Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (86279)	7/28/1999 4:55:00 PM
From: Burt Masnick	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Re:From that perspective, we have the preposterous claim that high-tech VP Al Gore can do better by investing the $400 million than could Intel's CEO, Craig Barrett. I state the obvious: Every American would be better off if Craig Barrett invested the $400 million.” But would they be better off if Jerry Sanders invested it?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (86279)	7/28/1999 5:14:00 PM
From: Logain Ablar	Respond to of 186894

Ten: Regarding P.S. - T.J. Rodgers' illustration does make one assumption. He's assuming that every CEO whose company benefits from tax cuts is as capable as someone like Craig Barrett. Imagine what would happen to the $400 million had it gone to Jerry Sanders! (sorry, couldn't resist) Can you please point to where AMD has had enough in profits to exceed their operating loss carryforwards and loss carrybacks to have to pay taxes. Oh I forget the K7 is supposed to do the trick. <gg> Welcome back from vacation Tim

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (86279)	7/28/1999 8:27:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Tench, It basically comes down to whether you think that the private sector or the government can best reinvest Silicon Valleys profits. Big government, a la Clinton/Gore, say they can...the more conservative approach falls on the side of business better investing the money. EOM Jim