[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [RT] Re: Fed supporting market



PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links




A final post 
related to the head of the Fed......Mr. Greenspan.
a couple of words 
from the famed "Jimmy Rogers" from an article in SFO magazine (October) 
recently:
<FONT color=#0000ff 
size=2> 
1) "Alan 
Greenspan's history has been one of repeated failures..."
<FONT color=#0000ff 
size=2> 
2) "...now he's 
causing the housing and consumption bubbles"
<FONT color=#0000ff 
size=2> 
3) "He was a Jack 
Grubman.....he was just sitting there babbling like he was an 
expert"
<FONT color=#0000ff 
size=2> 
4) "...he keeps 
trying to avoid slowdowns, artificially, but slowdowns are natural and necessary 
to clean out the system"
<FONT color=#0000ff 
size=2> 
5) "Alan 
Greenspan will go down in history as one of the worst Federal Reserve chairmen 
in history"
<FONT color=#0000ff 
size=2> 
<BLOCKQUOTE 
>
  <FONT face=Tahoma 
  size=2>-----Original Message-----From: Code 2 
  [mailto:Code2@xxxxxxx]Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 12:41 
  PMTo: Realtraders ListSubject: Re: [RT] Re: Fed 
  supporting market
  It's difficult to respond to your statement 
  because of your lack of specifics.
   
  Consider what happens when governments intervene 
  in stock markets.  The myths of "easy money", "can't lose", "buy and 
  hold" and "cash is trash" are perpetuated and reinforced.  Uninformed 
  investors (speculators, actually) take risks for which they are 
  unprepared.  They mortgage their homes and run up their credit cards to 
  buy the latest crap-dot-com IPO.  Now, the politicians have to pump even 
  more money into support mechanisms, because if those fools lose their houses 
  when the market gets its reality check, they will vote in a new batch of 
  political hacks.
   
  On the other hand, no intervention means up and 
  down cycles continue, but they are not accentuated.  Speculators 
  understand they risk losing their investment.  When a market 
  drops, there is a cleansing and preparation of a firmer base for the next move 
  up.
   
  I can think of no circumstance where government 
  intervention in the markets is not bad.
   
   
  <BLOCKQUOTE 
  >
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    <DIV 
    >From: 
    Adrian 
    Pitt 
    To: <A 
    title=realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
    href="">realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
    
    Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 1:32 
    AM
    Subject: RE: [RT] Re: Fed supporting 
    market
    <FONT face=Arial 
size=2>
    <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
    size=2>Wrong...an extremely superficial statement full or more holes than 
    you can imagine.
    <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
    size=2>Saying intervention is the problem is like saying guns are 
    bad.....and we all know how<SPAN 
    class=593043109-20112003> silly that 
    is.
    <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
    size=2> 
    <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
    size=2>Adrian
    <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
    size=2> 
    <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
    size=2> 
    <BLOCKQUOTE 
    >
      
      <FONT 
      face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----From: Code 2 
      [mailto:Code2@xxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, 20 November 2003 3:50 
      AMTo: Realtraders ListSubject: Re: [RT] Re: Fed 
      supporting marketThe Austrian school economists 
      would respond thatproviding liquidity *is* intervention, and that 
      anyintervention in the markets contributes to boom and 
      bustcycles.  Intervention is the problem, not the solution  
      ;)----- Original Message ----- From: "Terry B. Rhodes" 
      <trhodes3@xxxxxxxxx>To: 
      <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 
      6:16 PMSubject: [RT] Re: Fed supporting marketAs others have 
      pointed out, providing liquidity is not thesame as intervening 
      directly to support the market. I haveconfirmed as fact that the FED 
      is legally capable ofintervening directly, but know of no confirmed 
      incidentwhere this has happened. This is the question i am 
      askingProviding liquidity is the standard FED response to 
      anyfinancial crisis, real or imagined. 1987, Y2K and 9/11 area few 
      examples of this.regards,tbr> The fact is 
      it did happen in 1987.  The fed told the banks to> give 
      unlimited 
  credit.To 
  unsubscribe from this group, send an email 
  to:realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxYour 
  use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <A 
  href="">Yahoo! Terms of Service. 







Yahoo! Groups Sponsor












To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx





Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.