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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GVTucker who wrote (35849)	5/19/2000 1:17:00 PM
From: Mighty Mizzou	Respond to of 77397

Is your ego so fragile that it needs constant encouragement from strangers who you have never met? Or is this just a problem that has developed since CSCO has declined 40%? ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Classic! Get a grip OG!

To: GVTucker who wrote (35849)	5/19/2000 2:46:00 PM
From: JRI	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 77397

OT GV- Your opinion of my thesis (listed here after a few foundation facts.) TIA: (As we all know) The Fed likes to use the blunt tool of Fed rate hikes to "cool" the economy......but it is a strange way to go about the problem....it affects a few parts of the economy (homebuilding, farmers) disproportionately, however as you pointed out the other day)has little or no impact on other sectors....it eventually cools the economy, and (also) almost always "cools" stock prices (which, in turn, as the Fed theory goes, should "cool" consumer spending, to which some claim data supports a link....) Also, many Fed pundits WANT unemployment to go up (from current levels)...claiming 4.0% (or below) incites tight wage scenario, ergo, wage inflation.... Here's my problem: Finally, after years of, basically, no public/private solution to the problem of the "underclasses" (our country is not willing to adaquately fund education for the masses via higher taxes....training programs are few and far between)....4.0% unemployment is bringing many of the "underclass" into the real-world economy, and, the real world (of responsibility, respectability, civility)...it is giving them hope of "making it" in the world......we are all the better for it......we are adding good citizens who want to contribute.........of course, taking these 1st jobs are only a start for many, and the reality is that our economy has become bi-forcated, and it will continue to be extremely difficult for one without the right technical/educational skills to really accumulate wealth in their lifetime (after all, how many general manager positions are there at low-wage service/restaraunt outlets?)..but, at least, these folks have had some hope recently.....a start.........(we won't go into distribution of wealth issues..) Now, among many Fed watchers, the current thinking is.....4.0% is unsustainable....it is bad (for fighting inflation)... I ask, though: Why do you think crime statistics have fallen in the past few years (in major cities)? At what SOCIAL cost (increase in crimes, other additional costs, etc) will our country pay...in order to satisfy inflation hawks (results of higher unemployment)? Given we have a significant portion of our population that have felt left out.....while many of us have benefited enormously by the bull market of the last many years.......it is a good idea (or ethical) to give the lowest economic strata even less hope for their lives? What if...(my theory) one important part of the REAL solution is...... that we need to start a national campaign to education people about saving......it should be integrated into our school ciriculum....that current inflation problems are as much a BEHAVIOR problem, as an economic one...the cost of instituting such a problem ("SAVE AMERICA") would be more than covered by its benefits...it could be as simply as getting billboards that say "SAVE" (I'm not joking!)..but, just much more emphasis (private/public) on saving, and not spending..... As a nation, we simply overspend...that "overspending" is, in my view, less of function of high stock prices (sure, that plays a part...but a small part...... given less than 50% of Americans own stocks....and, I believe, less than 25% have portfolios over 25k)...I argue that the "overspending problem" IS a function of low unemployment (more than anything else)...BUT, as I have listed in the previous paragraph....it is counter-productive to attack low unemployment (because of social/ethical reasons)......instead, we should attack (faulty) behavior pattern among those of us (in all economic stratas) who, because they feel secure in finding/switching jobs in this low-unemployment, spend more than they should/have.......we have a cultural problem....education is the key... Short of doing this, we will stuck (perhaps forever)with a what-I-will-deem-unnecessary speed limits on wealth (stock prices affected by higher interest rates), and unemployment for all of us....what a pity....we all have to pay the price...and do not permanently solve the problem... Thoughts? (Apologies for any dangling modifiers, or poorly worded paragraphs)..again TIA..