance.yahoo.com Add ten years to the dates on that chart. Really strong cycle similarity. In 2000, I used to take solace in the fact that we at least didn't have a real estate bubble, and so might fare better than Japan. Well, we've certainly taken care of that distinction, now haven't we... I think the Fed "learned" to shift to a more aggressive fight against a post-bubble deflationary fallout, but what they did is build an even bigger bubble. In the process they shifted the real damage in the stock market secular bear from the first leg down (as in 1930s US and 1990s Nikkei) to the next leg down. The good news, if there is any, is that we would be closer to the end of the secular bear than I'd figured. That would have us bottoming out around 2014, with losses of 75% in big indices like Dow and S&P, but perhaps only marginal new lows for the whole secular bear in tech-land. That 1994 base actually would be a pretty good spot for it to stop: finance.yahoo.com BC