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 : Effective Collaboration - Team Research for Better Returns: -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Return to Sender who wrote (3678)	9/25/2014 1:51:04 PM
From: The Ox	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8288

Yes, I'm always skeptical of the numbers being produced. I'm not as much on the conspiracy side as I view numbers from almost anyone with a degree of concern. A CFO or CEO may not even realize they are "massaging" the numbers to their own advantage, as they are way too busy "drinking the Koolaid". This will lead to blinders or them not realizing what they've done was flat out wrong. Auditors are supposed to catch this and often don't until someone on the outside, who has a "fresh" perspective, point out the failure. When it comes to government stats, even more concern should be raised and most people fail to take the data in "context". The market's participants are notorious for "act first, question later". Clearly, these numbers are constantly revised and should be taken within that context, expect revisions that are often substantial. As to who's benefiting from the numbers, well, that aspect will most likely never change. Like the company who sees things one way when the should see them another, hard to expect the government not to be susceptible to the exact same thing (let alone, an outright rigging for their political purpose).

To: Return to Sender who wrote (3678)	9/29/2014 1:16:02 PM
From: The Ox	2 Recommendations Recommended By bruwin Return to Sender Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8288

I didn't really have the time to respond properly to your post, so I'd like to add these thoughts. The most important point, in my view, is that the FED is run for bankers, by bankers. It is also my belief that their purpose is much more simple than they would have anyone else believe. That purpose is to make sure the banking system is as strong as possible. Period. End of story. All else is just talk, IMO. They want to deflect anything and everything from the system itself and onto themselves. This serves a multitude of purposes but mainly they get to be seen as "involved" in economy. Employment, housing, main street economics, etc... but in reality, none of those are even on the radar if there's any trouble within the banking system. Each of the FED Heads gets to shoot off their mouth and talk about numerous issues. Almost always it's simply their individual opinion. Most is based in each person's political viewpoint. This gets the rest of the world worrying about what was said versus focusing on banks and how the system is performing. The latest spat being displayed in the media over GS and the FED is a perfect example, IMO. When you dial down, it's all about the banks and how they want the system to be running at any given point in time. What the Fed has done has put the country in a tremendous debt bind. No. I would completely disagree. It's what the banks did and what the FED is doing is simply trying to fix the things broken by the banks. I think they've done a very reasonable job within the banking system. However, since fixing the banking system doesn't necessarily translate to fixing the employment situation or what's actually happening on main street, they get everybody and their brother saying they've screwed up. I say no, they haven't but what they have done is to deflect the attention away from the banking system. They have shouldered the blame. Under any normal reality, there's no way the FED would do what the FED has done and continues to do. When the bankers decided the time was right to take down Shearson Lehman and Bear Sterns, the ripple effect rocked the entire global financial system. This triggered earthquakes and avalanches unforeseen by those who chose to step aside instead of offer a helping hand to these drowning entities. The most egregious issue being a lack of confidence in any global bank. If you can take down Lehman and BS with such speed and ferocity, who could be next? Putting that puzzle back together has been one whale of a chore.