The fundamental flaw in your argument, and in most of the talk of a "tech bubble", is that the environment today is being compared to prior environment.
The phrase "tech bubble", used today, is really a misnomer. Extraordinary action taken by central banks around the world in recent years has created multiple asset bubbles. Most of them are, directly and indirectly, interconnected and many are feeding off of each other. You seem to have some recognition of this when you write, "Stocks are doing well now, but so is everything else...", but it doesn't appear that you care to ask the question, "Why is everything doing so well?"
If you work or invest in technology, it's understandable that you would have a primary focus on the sector. But when evaluating the notion of a "bubble", not looking at what is taking place from 30,000 feet is like looking at a fly on an elephant's behind.
The phrase "tech bubble", used today, is really a misnomer. Extraordinary action taken by central banks around the world in recent years has created multiple asset bubbles. Most of them are, directly and indirectly, interconnected and many are feeding off of each other. You seem to have some recognition of this when you write, "Stocks are doing well now, but so is everything else...", but it doesn't appear that you care to ask the question, "Why is everything doing so well?"
If you work or invest in technology, it's understandable that you would have a primary focus on the sector. But when evaluating the notion of a "bubble", not looking at what is taking place from 30,000 feet is like looking at a fly on an elephant's behind.