My Photo
Note: Jeff does not accept guest blog posts on A Dash of Insight.

For inquiries regarding advertising and republication, contact

Follow Jeff on Twitter!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


  • Seeking Alpha
    Seeking Alpha Certified
  • AllTopSites
    Alltop, all the top stories
  • iStockAnalyst
Talk Markets
Forexpros Contributor
Copyright 2005-2014
All Rights Reserved

« Oil Prices and Gasoline Prices: An Interesting Divergence | Main | Trendline Deception »

May 31, 2007


marlyn trades

I think the doomsayer business is really the place to be - it seems to attract more attention than the Pollyanna place and thus more ad revenue. Also the doomsayer books outsell the Pollyanna books - well - parabollically.

But after all the chuckling and chortling is over something real did happen in 2000 to cause the market to go down. And while none of the doomsayers really knew why or necessarily even predicted it - the meltdown still happened. It was real to millions and millions of people, and many of those are absolutely convinced today that had they "read the right book" in the 90's they wouldn't have lost half or more of their money. Consequently many of those folks are now looking for the prophet - the one seer who will lead them boldly from the "coming apocalypse".

You can't predict tops nor bottoms and you can only recognize them in the rear view mirror and no two are alike - but the average 'merican is not going to believe that for an instant. And, in fact, many above average 'mericans don't believe that for an instant. Hence the rise of money managers since 2000 - that phenomenon is a result of "bad things that happened".

Now both the average and above average 'merican can go to bed at night and sleep tight because he/she knows that he/she has someone else to blame.


Presenting steady growth as unsustainable 'parabolic' growth might be as simple as changing the x axis (time) to suit.

David Merkel

I think what they are trying to go for is the concept of something that is increasing at an increasing rate that is rapid at present. That is not the present market, but it might describe the market in 1927-8, or the liquidity fueled Nikkei in the late 80s, or even the NASDAQ from late 1998 to early 2000.

Parabolic conditions are rare; we are not there now.


Thanks, RB.

Great fun -- and worth thinking about!



A little light-hearted something that I came across on another blog:

The comments to this entry are closed.