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.

Politics : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sharp_End_Of_Drill who wrote (1340)	3/11/2001 11:45:35 PM
From: Telemarker	Respond to of 23153

SOED, I hear ya on China risks. Yet, still believe that the point survives about what's going on over in Asia being quite relevant vis-a-vis demand side of oil equation, and it appears that China's consumption capacity may have grown substantially over last several years. I recall reading that China's looking to add 300MM automobiles over there in the next decade (from memory). However the old farts land up treating foreigner's capital, I still buy into the notion that prosperity will have the upper hand internally at least. Exports to the West will undoubtedly be dropping -will be interesting to watch & see how things develop. Maybe I'm just trying to convince myself that there's bound to be more to the world economy on a going forward basis than what side of the bed Greenspan gets up on <g>, or how many more marginal electronic gadgets we Yankees can consume. As far as investment in China, I'm trying to put together a diversified international portfolio and China just seems to big to ignore even given the agreed upon risks that you mention. I'll let the likes of Mobius do the legwork for me through vehicles such as TCH, even if it means exposure to the state-run entities. Libbyt, thanks for the link. Perhaps you or other posters can help me out a bit here, as I haven't really followed the CA energy matter closely. When I hear talk of manipulation in our economy, I become very suspicious as it implies extensive collusion to me. How many electricity suppliers are selling into the CA market? From the "black list" I remember Davis circulating some time ago it was at least 15 or so. Don't think I'd want my plant down unnecessarily while my competitors were selling their juice at record prices, BWDIK?? In any event, CA certainly seems to have bent over (unwittingly?) for any such stuff. Do I sense that such claims would rationalize inaction at this point?? Wouldn't the now crippled Utes have this manipulation theory in the courts by now if there were anything to it? pls418, if you're long big-cap tech I don't think you want to even talk about the PE's. If your math is limited to projections of the index prices, I'd suggest that you dig a little deeper into the specifics of the companies that you're indirectly investing in and the business assumptions implicit in your investment return hopes. Finally, WRT Don's discussion on gold I'll offer that one consider the yellow metal's centuries-old track record as a store of value and that of the history of fiat currencies (I know, I know, it's all different now...) Gold is money, and little else. Forms of money go in and out of favor, but fiat has always failed - sooner or later. But perhaps most importantly consider the huge short positions now carried against gold and the implications of and cold wind blowing at the massive derivatives house of cards that now stands so central to our financial system. I read lease rates hitting over 6% now, as risk free return rates tumbling down - that gold carry trade not looking so good any more. I don't expect to actually see U.S. fiat failure in my lifetime, but as JimL stated, too many potential catalysts for gold at this point. A gold rally seems to have the potential to take on a life of it's own. Here's to a safe week ahead for everyone. TM