Did the stock market begin a major uptrend because central banks promised more liquidity to banks in Europe?
Good question -- yet one publication had already provided the answer.
In fact, the Nov. 30 "joint liquidity agreement" pronouncement from the central banks only affirmed the analysis Robert Prechter published in the latest Elliott Wave Theorist on Nov. 18.
In that issue, Prechter spelled out thirty-five parallels between 1929-1933 and today.
Here's how he introduces his in-depth analysis (emphasis added in light of the central banks' liquidity pronouncement):
"Many people point out the differences between the financial/economic situation today and that of the late 1920s-early 1930s. Conquer the Crash argued that the two situations are very similar except that current conditions reflect an Elliott wave trend change that is a full degree larger. Reflecting this difference, the top is taking longer, the deterioration is taking longer, the entities trying to maintain the old boom are larger, and, while the same U.S. central bank exists, the restraint of a gold standard is absent, so its ability to steal value from savers by inflating the quantity of dollars is greater. But the ultimate outcome will be the same: a deflationary credit bust. Since most people focus on differences to argue that the outcome this time will be different, I thought it would be useful to highlight some of the ways in which the two eras are nearly identical, namely in the actions taken by political leaders and the central bank."
Again, this published before the Nov. 30 rally. No one else was saying what Prechter said then, and we're certainly not hearing a chorus of agreement now.
Yet isn't this the very time to get an independent viewpoint?
Could anything like 1929-1933 really happen again?
Make up your own mind as you read the latest Elliott Wave Theorist risk-free. Fully 50% of the issue is devoted to describing the similarities between today and 1929-1933.