As I have said before, and will undoubtely say again, , the writer of CNNFN's "The Buzz" column, Paul R. La Monica, is a complete Pratt.
Well, a few days back, La Monica claimed that the next bubble will be -- get this -- short selling.
This is the statement of someone who does not get the concept of a bubble beyond the fact that it's an "in word" in the media.
A bubble is an artifact of an unreasonable optimism, and short selling is a manifestation of pessimism, but the clue train has not arrived to La Monicaville.
<p>
ReplyDelete</p><p>This is what he said about gold on June 20, 2008 in his article <span><span>Gold: Don't count on $1,000</span></span>
</p><p>
</p><p>
</p><p>Barring another major scare to the market like that, it's hard to imagine that gold will shoot up to a new record, especially if the Fed does actually raise rates later this year, a move that could help strengthen the dollar and lead to a pullback in commodity prices.
</p><p>
</p><p>
</p><p>Gold not only surpassed 1000, it made a new high at 1225 recently</p>
Greg: You quoted him saying "Barring another major scare to the market like that...". Well there was a major scare after June 2008, and that's one reason gold shot up. "Gold not only surpassed 1000, it made a new high at 1225 recently" So what's your point?
ReplyDeleteFolks, the post is over 2 years old!
ReplyDeleteSeriously, read more current stuff of mine.
What's wrong with you, <span>Matthew? Jealous? Maybe you are just not bright enough to understand LaMonica's humor. Not atypical for a geek I guess.
ReplyDelete</span>
Ummmm....Hello?
ReplyDeleteI posted this almost 4 years ago?
BTW, I see no eviodence of humor.
La Monica wrote this sentence in a CNN Money article today:
ReplyDelete"Twitter's recent deal with the NFL to live-stream a big chunk of Thursday Night Football games hasn't led to a touchdown for the stock either."
Reading that sentence caused me to google "Paul La Monica Idiot," which brought me here. Thanks!
How many hits does a search on "Paul La Monica Idiot" generate?
ReplyDeleteI search myself, but I am afraid of getting a confirmation of rule 34.