Börsennotizbuch

Ja, ja — mir geht es auch häufig so — Paul Kedrosky spricht es an:

Ist es nicht erstaunlich — trotz der ganzen (bekannten) Börsengeschichte, die im Grunde als einen großen Triumph der Bullen (der Optimisten) beschrieben werden kann, sind es Bears (die Pessimisten), die immer die besseren Argumente haben? Die Bullen erscheinen die meiste Zeit als blauäugige Enthusiasten. Warum ist das nur so? Kedrosky macht ein paar Erklärungsvorschläge:

1. Things fail more often than they succeed. Pace availability heuristics, it is easier to think of examples of things failing than succeeding, so it gives bears more fodder.
2. Bears have the past, and bulls have the future. Bears get to argue from data, while bulls argue from what might happen.
3. Apocalypse is seductive. There is something about the thought of imminent mass ruin that really gets people’s attention, as has happened with the overdone coverage (hello, Matt Drudge!) of the current credit problems in the market.
4. There is a Puritanical urge in America wherein people want to believe they (or better yet, their neighbors) will be punished for their prior success, etc., so it stands to reason that stocks will punish people after they make them a lot of money.
5. Bears have been generally wrong for so long that they have to know how to tell better stories.