<<< WRT to Japan, outsourcing, and things that happen and don't. This whole discussion is more about trends. The trend is your friend until it bends. What Jay, myself and others are saying is,
a) we were here for the first part of the trend when we didn't think it was a trend.
b) we leveraged our collective ASSets when we were convinced it wasn't a trend.
c.) we soon watched the 2:30 buying program kick in and convince us that we were wrong.>>>
I am kind of new here and therefore did not catch your major drift. But I do get the picture, especially wrt to Jay, that you are relentlessly patting yoursellves on the back for spotting the US equities bubble and in someways monetizing that view.
However, as they say, it ain't over until it's over. But, in this case you can hold diametrically opposing views and your turn can come around again and again - so long as you have deep pockets.
<<< I tend to think China(breadth) is for real and India and Mexico(bright spots, but all bluster) aren't.>>>
Both your attitudes concerning things US are on the whole are condescending. But Wall Street has some pretty sharp minds and they are aware of the Chinese economy. If Jay can bring something sensible to the table, those guys are going to jump at it - and ignore his life style that seems to come from watching "Casablanca" the movie. (I am sure Jay can take a little ribbing - as he says he is thick skinned - although I am not at all too sure about that).
<<<but if you believe our economy is being tugged along by research, can you not then believe that China's is being pushed along by manufacturing growth? See the history here? Point people are making is resource wise the trend ain't in our favor and OBV doesn't look too good either.>>>
The super macro trend that I do see comes from a book written by Herman Kahn, from I beleive the Hudson institue, in a book written in the 1960-70 time. He wrote and predicted a global economic boom. Something about more scientists working and living now than all the scientist put together in the past - creating opportunitties and much higher standards of living for everyone.
The question becomes as to who are going to benefit more. To be sure the gap between the US, Europe, and Asia will narrow. Whether, Africa, the Middle East, and to some extent South America get left out are real possibilities.
From, the way the discussion is going on this thread, the question becomes whether the US will completely collapse or not.
I clearly do not see that happening. If we get any kind of leaderhip from the White House, it doesn't have to be super intelligent, we can maintain our leadership in the world for quite some time.
<<<What is the capital barrier to creating a MIT, Harv, etc.? I just tend to think that the bright minds will go where the opportunity exists because the intellectual barriers may not be so high.>>>
Again, I don't think it is just a matter of capital. There has to be a whole set of infrastructure that goes along with it. Even if Beijing University were to spend 10 times the amount that NYU did over the past twenties years, that they would have a world class University in the upper ranks of Academia is doubtful. |
