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 : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (37707)	11/28/1998 2:31:00 PM
From: Tommaso	Respond to of 132070

Of course, there are quite a lot of ways of defining "inflation." Yes, I was talking about general price increases, as measured in the United States by the CPI or PPI. For the moment, I was discussing economics more than the behavior of equity markets. And the point I was making was that Milton Friedman and Anna Schwartz's exhaustive study of the role of money and money supply in the United States economy failed to take into account the very rapid increases in output possible in emerging economies--the efficiency and productivity of very rapid export-driven industrialization. (As well as increases in domestic efficiency). In trying to prevent an accelerating deflationary drop (in dollar terms) of the prices of goods and commodities, the Fed has encouraged an outrageous bidding up of equities. I think they were foolish to step in with a panicky surprise rate cut, just as the stock market was correcting, and foolish to rescue Long Term Capital. They have given the impression that the U. S. Government is prepared to keep equity prices permanently rising. I don't think they meant to do that at all, but they did. Funny how opinion about the fed runs the gamut from a belief that they are secretly trading options so as to manipulate the market to a belief that they totally neglect what goes on in the equity markets. I think that they took the August decline as a sign that they could safely ease credit and head off incipient deflation, and also as a sign a contraction was already under way. As usual, when they try to fine tune, they have made things worse.

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (37707)	11/29/1998 4:13:00 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

seems james cramer has his panties in a tight wad... Message 6581365 he was responding to this... Message 6569244 slander? did you see it? it appeared to me the guy laid out his facts and asked some questions. then he stated that james shouldn't go out and make reccomendations based on unverifiable tips. on another interesting note... money fund $$$ our increasing... Message 6593527 seems james is quite weak when his bad calls are at issue. ok, so it hurts to be short and see as tock go up $40 points ;-) no need to get the empty lawyer suits out.