This struck me as apropos – and given the big uptick in traffic recently, I get the sense that some newer readers are not hip that i consider part of my charge as providing a counterbalance to more mainstream fare. As I wrote last week:
1. Purpose: This blog has evolved into a place where we can discuss general market and economic issues. It is a counter-balance
to the general mindless cheerleading of Wall Street, the spin of the
Federal government, and the superficial coverage presented by much of
2. Slant: This is not a Bear cave. However,
when "the facts themselves are biased" I present them — especially
when the headline spin is all most people hear. Again, if you want MSM
or cheerleaders, there’s plenty of that elsewhere.
3. Contrariness as a virtue: On a related note, you can
expect lots of pushback here. When I flipped Bullish in October 2002, I
got the same angry response (a good sign). If the perma Bulls weren’t
so nervous, they wouldn’t troll here.
I think the contra-story is more interesting than the mainstream, the facts below the headlines are more valuable the sound bites, and the unspun analysis is more intelligent than the spin cycle.
Hey, its not like you can’t find the mainstream fare out there if you want it…
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.