Quote from traderNik:
Who was it who said 'The mark of a real man is the ability to change your opinion when presented with facts which contradict your original opinion, as opposed to stubbornly insisting that you're not wrong, not wrong, not wrong'.
Or something like that.
You mean a "fact" like this:
"The caller was obviously talking about his stock holdings. He watches Cramer and threw the word liquidity in there, but what he meant was, 'Should I sell my stock'. "
In this "fact" we take the word "liquidity", change the meaning, then change what he said. LOL!
Or perhaps you mean a "fact" like this:
The response from atticus, which asked whether you seriously think someone with a trading account there would be calling Cramer to check whether to cash out, is on point.
In this fact we "assume" who had an account, what type of person he was, and whether he would call Cramer for an opinion. Of course, what is left out is the FACT that according to all published reports, there was significant withdrawals from Bear which was part of what later led to a liquidity crunch at Bear.
In fact, Atticus cites a "fact" about SEC related accounts in which he states that no account has ever lost a dime, and that therefore, no one would be calling Cramer about this type of issue. Clearly, he "overlooks" the fact that accounts did withdraw money from Bear. In fact, I noticed in one thread where you yourself withdrew money from IB. Fear was widespread about the liquidity of brokers in the last several days. And therefore, should it come as any surprise that someone might address a question to Cramer?
Be that as it may, I simply listened to the question, and read it in the box on the left of the video. I did not change the answer, assume who he was or wasn't, what he might have done or not done based on supposition.
OldTrader
