Alívio do IRS é maior para 17% das famílias

[Ulisses Pereira]

"Bored With the Bearish Arguments"

By James J. Cramer
09/15/2003 09:31 AM EDT


"Wish the bears had some new arguments. I don't know about you, but the "insider selling's high, valuations are stretched, there's no reason for this rally" crowd seems just plain mealy-mouthed. For the second week in a row, I heard it on "Kudlow & Cramer" in my somewhat vain attempt to bring a Friday balance to the show.

I say that because whatever arguments didn't take us down from 7700 won't take us down from 9500. That's not how it works. That's not how the market works. We surmounted those worries before, so we will surmount them again.


That doesn't mean that I think the market's immune to the downside. It just means that tired negatives won't do the trick. In fact, I find them a tad embarrassing because if they were being argued unsuccessfully when things weren't so hot with the economy, why should they have more credence now that gross domestic product growth is most definitely picking up?

Look, I thought the bears were on to something tangible when they talked about how the budget deficit and the potentially roaring economy was going to take bond yields on a straight line to 5%. But it now seems, in retrospect, that the trajectory of bonds was deeply affected by some real mess-ups in the mortgage markets, not a crowding-out theory. I say that because, again, empirically, bonds are much higher (and yields are lower) than when those arguments were all the rage.

So forgive me my boredom with the current crop of bears and their arguments. They could be right, but it certainly won't be for the reasons they are articulating. They didn't, and therefore don't, wash.

Oh, in addition, in the world I am from, if you are a hedge fund manager and bearish, it seems almost inconsistent to be net long. By nature, your portfolio should reflect -- no, should be -- your view. If you are net long you are not bearish. Period. "

(in www.realmoney.com)