Bullish Article from 1999 Denouncing & Trolling “Bubbleologists”

Came across [this article](https://www.aei.org/articles/bursting-mr-greenspans-bubble/) from September 1999 that seems relevant to the environment we are in today. Contrary to some people’s memory/ belief about the late 90s leading up to the Dotcom crash, there was many people saying that the market was in a massive bubble and that Internet stocks had grown to incredibly irrational levels and valuations. This included Alan Greenspan, which prompted the author of this article to call him and the other “bubbleologists” (as he refers to them) out. He goes on to explain, rather arrogantly, why stocks are not overvalued, why P/E ratios were a meaningless metric for valuation and outdated, and ultimately why the idea of there being a bubble was ridiculous. About 6 months later, one of the largest bubbles in stock market history bursted resulting in a crash that would lead to the S&P 500 not seeing another ATH close for about 13 years. Some gold from the article: *“…. there is a bubble if a price is bolstered by the greater-fool theory–that you might be a fool if you buy a stock but you can soon find a greater fool to sell to at a higher price.* *Suppose investors were well aware that Internet stocks could not possibly achieve earnings high enough to justify current valuations, but these investors were nonetheless convinced that other investors would pay higher prices anyway. Then, we could safely say that there was an Internet bubble.* *While the example sounds familiar, the truth is that no one has ever found convincing evidence of such a bubble for the U.S. market as a whole.”* *“Bubbleologists think stock prices are driven by a kind of insane euphoria that will end any minute. According to these analysts, if price-to-earnings ratios exceed 20–or is it 15?–then the market is headed for a bad fall. But why should certain P/Es constitute a ceiling? In our new book, Dow 36,000, we argue that the old valuation model for the market, based on P/Es and dividend yields, should give way to one that focuses on stocks’ actual cash returns over time. When you apply our model, the market looks like a very good deal, even at today’s prices. “*