|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Chris Evans wrote:
<.....we could attribute the entire
rise in the Nasdaq last year to the growth in M2 ...>
I often hear this stated: that Greenspan fueled the market
bubble. I hear and acknowledge your argument, but remain
unconvinced it was the predominant contributor, but I don't deny
its role either. Thanks for the precise explanations and terms.
I'll keep my mind open, but I keep returing to the technical
destiny that always seems to accompany these phenomena,
that there are always extenuating circumstances and fundamental
explanations, but that the whole is somehow far bigger than
its parts, as if to say it was going there anyway, and explanations
would always be there to follow.
S
Chris Evans wrote:
> what I'm getting at is the enormous rise of M2 into the Y2K fear and then
> the massive unwind (drainage) this year .. this huge swing in liquidity
> occurred during a steady rise in rates .. we could attribute the entire
> rise in the Nasdaq last year to the growth in M2 and its decline this year
> to the drain .. Greensp may now be afraid that the drain has burst the
> bubble he was afraid of 3 years ago .. so he needs to do whatever he can to
> temper stock market fear...
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "scheier" <scheier@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Chris Evans" <evanscje@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 1:14 PM
> Subject: Re: Statue to Greenspan/Re: the Fed
>
> > Understood. But the point is the same. There is far more at
> > work in a bull market of this magnitude than money supply. I
> > believe that had Greenspan raised rates even more than he did,
> > he would have had only more dramatic, but still impotent affect
> > on the eventual rise of this bubble. IMHO.
> >
> > in any case, thanks for the thoughtful contributions, and good
> > luck with all your trading in the weeks to come
> >
> > Scheier
> >
> > Chris Evans wrote:
> >
> > > It's not about rates .. it's about non-borrowed reserves and money
> supply ..
> > > rates can be very misleading
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "scheier" <scheier@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: "Felix" <felixty@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: "Omega Users List" <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 7:13 AM
> > > Subject: Statue to Greenspan/Re: the Fed
> > >
> > > > Felix wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Wallstreet should one day show its gratefulness to Greenspan by
> putting
> > > his
> > > > > statue riding the bull.
> > > >
> > > > But Greenspan isn't responsible for the Bull market, no more
> > > > so than Bill Clinton. This connection is naive and just stand
> > > > up to scrutiny. A study of hikes and cuts along side the
> > > > longer history of the stock market over the last 70+ years reveal
> > > > that interest rates have only the shortest term affect on investor
> > > > psychology. If rates controlled the market, it wouldn't have
> > > > continued to climb from the depths of the '74 bear while rates
> > > > continued to ratchet up to their highest in recorded history,
> > > > nor would the market have continued to crash in '30 when rates
> > > > went affectively to zero.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
|