|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
We have nukes. We can't lose a conventional war against anyone. And soon
we'll have SDI. Maybe not perfect, but if it can knock out 75% of the
incoming nukes, getting 25% nuked is better than 100% nuked. We might not
be able to win a conventional war against China in the sense that we could
not occupy their country, but we cannot lose.
Economic war is a different story. In a book I read a while back (I think
it was "Accidental Empires" by Robert Cringely), the author points out
research that demonstrates how forward progress is dependent on finding
truly, truly great talent and giving them resources and pressing deadlines.
We are talking people way out on the bell curve. And the author makes the
simple observation that the number of these people a country has access to
is simply a factor of that country's population. Like Dennis Miller said
when China crossed the 1 billion mark, "It means that even if you're a
one-in-a-million kind of guy, there's still a thousand other guys just like
you."
The Chinese (and Japanese) think a lot differently than we do. That will
make things more diifficult for us Westerners. They have "spies" who live
here now. They buy things in this country that it is illegal for China to
import and FedEx them to China. Things that are relatively low-tech for us,
but things that China won't be able to manufacture for another 10-15 years.
That's their idea of spying...for now. Of course with Klinton, they got a
better quality of stuff...one throat to choke and all...
Our only hope? Thomas Friedman's observation in "The Lexus and The Olive
Tree": no 2 nations with a McDonald's have ever gone to war with each other
(the book was written before Klinton bombed Belgrade). Trade, trade, and
more trade. But then of course that gets us back to the economic
war...maybe we're just screwed. Maybe we should start bombing China with
condoms.
Kent
----- Original Message -----
From: "Clyde Lee" <clydelee@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 11:50 PM
Subject: Re: [RT] Re: Thursday Prognosis of S&P
You say:
Better take some Chinese lessons because they'll be running things
soon.
After over 200 years of enduring this "rotten" thing that we have in
this country can we not expect to endure for another 200 years
even though China has a lot more people.
If it came to a real war we would probably lose but if it is only
an economic war we will probably solve that problem in the
same way that we solved the Japanese problem after WW2.
Clyde
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Clyde Lee Chairman/CEO (Home of SwingMachine)
SYTECH Corporation email: clydelee@xxxxxxxxxxxx
7910 Westglen, Suite 105 Office: (713) 783-9540
Houston, TX 77063 Fax: (713) 783-1092
Details at: www.theswingmachine.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
----- Original Message -----
From: "bondo92677" <bruce.larson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 10:39 PM
Subject: [RT] Re: Thursday Prognosis of S&P
> What would I do if I were Alan? I'd retire and ride off into that
> big sunset. Got a nice pretty younger wife and can make tons of
> money on the speech circuit.
> Nothing you can do once the bubble bursts. Just gotta let it all
> play out. The end result is always the same. After you party,
> there's always a hangover. And we're in for a big one. Alan saw it
> all happen in Japan 10 years earlier and just let it happen again.
> You can keep the patient alive on life support like Japan with stupid
> protectionist regulations, zero interest rates and fiscal stimulus
> which only prolongs the problem by helping unproductive entities
> remain in business or you can go cold turkey. I'm assuming we're
> looking at 10-12 years of subpar growth. The alternative is
> politically unacceptable. And of course Bush will try to get us
> involved in every war imaginable to take our minds off the real
> problem.
> Better take some Chinese lessons because they'll be running things
> soon.
>
>
> --- In realtraders@xxxx, "tradewynne" <tradewynne@xxxx> wrote:
> > I know you "really have no opinion" .... but what would
> > YOU do now?
> >
> > BW
> >
> >
> > --- In realtraders@xxxx, "bondo92677" <bruce.larson@xxxx> wrote:
> > > I really have no opinion on either way. I read in several
> > > publications during Dubya's campaign that Daddy Bush blamed
> > > Greenspan's tight monetary policy for blowing his reelection.
> > Daddy
> > > Bush had the highest public approval rating immediately after the
> > > Gulf War (2/91) and blowing the election was bigger than this
> > market
> > > reversal. I didn't make it up. Obviously Bush Snr believes
> > > Greenspan took too long to loosen and the 91 recession/tepid
> > recovery
> > > of 92 hurt him. Gotta blame someone and Alan the easiest one to
> > > point his finger at. I'm sure "read my lips" and Dan Quayle
> didn't
> > > help his chances but it reelections really do depend on the state
> > of
> > > the economy.
> > > As far as Alan's loose rate experiment, its well known that Alan
> > had
> > > this pet theory of tech based productivity gains dampening
> > > inflationary pressures. So in spite of strong (service)economy
> > gains
> > > in 1996-98, he held off from over tightening. In fact, I've
> heard
> > > that his 3/97 one time hike was done reluctantly at the
> insistance
> > of
> > > the Fed Board. Its also said that Greenspan had a tacit
> > > understanding with the Clinton administration (Rubin) that he
> would
> > > lay off tight monetary policy if they balanced the budget.
> > Everyone
> > > loves to blame Alan for creating the bubble although now its
> clear
> > it
> > > was all based on false accounting, share buybacks, media hype and
> > > greed. The earnings were never there. Of course, demographics
> > > (boomers pouring their retirement money into stocks) and foreign
> > > investment(strong dollar) had alot to do with it. But the fact
> of
> > > the matter is that Al simply sat on his hands while it all
> spiraled
> > > into a mania. He warned of it bubbling in 12/96, watched it take
> > off
> > > then smugly watched it collapse. Would it have been better if he
> > had
> > > nipped it in the bud by raising rates more and tightening margin
> > > requirements in 1997? I guess that depends on if you got out at
> > the
> > > top. If he had pulled a Volcker and tightened the screws, the
> > Asian
> > > crisis, Russian crisis, and LTCM could just as well have
> collapsed
> > > the entire financial system. My only opinion is that he should
> > have
> > > at least raised margin requirements. And then there's that
> garbage
> > > he lays out that he doesn't target the stock market. Yeah
> right.
> > > Funds are at 1.75% right now. Is the economy that bad right
> now?
> > > Only because it was allowed to get out of control.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In realtraders@xxxx, "tradewynne" <tradewynne@xxxx> wrote:
> > > > --- In realtraders@xxxx, "bondo92677" <bruce.larson@xxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I don't where his allegiances lay.
> > > >
> > > > >>>Alan was a good friend of the
> > > > > > > Clintons. He used to always sit next to Hillary at
> public
> > > > > > > ceremonies. Daddy Bush still holds a grudge against Al
> > > because
> > > > he > > > feels his tight policy lost him the election in 1992.
> > > >
> > > > I guess I didn't understand.
> > > >
> > > > > But he sure tightened the screws
> > > > > in 88-90.
> > > >
> > > > Rate cuts in 90-92 were too late
> > > > > > to save Bush Snr
> > > >
> > > > Again, I'm not clear. Are you saying he was trying to screw Bush
> > > > Sr. or save him?
> > > >
> > > > > He said the market was "irrational exuberant" in 12/96. We
> > > almost
> > > > > got back down there last month no thanks to him.
> > > >
> > > > You're saying his "12/96" speech caused the market to decline
> from
> > > > 2000-2002?
> > > >
> > > > I know a lot of folks are bitter about the decline in the
> market,
> > > > and want to blame someone, but I don't think you can have it
> both
> > > > ways. If you blame him for the decline don't you have to give
> him
> > > > credit for the greatest bull market in history? I don't think
> he
> > > > deserves either. The markets are going to do what they want, all
> > > > the fed does is goose it here and there. Check your own time
> > > > line as proof: look at a chart after his 1996 speech; the NDX
> > > > was up 500%+ in three years.
> > > >
> > > > BW
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In realtraders@xxxx, "tradewynne" <tradewynne@xxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > Yeah, another left-winger Ford and Reagan appointed?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.federalreserve.gov/bios/greenspan.htm
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In realtraders@xxxx, "bondo92677" <bruce.larson@xxxx>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > They said the same in fall 1998. Alan was a good friend
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > > Clintons. He used to always sit next to Hillary at
> public
> > > > > > > ceremonies. Daddy Bush still holds a grudge against Al
> > > because
> > > > > he
> > > > > > > feels his tight policy lost him the election in 1992.
> > > Remember
> > > > > Al
> > > > > > > raised rates up to 11% in 1989. Rate cuts in 90-92 were
> > too
> > > > late
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > save Bush Snr although they sure made Clinton look
> good.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In realtraders@xxxx, "Kent Rollins" <kentr@xxxx>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Quite the contrary. The Fed will avoid moving right
> > before
> > > > an
> > > > > > > election
> > > > > > > > unless things are really bad. If the economy continues
> > to
> > > > > > sputter
> > > > > > > along as
> > > > > > > > it is doing now, there will be no change in rates.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kent
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > From: "M. Simms" <prosys@xxxx>
> > > > > > > > To: <realtraders@xxxx>
> > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 11:29 AM
> > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [RT] Thursday Prognosis of S&P
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > With the Bush administration, ANYTHING GOES RIGHT
> NOW....
> > > > > > > > WAIT.....Doesn't the FOMC meet BEFORE September 30th ?
> > > > > > > > I think it's SEPTEMBER 24th.....just ONE WEEK
> > > BEFORE.....HOW
> > > > > > > CONVENIENT.
> > > > > > > > Hmmmmm.......I wonder what will happen to S/T interest
> > > rates
> > > > > > > then ?? (duh !)
> > > > > > > > "FOMC lowers Fed Funds by a record by 75 basis
> > > > > points......stock
> > > > > > > markets
> > > > > > > > rise sharply.....mutual fund holders now happy
> > > > campers......GOP
> > > > > > > election
> > > > > > > > chances now improved"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > BTW: I just love to shake you guys up...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > > From: Norman Winski [mailto:nwinski@x...]
> > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 12:15 AM
> > > > > > > > > To: realtraders@xxxx
> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [RT] Thursday Prognosis of S&P
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > M Simms,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hey, maybe they have Arafat bidding up the market
> > with
> > > > his
> > > > > > > secret
> > > > > > > > > billionaire dollar account? And the Bush
> > administration
> > > is
> > > > > bad
> > > > > > > > > mouthing the
> > > > > > > > > Saudis so no one will suspect they are trading for
> the
> > > CIA?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Conspiringly,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Norman
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > > From: "M. Simms" <prosys@xxxx>
> > > > > > > > > To: <realtraders@xxxx>
> > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 12:00 AM
> > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [RT] Thursday Prognosis of S&P
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > NYSE volume of 1.5 billion today.....weak ?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Also, let's not forget the Sept 30th date in NEON
> > LITES
> > > > > > hanging
> > > > > > > in the
> > > > > > > > > white
> > > > > > > > > > house......
> > > > > > > > > > they gotta keep the market up till then.....or else
> > > WHAM,
> > > > > > > goodbye GOP in
> > > > > > > > > > November.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > These fierce non-news-related afternoon rallies are
> > > just
> > > > so
> > > > > > > > > suspicious.....I
> > > > > > > > > > wonder if Bush has the CIA hitting the BUY order
> > > buttons
> > > > all
> > > > > > > > > afternoon in
> > > > > > > > > > the eminis.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > > > > From: John Cappello [mailto:jvc689@x...]
> > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 7:38 PM
> > > > > > > > > > > To: realtraders@xxxx
> > > > > > > > > > > Cc: MedianLine@xxxx
> > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [RT] Thursday Prognosis of S&P
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I know general TA consensus says that we have
> > broken
> > > a
> > > > > major
> > > > > > > > > > > resistance and 947 or better is in sight tomorrow.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > This may be true but this rally could have also
> > been
> > > > > fueled
> > > > > > > by the
> > > > > > > > > > > absence of major bad news and CEOs signing on the
> > > > dotted
> > > > > > > line.Plus
> > > > > > > > > > > coming off the heels of a major decline never
> hurts.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Tomorrow I believe that:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 1. UAL will announce Bankruptcy plans
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 2. Major CEOs of certain firms will not sign
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 3. Companies will announce a need to redo back
> years
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 4. While we passed the early Aug. high we are
> still
> > > > below
> > > > > > > July highs
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 5. The 200 day moving average is a long way off
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 6. 775.9 may have been the low for this cycle but
> > > that
> > > > > does
> > > > > > > not mean
> > > > > > > > > > > 880 will not be retested.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > We can move higher but I think we will end lower.
> > It
> > > > > would
> > > > > > > not take
> > > > > > > > > > > much to derail this uptrend which until now has
> > been
> > > > > fueled
> > > > > > > by weak
> > > > > > > > > > > volume.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > This one may have passed a "magic" number but
> that
> > > does
> > > > > not
> > > > > > > mean that
> > > > > > > > > > > it "is" the magic number to climb aboard.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > > > > > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxx
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > > > > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxx
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxx
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > > > > > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxx
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now
http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/RN.GAA/zMEolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|