当然，持反对意见的也不少，包括WSJ的阿兰-雷诺。
温影帝则是很模糊地说全球经济“可能”二次触底。
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64U0JY20100531
对数据感兴趣的，经济周期研究所的过去四十多年数据表明，它的WLI（Weekly Leading Index）Gr一旦跌到-10以下，必有Recession。目前的数字已经从去年十月高峰时的28.5跌到-3.7，到-10以下只是时间问题。
今年第一季度华盛顿州的止赎房增长率领先全国，估计还是因为这里市场滞后的缘故。目前的高价位平台期不会持续到今年夏天以后。耐心等待一个时机的到来其实是一件非常困难的事情。如果政府不再出来捣乱的话，买房的好时机大约会是在2010年的冬季（2010年10月至2011年3月）。
NYT上的专栏Krugman（诺贝尔奖得主）上周也忍不住开始唱衰，担心“失去十年”的开始。这些功成名就的人多担心一些事情对大家来说是好事情。
昨晚看前辈Ramond Chen的部落格，里面教诲大家发伊妹儿问问题的时候最好把你踹过的东西都讲讲，免得浪费DL上别人的时间。里面有个回帖很有意思，文中提到：
I seem to have the exactly opposite problem.
I write a question for a discussion group. I re-read it and think, nah, this question will make the reader think I’m struggling with the widely known issue ABC. So I add: Please note it’s not the issue ABC because conditions X and Y are not met in my case.
OK, I re-read the whole thing again and add yet another clarification: Also note that XYZ solution does not apply here because of GHI.
The process repeats several times. Finally I’m happy with the result so I post the question.
Very quickly I get a response — You’re a n00b, it’s a widely known issue ABC! RTFM!
I respond — please read my question again. I described why ABC does not apply here.
I then get another answer (often from the same person): Try XYZ then.
Again, I reply — please read my question again. I described why XYZ won’t help me.
Several posts later we finally achieve a point where everybody has finally read my question in full and actually understood it. But at that point they are so pissed off for being told to read my question again several times that they are not willing to help anymore.
哈哈，倾框倒箧（竹筒倒豆）的人士和挤牙膏风格的人士碰到一起还是蛮有趣的。
http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2010/04/22/10000406.aspx
很简单的一个道理，很多公司里的管理员似乎不明白，总是千方百计把事情搞到更糟糕。
近期评论