This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Nasdaq-100 Breaks 3000, First Time Since 2000
Up 195% from the Nov 2008 lows, the Nasdaq-100 has now broken back above the magical 3000 level. A level first seen in Nov 1999 (back then it took 4 more weeks to hit 4000). How long until CNBC adds a countdown timer to the Nasdaq all-time high?
»
- 7204 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Only 2000 more to go and I'm break-even on my Lucent and Pets.com losses!
Testament to the economic strength.
;-p
I have a feeling Netscape is making a comeback!
About time. Now, that Opera has quit, we could use a new navigator. ;)
Tech Depression = NASDAQ 6000
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/were-living-tech-depression-andreessen-100130066.html
Having been part of a tech company that went public in 2001. Why would anyone bust their ass to bring a company public and have it gutted by a bunch of useless fucking paper-pushers (V.C. people, bankers, etc.) when they extract their pounds of flesh. Fuck the mother fucking paper-pushers, their is no fucking value in their labor, despite their compensation (yet another underlying structural problem). Good tech companies getting smarter about their own finance. Sounds good to me actually.
OT:
there is a pretty girl in ad on the side of my zh page, as per usual.
this time, she is selling me dvf gear.
I had to click.
because, see above re: pretty girl
that makes 1 click from zh page
at the bottom of the dvf page, I click "about"
that makes 2 clicks
on the resulting page, under board of directors, I click "barry diller"
that makes 3 clicks of separation.
here. let's bring that number down to 1.
http://www.dvf.com/about/board/barry-diller/company-board-barry,default,...
fify
i have a feeling worldcom is making a comeback.
How is Enron doing today?
Time to remember those hot stock symbols: XCIT, LCOS, SEEK, ETYS, NCSP, CNWK, AHWY, CYCH, SPYG, EMLX, CIEN, FIRE, TGLO, GOTO, INKT....
Is CNBC still on the air? I saw they have almost zero ratings. Must have guests paying the tab to pump stocks
Get your Nasdaq 2000 hats ready folks!
Speaking of technology markets, where the hell are those fusion reactors I ordered? I am sure that "this time is different". < sarc off >
Is Bill gross still buying treasuries like mad? Yeah I thought as much.
Look up into the sky. There it is: Finest fusion reactor ever. (Could be hidden behind clouds. Just wait for better weather, then.)
It's an Electric Universe bro.
Good thing too, otherwise fixed nitrogen would be in much shorter supply. Cycles matter bitchez, details matter as well. many elements are only useful to higher organisms in certain oxidation states, simply getting to those oxidation states requires energy.
No shit sherlock, unfortunately the energy (in calories or Joules) current being consumed by humanity greatly exceeds what can be harvested from sunlight at the present time. If only we had solar voltaics with a quantum efficiency of 1.
Someone off-handedly said the stock rally will continue until Nasdaq reaches its previous highs. I'll stick to Martin Armstrong for more in-depth analysis of the undying stock rally, but we'll see if such off-the-cuff comments come true in time.
Corporations obviously need to lay off everybody to get us to NASDAQ 100000000000
Actually they don't need to at all. Because they don't even need earnings to make their stocks go up. Case in point AMZN. Hire more workers, ship more shit at negative margins, miss expectations again and again, watch the stock price go up! Ben's got your back, baby!
Who coined this fraud as the "new normal"? Perfect! The new normal is the abnormal!
A couple of months should be enough to break the record the way things are going.
How can they get away with the lies, theft and waste for so long? Will they ever reap what they've sown. Or will it be everyone else paying the price forever?
(Don't answer please, I'm afraid I know already)
BTFP - Buy The Fucking Peak
BTFB - Buy The Fucking Bernank ... before he starts charging $175K a pop on the lecture circuit.
dup
... inflation ...
@ HOBO,
AS LONG AS "INFLATION" REMAINS TO BE "A WORD"....IT CAN REMAIN "CONTAINED".
And still Bernanke won’t let the savers go. They still have more sacrifices to make if the indexes are to be driven higher.
Count on it JR. This whole concept has been to sacrifice the many to enrich the very few, and to feel like loser if you don't embrace it with glee.
Nosedaq 2000 - what could possibly go right?
back to 1999
Benghazi cover-up.
Wow and it hasn't even hit the parabolic stage yet.
This is going to 8000 - 9000
Makes perfect sense withn the worst economy in 70 years! Con show is what I think it is called?
"I believe I can fly, I believe I can touch the sky, I think about it every night and day ..."--> Ben's version.
Spread my wings and CRASH AWAY! --> My version.
Anyone interested in some Webvan or pets.com stock? Super cheap.
When Henry Blodgett starting making his appearances again, you can bet the top is near.
Qualcom...
"Go on in! The water is fine!" Says the salesman on the other side of an active volcano.
Wonder what the 27yr olds at the Squids are offering on fat tails/jump risks these days?
Here’s how the Financial Times is preparing the American public for the Bernanke legacy:
A good engineer who knows his own limits
By Edward Luce March 10, 2013
The Federal Reserve under Ben Bernanke has been the only serious economic actor in Washington
At the start of this century the journalist Bob Woodward anointed Alan Greenspan as “the symbol of American economic pre-eminence”. Ben Bernanke must pray that he never attracts that kind of praise. As a student of business cycles, the current chairman of the US Federal Reserve knows all about reputational bubbles – and few have burst more convincingly than Mr Greenspan’s.
With just seven Fed open market meetings before he completes his second term, Mr Bernanke is in no danger of emulating the maestro’s former heights. Last week, the Dow broke its historical record. There were no Greenspan-style celebrations. Conservatives dismissed the surge as a “sugar high” caused by quantitative easing. The left saw it as yet more Fed-fuelled froth that was bypassing Main Street.
Both contain some truth. The $85bn a month in QE3 is fuelling a “reach for yield” that is driving a mini equity boom. And America’s wealthiest 10 per cent are its main beneficiaries. But they ignore the big picture. Without the Fed’s easy money, the stock market would be languishing and unemployment would be rising. Instead of “helicopter Ben” dropping reserves from the sky it would be “lawnmower Ben” shredding the green shoots of the recovery.
On this topic
History is likely to treat Mr Bernanke more kindly. Peter Drucker, the management consultant, once said: “The greatest danger in times of turbulence is to act with yesterday’s logic.” Mr Bernanke’s chief virtue has been to ignore the normal rule book. As a scholar of the Great Depression, he understood its chief cause was the extinction of credit: the US escaped the slump because it went off the gold standard. The New Deal had little to do with it.
Most of the unorthodox steps Mr Bernanke has taken since 2008, such as the galaxy of lending windows he set up after the Lehman bankruptcy, or the various quantitative easings, may seem obvious in retrospect. But it is not clear any of his former rivals for the job would have responded the same way. “Bernanke’s grasp of the Great Depression and also of Japan’s liquidity trap in the 1990s has been a very important element of how the Fed has handled its challenges since 2008,” says Liaquat Ahamed, whose book, Lords of Finance, chronicles the central banking errors of the 1930s. “There is no doubt he is the right chairman for this kind of crisis.”
Mr Bernanke’s grounding has given him the authority to dismiss those who view the meltdown through a moral lens and want to purge society for its excesses. Had he embraced this popular intuition, the US would now be following the UK into triple-dip recession. As Mr Bernanke noted in Texas shortly after Rick Perry, its governor, had all but threatened him with a lynch mob: “I am not a believer in the Old Testament theory of the business cycle.”
In recent years it has become common to worry about weakening democracies and fraying institutions. Moisés Naím’s new book, The End of Power, crystallises that view well. Since 2008, the Fed has proved a notable exception to the trend. “When the Fed has met a new problem it has usually engineered a new solution,” one of Mr Bernanke’s Group of Seven counterparts told me. “It has used its power effectively.”
For the bulk of the past five years, the Fed has been the only serious economic actor in Washington – and remains so today. With the big exception of President Barack Obama’s 2009 stimulus, it alone has tried to find ways to keep the US economy afloat. Since 2011, fiscal policy has been a drag on the recovery. US growth is expected to hit about 2 per cent in 2013. Were it not for the fiscal cliff and the sequestration, it might be heading for 3 per cent.
Likewise the Fed has stood alone in its attempts to confront America’s jobs and housing crises – albeit with its limited monetary tool kit. Political gridlock has stymied any serious action elsewhere. For the first time in its history the Fed is taking the full employment half of its mission seriously. In December Mr Bernanke broke precedent by pledging to keep zero-bound interest rates until unemployment fell to 6.5 per cent or inflation exceeded 2.5 per cent.
At the open market meeting next week, Mr Bernanke is likely to come under renewed pressure to take his foot off the pedal. Last Friday’s strong jobs report will bolster those arguing that the risks are now tipping towards inflation. But they have been sounding the same alarm for four years. In the last year, US inflation has fallen to 1.6 per cent. And unemployment is still at 7.7 per cent. Mr Bernanke will get to keep QE3.
Perhaps his least appreciated contribution has been to steer well clear of Mr Greenspan’s cult of omniscience. By insisting on the Fed’s limitations, Mr Bernanke has sometimes enraged the staunchest Keynesians, including Paul Krugman, the New York Times columnist, who once depicted him as a “profile in cowardice”. Mr Krugman has recently tempered his criticisms.
But Mr Bernanke misses no opportunity to remind people there is only so much the Fed can do: it can help boost demand but it cannot force banks to lend; it can assist job creation but it cannot reverse the fall in median earnings. Most of America’s challenges are not monetary. Since the Fed is not an orchestra, its chairman can never be a maestro. Posterity should reward Mr Bernanke for having the serenity to know that.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b586044e-874c-11e2-bde6-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2THTA0Aqp
P.S: Edward Luce is the Washington columnist and commentator for the Financial Times. He writes a weekly column, FT's leaders/editorials on American politics and the economy and other articles.
Ed has worked for the FT since 1995 as Philippines correspondent, capital markets editor, South Asia bureau chief in New Delhi and Washington bureau chief between 2006 and 2011. In 2000 Ed was the chief speechwriter for Lawrence H. Summers, the US Treasury secretary. His first book, In Spite of the Gods, The Strange Rise of Modern India remains a high seller.
http://www.ft.com/intl/comment/columnists/edluce
The moral to this story is that ownership of the currency by the owners of the Fed has given, in the word of warning by G.M. Coogan in 1937, "the
internationalists their final weapon to destroy the property and personal rights of loyal (American) citizens…"
so elegantly summarized by ""the internationalists their final weapon to destroy the property and personal rights of loyal (American) citizens…".
Better disarm those "tenants" first, Oh wait...
There's a fibonacci confluence zone at 3014-3031.
http://bullandbearmash.com/chart/nasdaq100-weekly-up-over-1-new-record-1...
More upside ahead.
So if I invested $20k in the QQQ in 2000 on the way don, I just got back to $20k in 2013.
WOW!!!!!!!
If I sold now, I'd owe taxes so I'm still down.
Long term investing for the win, man.
“The greatest danger in times of turbulence is to act with yesterday’s logic.” In the case of the asset markets 1+1 =2 is considered the "old logic", by the left wing socialist Ed Luce. The new logic is 1+1 = to anything that the Fed says it is.
The Fed (Bilderberg + Google) and the rest of the "forward looking / progressive" illuminati know what is most effcient for their centralized, technology based control.
Once Bernank took control on the USD and started printing, the US citizens and businesses (well....I guess illegals are citizens also under Obama regime) are now being held hostage. Either you buy equiites and help complete the centralized takeover or go to the poor house. With no equiites in one;'s portfolio, eventually one will be accused of treason. That's the new "logic".
Class base taxes (race based on account of white privelege?) and redistribution policies will be the next step. I mean c'mon the Fed allowed you to get "wealthy" with their policies and now you must pay for the socio-economic structures they helped to put into place, because "you didn't build that wealth on your own".
front-run the idiocracy, this is all one can do now, that and get a dependable tribe in order.
The new "meth"! Only to be destroyed by the old consequences? And what are they?
“Cheap money policies, in short, eventually bring about far more violent oscillations in business than those they are designed to remedy or prevent.”
Henry Hazlitt, who demolished all the Keynesian misconceptions of the Great Depression by statistically proving they had the OPPOSITE effect of that intended – unemployment – goes on to say in “Economics in One Lesson”:
“The effect of keeping interest rates artificially low, in fact, is eventually the same as that of keeping any other price below the natural market. It increases demand and reduces supply. It increases the demand for capital and reduces the supply of real capital. It creates economic distortions. It is true, no doubt, that an artificial reduction in the interest rate encourages increased borrowing. It tends, in fact, to encourage highly speculative ventures that cannot continue except under the artificial conditions that gave birth to them. On the supply side, the artificial reduction of interest rates discourages normal thrift, saving, and investment. It reduces the accumulation of capital. It slows down that increase in productivity, that ‘economic growth,’ that ‘progressives’ profess to be so eager to promote.
"The money rate can, indeed, be kept artificially low only by continuous new injections of currency or bank credit in place of real savings. This can create the illusion of more capital just as the addition of water can create the illusion of more milk. But it is a policy of continuous inflation. It is obviously a process involving cumulative danger. The money rate will rise and a crisis will develop if the inflation is reversed, or merely brought to a halt, or even continued at a diminished rate. Cheap money policies, in short, eventually bring about far more violent oscillations in business than those they are designed to remedy or prevent.”
Hazlitt wrote this in 1946 and reiterated it in 1979, but this is precisely what is happening today as this Keynesian economy runs out of fuel taken from savers and depositiors on the mantra that “the world is foolish to go on saving and adding to its stock of capital.” Uh-huh.
Continues Hazlitt: (It is true that the U.S. has been losing its world economic leadership in recent years, but because of our own anticapitalist governmental policies, not because of ‘economic maturity.’)
You are right, on every count, Clowns.
As the Nasdaq collapsed from March 2000 onwards,it left huge pockets with no resistance to the current melt up,which is what we are currently experiencing, but add in the maniac at Mariner Eccles and you may as well throw out your technical analysis books and ignore the trendlines/resistance levels on your monitors,this is going to go much higher than most people thought and will cause consequently more damage.