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.

Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dealer who wrote (196)	9/10/2000 9:34:26 PM
From: elpolvo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 65232

who knows what polvie had or did not have under that hat he insisted on wearing confession: i'm a blonde. (some say there's gray in there too but i just can't see it.) -polvie@nearsightedblonds.com

To: Dealer who wrote (196)	9/10/2000 9:52:12 PM
From: Jill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 65232

STole this from market gems thread too, nice piece: The American Economy, Irwin Stelzer from todays Times (London) <<LEAVE it to the securities analysts to guess if next quarter's growth rate will be 3% or 5%, and whether Al Gore or George W Bush poses a greater threat to American prosperity. Let us look instead at where the American economy is headed in the longer term, consider the changes that have occurred in the past 20 years, and then guess at what they portend. We can start with the obvious: nothing has eliminated the business cycle or the possibility of sharp share-price declines. Businessmen will still make mistakes and overstock on goods, necessitating recession-causing cutbacks. Government policymakers will misjudge changes in interest rates and tax. And events - wars, oil-price shocks - will happen. They always have and always will. But last week's news from the Department of Labor contains a hint of the fundamental changes now driving the economy and that, with a few blips, here and there, should continue to drive it for the foreseeable future. Previous productivity estimates are being revised upwards and the department now estimates that in the second quarter of this year non-farm productivity rose at a 5.7% annual rate. This allowed unit-labour costs to decline at a rate of 0.4% even though hourly compensation rose 5.3%. Longer-term figures suggest that we are not looking at a one-quarter phenomenon. According to Daniel Sichel, a Federal Reserve economist, labour productivity - output per man-hour in the non-farm sector - grew 1.4% a year between 1974 and 1990. In 1990-94 the growth rate was a touch higher. But between 1996 and 1999 productivity soared 2.6% a year. And recent figures suggest even this rate is being surpassed. This means the economy's speed limit - the rate at which it can grow without triggering inflation - is higher than ever, as even Alan Greenspan, the ever- cautious Federal Reserve chairman, now concedes. In the past, it was assumed that the speed limit was 2%, half of that coming from the rise in the number of workers, and half from greater productivity. Now we can add to the 1% increase in the number of workers productivity gains of at least 3%, meaning we can have at least a 4% growth rate without worrying about uncorking the inflation genie. There are several reasons for thinking these productivity figures are no chimera. For one thing, the huge investment by business in recent years in information technology and other high-tech capital goods seems to be paying off. A study by Harvard's Dale Jorgenson, the doyen of productivity analysts, says this investment-induced productivity increase is likely to continue for some time. Then, too, there are the changes built into the American system by the twin fathers of the current expansion, Ronald Reagan and Mike Milken. Reagan encouraged risk- taking and hard work by lowering income-tax rates, a move that has been only partly reversed by his successors. Milken made it possible for thrusting, efficiency-minded entrepreneurs to unseat slothful perk-ridden bureaucrats by making credit available to the newcomers to use in their bid battles. The result is an American corporate sector that is leaner and meaner. A third force is deregulation. Airlines fly more people to more places at fares 40% lower in real terms than under regulation. Trucking firms are free to compete for business everywhere, rather than being forced to forgo return-trip cargoes because some clients were reserved by regulators for carriers located in their home territories. Banks, securities firms, gas and electric utilities - all are feeling the lash of efficiency-inducing competition. Add to this freer trade. Although protectionism is far from dead, goods and services do move more freely across borders, forcing many firms to conform to international best practice. And the movement of workers across borders helps to cut the cost of building houses, running hospitals and designing software. And we cannot ignore the internet, even though its effect on costs is nowhere near as great as its wildest exponents contend. This new information-distribution system is cutting the cost of carrying stock by keeping manufacturers in closer touch with customers, providing cheaper ways of distributing goods such as books, CDs and drugs, putting downward pressure on transaction costs, as in share trading, and threatening to force even the most Luddite high-cost sectors of the economy such as education to make their services available more efficiently and cheaply. Finally, there is a change in the ownership of corporate America. Share ownership rose 86% between 1983 and 1999 and half of all households now own shares directly, or indirectly through mutual funds or pension plans. This is a new, large pro-business constituency, one that is unlikely to countenance government efforts to interfere with legitimate profit-maximising business behaviour. All these changes are permanently built into the economy. And all seem to have a long way to run before exhausting their potential for enhancing productivity. No matter what the economy's short-term performance proves to be, the long-term prospect seems about as bright as it has ever been. >>

To: Dealer who wrote (196)	9/10/2000 9:56:38 PM
From: dangergirl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 65232

Hi Dealer and all I love the new porch--so much roomier. Thanks for leaving directions on how to get here. Just talked with my buddy,Jim Willie and told him to tell everyone hi. He told me to tell you all myself, so here I am. Haven`t been on much. I`ve been really funked by this market. I keep losing money and can`t stomach much more of it. I`m a lot more comfortable with real estate and may try to buy another Florida condo for investment . Sorry you had to go thru so much this week Dealie, but this new porch is worth it. Thanks for all your hard work. I`ll be talking to you soon. Good luck to all with your trading this week! Love Danger