|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Steve,
You're right. People are amazing. Especially those that read a book, an
article or listen to some talk show host espouse some unsubstantiated
theory and then take it on as gospel. No more thought or research
necessary. Unfortunately, they give too much credit to the people that
supposedly pull off these complex conspiracies involving many (without a
sole knowing it except the one reporting it) and not enough credit to
the originator of the theory who has found a scheme to attract attention
(usually for profit). It's not enough that people will listen and
believe so easily, but that they spread the word as if it were some truth
from above. Name a significant public event or activity that goes or
has gone on and you will find any number of conspiracy theories to go
with it. The day people actually are clever enough to execute these
theories (always in total secrecy you will note, and without anyone but
the conspiracy theorist in the know) is when I might start to believe
them. As long as people are willing to believe anything they read or
hear without any further dissection or verification, this insidious
activity will continue--probably to the end of time.
Dick
On Sat, 31 Oct 1998 10:44:59 -0200 steven poser <swp@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>I am constantly amazed at what people will believe. What I love best
>about folks that believe in conspiracy theories, that the Fed buys
>futures (Earl, though I disagree with you on the futures purchase
>stuff,
>you are obviously not in the idiot category.)
>
>Alan Greenspan is the consummate market behaviorist and technical
>analyst. I am not suggesting that he sits there and draws lines, looks
>at OBV and RSI. But, he may be the only Central Banker in the world
>who
>understands how to mollify the markets. I wrote to my clients back
>before the first rate cut that the Fed would go again between meetings
>if they only went 25 bps on 29-Sep. I made this call based on how I
>thought the markets would react, and how I figured Greenspan would
>react
>to that. The day that the Fed cut again, was the first time I saw
>inklings of the market getting ready to turn lower. I think if the Fed
>had not cut then, we'd be at 6800 now and not 8600.
>
>Alan Greenspan almost certainly has no great love for Bill Clinton.
>Clinton is a Democrat and Greenspan is a Republican. So, Alan is not
>saving Bill. He is not saving a Republican Congress either that sits
>there and asks for rate cuts also when the economy is humming along.
>The
>FED is and must be fiercely independent.
>
>LOOK WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A CENTRAL BANK IS BELIEVED TO BE CONTROLLED BY
>THE GOVERNMENT (OR ACTUALLY IS CONTROLLED BY THE GOVERNMENT). LOOK HOW
>ENGLAND AND FRANCE HAVE IMPROVED THEIR ECONOMIES SINCE THEIR CENTRAL
>BANKS GAINED MORE INDEPENDENCE. LOOK AT THE FRIGGIN MESS JAPAN IS IN
>BECAUSE THE BOJ IS NOT INDEPENDENT.
>
>IF THERE WAS A TRUE BELIEF (AND FOR THAT MATTER REASON TO BELIEVE)
>THAT
>THE FED WAS CONTROLLED BY ANYBODY BUT THE CENTRAL BANKERS, THE DOW
>WOULD
>BE AT 5000 NO MATTER HOW LOW GREENSPAN PUT RATES. THAT IS HOW MUCH
>CONFIDENCE WOULD BE LOST.
>
>OH, AND THE FED IS ALSO NOT CONTROLLED BY WALL STREET. IF IT IS GOING
>IN
>TO SAVE STREET FIRMS, IT IS TO PREVENT A PANIC. I WAS NOT THERE IN
>1929
>WHEN BANKS FAILED LEFT AND RIGHT. DO YOU WANT TO SEE THEM FALL LIKE
>DOMINOES?
>
>Remember, though how Wall Street goes, is not how the whole economy
>goes
>(did you see GDP yesterday? -- AND PLEASE DONT TELL ME THE FIGURES ARE
>RIGGED OR I'M GOING TO PUKE), failures are a different story. The
>markets are all about psychology, expectations and behavior. Nobody is
>better at managing that than Alan Greenspan. If it looks as if the Fed
>is controlled, it is only because knows how to pull the strings.
>
>Steve
>
--------- End forwarded message ----------
|