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 : Bob Brinker, Moneytalk and Marketimer -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: octavian who wrote (1696)	10/22/2007 9:45:49 PM
From: Kirk ©	Respond to of 2121

But let me ask YOU a question. When you started saying brinker was wrong about high oil prices acting as a tax on the economy, did you say:.... I NEVER said this. Find the quote or admit you made it up. NEVER said it. Acting as a tax doesn't mean higher priced oil isn't inflationary. it simply means the relationship is not 1-to-1... that is you might expect inflation to go up 1% with a doubling of oil, but the "taxing effects" means inflation might only go up 0.5%.... It is not a 100% tax....

To: octavian who wrote (1696)	10/22/2007 9:48:06 PM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2121

<<IF the FED had stopped raising rates at 4.0% as Brinker advised them to, do you think core inflation would have peaked at 2.9% then fallen to the current 1.8 or 1.9% level, the high end of the Fed's target zone, as it has?>> --I don't know (being an idiot, how COULD I know)? IF you can't answer that question, then..... Why don't you TRY to answer the question honestly? The BIG REASON I think you are so dishonest is you MAKE STUFF UP that you attribute to me saying, then you attack it. That is dishonest and despicable.