22 replies to this topic

[vitaminm]

TYX >5.5? 60min sell

[Russ]

so called geniuses......all quotable.......an army of them......have been spreading fear and pessimism for as long as i can remember.........anybody can do it........snort.........thats why i dont worry about a thing......theres a mob of professional worriers doing it for me..........lol.......the markets response to all this worry?????......wadya think.....geez

Armstrong accurately forecast that the 1990's would make the 80's look like the quiet times, his computer predicted that the dow would hit 6000 by 1996 and 10,000 by 1998 (july 20th) the exact date of the high before the crash. He also predicted in 1996 that oil would go to minimum $65.

He had a long history of accurate forecasts, that's why Campbell featured him as the star of the Economic Outlook Conference in Vancouver each year through-out the 1990's and Equity Magazine named him North America's top economist in the early 1990's.

If he had not been in prison for the past 7+ years we would have gotten an update!

His daughter Victoria stated that the real reason he is in prison is because he would not hand over the source code for his computer model.

There are other people out there Don that are as smart as you...believe it or not.

[da_cheif]

dumbazzez end up in jail......

[Russ]

dumbazzez end up in jail......

Marty had a big mouth...big trees catch lots of wind. His lack of judgement on some things does not mean his computer model that he devoted his life to developing is not extremely valuable though...otherwise the CIA and Chinese would not have come knocking at the door. It's a real tradgedy, I spoke with him on several occations he was a very interesting person.

[Tor]

Russ, I hear you but what about the so called cycle top of Feb 27th? Sure the market went down, but it has gone back up and new highs met many indices globally. I did read somewhere that his supercomputer had a 3 month time window accuracy however. Maybe we are still in that window.

[OEXCHAOS]

As for refinancing into fixed rates... most of the people who took out arms will not be able to get a fixed rate mortgage to save their lives as the lending standards tighten and rates rise. Most of those people shouldn't have been given any mortgage in the first place.

OK, I've heard this a lot. I know that a lot of loose lending has taken place. What I don't hear is any hard research supporting the assertion that "MOST" ARM holders shouldn't have been given the loan in the first place. It seems to me to be the lynch pin of most doom and gloomers' cases, yet I never, ever see it substantiated by hard data.

Have you got any or am I asking a rude question?

M

[Russ]

Russ, I hear you but what about the so called cycle top of Feb 27th? Sure the market went down, but it has gone back up and new highs met many indices globally.

I did read somewhere that his supercomputer had a 3 month time window accuracy however. Maybe we are still in that window.

Tor,

The 8.6 year cycle has a small small variance that is tolerable but that is long gone, the cycle hit exactly as forecast to within a couple of days of theoretical time, Armstrong's written time was Feb.27th excactly where it crashed.

What is important is not just what each major panic cycle produces but also what bigger picture trends it is showing. In 1998.55 it hit excactly to the day on July 20th but then the market recovered in a few weeks and went on to make new highs into early 1999 but internally the market had actually peaked back in mid 1998.

In late 2002 the cycle bottomed and that was the end of the slump since the dot com boom, Armstrong had long said the market would likely go down into the 8.6 on Nov.2002 the exact date of the 8.6 year cycle, he also said war would tend to increase after that date, the United Nations gave Iraq a deadline on Nov.8th and Bush attacked them a few months later.

Since the last 8.6 hit excactly but bounced up strongly within a couple of weeks whereas the average panic cycle takes 6 weeks this shows that the bullish forces are extremely powerful (epicenter of primary 3?) and now bonds are starting to crash, so this is suggesting wild inflation and possibly the start of the major debt crisis that Armstrong warned was coming back in the early 1990's. The problem is the huge US federal debt as interest rates rise the payments on those bonds will go up dramatically...hyperinflation was Armstrong's prediction which led to his statement..."Unfortunately my view of the future is not a very nice one." If the dollar starts to crash more and the Asian's lose confidence and dump the bonds there will be serious trouble.

Edited by Russ, 11 June 2007 - 06:27 AM.

[Tor]

If he only predicts internal market lows, then what use is it Russ? I mean in 1998, would have got wiped out. Then today who knows if he is right or wrong. By marking only internal market tops/bottoms, then it is pointless, no? Maybe 1998 was a predicted LOW, rather than high?

[Russ]

If he only predicts internal market lows, then what use is it Russ?

I mean in 1998, would have got wiped out.

Then today who knows if he is right or wrong.

By marking only internal market tops/bottoms, then it is pointless, no?

Maybe 1998 was a predicted LOW, rather than high?

On july 20 1998 Barclay T. Leib of Sandspring.com was an employee of Armstrong's company Princeton Economics, Leif sat there and watched as Armstrong shorted several thousand contracts, by the time the market had fallen 20% Armstrong closed the shorts and went back to his beach house to rest. Hardly useless. On the last panic in Feb. some people made millions of dollars going short. It marks stock market tops which lead to huge volatility..

[LeroyB3]

As for refinancing into fixed rates... most of the people who took out arms will not be able to get a fixed rate mortgage to save their lives as the lending standards tighten and rates rise. Most of those people shouldn't have been given any mortgage in the first place.

OK, I've heard this a lot. I know that a lot of loose lending has taken place. What I don't hear is any hard research supporting the assertion that "MOST" ARM holders shouldn't have been given the loan in the first place. It seems to me to be the lynch pin of most doom and gloomers' cases, yet I never, ever see it substantiated by hard data.

Have you got any or am I asking a rude question?

M

OEXCHAOS,

I've actually read somewhere that a lot of the people who were given arms could have been approved for fixed rate, but were screwed by their brokers.

Best,

LB