Skip to main content

The Spring

The extensible spring.  Think of the shock absorber on your car.  You hit a bump, the spring is compressed and then releases its energy slowly to cushion the bump. 

Now think of capital markets in the same way.  This time the bump is a constant barrage of regulations.  They kept coming during the Obama administration.  For good or bad, the spring kept compressing.  Under Trump, the regulations have been relaxed, and the spring with all its stored up energy seems to be releasing its energy in an explosion of expansion.  This leads us to believe the markets have expanded (30 new DOW records this year), not back to their reasonable expression, but far beyond.  It leads one to think a rebound is possible, as it returns to where it should be. 

And “should be,” on the basis of growth and market, are the key words.  We are led to believe the markets will settle back to reasonable positions, and this may imply a correction is coming.  A bumpy ride may be afoot. 

Analogy is a wonderful method to explain.  Be aware of analogic imperfections.

A final point rears its unsmiling face.  Both presidents, seeming to live by executive action, can die by the same.  What if, in the next cycle, the Dems come back?  It might well happen.  Then, all those relaxed regulations could be reinstated.  It might well happen.  Back go the  markets.  This creates something of an unstable condition in the markets.  As well, it expresses confusion and therefore instability about investment. No matter who you support, this cannot be good.  Instability is usually bad – unless you think it controllable.  Not wise think.  Ping-pong, ping-pong.

Cycle-by-cycle, we could endure regulation, repeal and back again. You want this?


I hate to say it but Congress has devolved into a jumble of opinion minions, each staking out “moral” or “ethical” positions, which allows them to do little, requiring the President to make decisions they should have compromised upon to create law. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view