tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7444476276287180978.post8323028202716084058..comments2023-11-20T05:15:20.137-05:00Comments on Behind the Headlines: Butterfly FlappingMichael Kahnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10668546349672243203noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7444476276287180978.post-14669868205974353832009-04-08T22:22:00.000-04:002009-04-08T22:22:00.000-04:00Amalan,Yes, I do see 03-07 as a cyclical bull. Go ...Amalan,<BR/>Yes, I do see 03-07 as a cyclical bull. Go back to a post here where I put up a chart I drew in 2002 (I think). I called for huge up and down swings in a decade that would go nowhere. That is what I say now and I think what you just said, too.Michael Kahnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10668546349672243203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7444476276287180978.post-30337152644758250562009-04-08T19:48:00.000-04:002009-04-08T19:48:00.000-04:00didn't see the movie, but read the book; recall it...didn't see the movie, but read the book; recall it as quite thrilling, but have forgotten the details - has been so long.<BR/><BR/>Regarding your cyclicals vs. consumer indices and such.. do you subscribe to the cyclical bull vs. secular bull classification? It appears now that the rising trend from 2003 - 2007 was merely a cyclical bull, brought about by merely the regular business cycle, as opposed to the 80's and 90's bull that seemed to defy business cycles. Business cycles are expected to last 4-5 years.<BR/><BR/>The next secular bull will probably not start for another 5 years...it's a traders' market for the foreseeable future.Amalanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12597327887568168370noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7444476276287180978.post-25352556358126702162009-04-07T23:44:00.000-04:002009-04-07T23:44:00.000-04:00Very nice analogy...Very nice analogy...Blog do Claudio Digitalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11313609760814573961noreply@blogger.com