To: Bill Murphy who wrote (3024 ) 1/12/1999 10:16:00 PM From: dospesos Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 81173
Bill: A very comprehensive survey today! Thank you very much. One small difference wrt Crudele's comments. It has to do with the Kondratieff Wave which I have studied extensively. Several well-known long cycle pundits have succeeded in confusing everyone about where it starts and ends. It remains extremely close to a full 54 year trough to trough, peak to peak event. This is not the place to get into details. In several publications I have outlined the whole history but particularly the 20th century events. Briefly, 1896 was a trough, and 1920 a peak. 1949 was a trough and 1974 a peak. 2003-2004 will be a trough. That said, there is often a tendency for prices of "stuff" to bottom absolutely (or on a momentum basis) on one of the approximate six year event subcycles: 1986, 1992-93, 1998-99. The problem most analysts have is in understanding how interest rates and stock cycles fit into this "stuff" cycle. It's actually quite simple and logical although too much for here and now. Interest rates are bottoming (short rates in 1992, long rates now?), and stocks will go up for many more years, albeit with more frequent bear markets than we have come to expect. Deflation scares will remain (as today, for example), but deflation is basically finished for this cycle, although the transition will be volatile and dangerous to capital, as all transitions are. Bonds will be THE asset to own one day, and gold the next. And so on. I know that Charles Peabody and many other good minds are convinced of the credit crunch/deflationary debacle gold bull case, but that is really only a case for protection from official devaluation of paper currencies. It's the unofficial devaluation via re-inflation that is far more likely going forward. I hope to have my entire Year End Review up on the Internet within a week or so after friends and subscribers have no further excuse not to have read it all...;-) Cheers.