Nov

30

Albert J. Nock's essay "Isaiah's Job" comes to mind.

"…he presented me with arguments sound as a nut and he was a much more learned man than I." … "But still I reasoned he was not taking account of one thing… "

All this talk about how bearish things are, and how the economy is going into a freefall, and Citi's deal means that they're twice as bad as Countrywide, and housing's fall has just started, and the million other things that I've been reading about how the end is nigh, the dollar is through the cellar. The statistical talk about how many 20% declines there have been relative to 10% declines. (All that one has to do there is look at the expectation after a 10% decline has occurred for a fixed interval ahead, or until the next x% move up or down, a exercise that is well covered in various books by Daily Spec posters and founders). What does this have to do with the differential between the earnings yield + growth rate, and the long term bond yield? What does this have to do with whether it's discounted? What does this have to do with whether when news is bad or good? And what does this have to do with whether it's good to buy when it's down 10% or up 10%? Most important, when the market looks bad, is it time to sell? Remember you have to sell and then buy to catch that 10,000 fold drift.

I am too busy looking for a Morrison's where I can get seconds for free (all tennis players dress in white in the qualifiers to look alike to the cashiers in the South), or a buck to post the answers to this, and indeed, I'll go with Schoolboy's idea of a few days ago tomorrow, but Nock, if he read as much of the Triumphal Trio's work and the Lorie work as he did of the classics, would be able to write an essay similar to Isaiah's Job about the wrongness of all these abysmal end of the world memes.


Comments

Name

Email

Website

Speak your mind

Archives

Resources & Links

Search